E-cigs vote backed by regional MEP Chris Davies

St Helens Star: MEP Chris Davies backs E-cig vote MEP Chris Davies backs E-cig vote

REGIONAL MEP Chris Davies supports an EU ruling that will continue to make electronic cigarettes readily available.

The European Parliament beat moves to class e-cigs as medicines, which could have restricted their availability. MEPs argued that e-cigs with a nicotine content of 20mg/l or less were just consumer products.

Liberal Democrat MEP Mr Davies believes they could be a game changer in the fight against smoking related disease that kills 700,000 Europeans each year.

He said: "This is a compromise that won't please everyone, but it's a huge improvement on the alternative of an e-cig ban that was threatened in some countries.

"We don't yet know the long term consequences of using e-cigs, but it must be likely that they will be healthier than the tobacco that we know is so damaging."

MEPs also agreed new rules to beef up the warnings on cigarette packs, with bigger pictures and harsher words for smokers. Health warnings will now take up 65% of the surface area of a cigarette packet after studies show that this has an impact on existing smokers and deters those who are thinking of starting.

He said: “Everyone knows that smoking is bad for you but the warnings hit home best when you have to take a cigarette out of a box that is warning you that they will kill you.

“Even if it only stops a few more people smoking that will mean a healthier life for them and those around them.”

Comments (12)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:57am Tue 4 Mar 14

Overproof says...

and again, Chris Davies delivers the myth that ecigs have somehow been "saved".

The truth is that all of the effective e-cigs on sale today will be taken off the shelves and banned by the EU. The new restrictions mean that only huge corporations will be able to afford to comply. There will be no more refillables. and the maximum strength will be limited to make e-cigs ineffective for many people.

At the moment, tobacco cigarette sales have dropped by 8% across the EU in just one year, as a direct result of the e-cigs that are available now. Research (recently published in the Times) has shown that these new restrictions will result in 105,000 deaths per year by removing the most effective e-cigs from the market.

These proposals are a huge disaster. Chris should be ashamed for supporting it.
and again, Chris Davies delivers the myth that ecigs have somehow been "saved". The truth is that all of the effective e-cigs on sale today will be taken off the shelves and banned by the EU. The new restrictions mean that only huge corporations will be able to afford to comply. There will be no more refillables. and the maximum strength will be limited to make e-cigs ineffective for many people. At the moment, tobacco cigarette sales have dropped by 8% across the EU in just one year, as a direct result of the e-cigs that are available now. Research (recently published in the Times) has shown that these new restrictions will result in 105,000 deaths per year by removing the most effective e-cigs from the market. These proposals are a huge disaster. Chris should be ashamed for supporting it. Overproof
  • Score: 47

12:10pm Tue 4 Mar 14

davedorn says...

Chris missed the point by miles. Current vapers using 18mg or lower eliquid MAY just be OK, but probably won't. New vapers, once this idiocy is enacted, will be very hard to find, as the wording is so broad that every current ecig will be banned come the day - and that is not conjecture, it is fact. This threatens to reduce the efficacy of whatever DOES make it through the process to the point where no current smoker will actually adopt and switch to ecigs. Coud it have been worse? Maybe, but, hell, not by much.
Chris missed the point by miles. Current vapers using 18mg or lower eliquid MAY just be OK, but probably won't. New vapers, once this idiocy is enacted, will be very hard to find, as the wording is so broad that every current ecig will be banned come the day - and that is not conjecture, it is fact. This threatens to reduce the efficacy of whatever DOES make it through the process to the point where no current smoker will actually adopt and switch to ecigs. Coud it have been worse? Maybe, but, hell, not by much. davedorn
  • Score: 34

12:58pm Tue 4 Mar 14

FergusM says...

"REGIONAL MEP Chris Davies supports an EU ruling that will continue to make electronic cigarettes readily available."

Sorry, but this is the exact opposite of the truth. The new EU law means that most electronic cigarettes, including all of the most effective ones, WON'T be available any more. They will be much less available than they were before the EU stuck its unwanted nose in. Many of Davies's fellow MEPs recognised this and voted to remove e-cigs from the Tobacco Products Directive, where they have no business being anyway (they don't contain tobacco) but sadly not enough. Davies, on the other hand, sent months telling e-cig users he was on our side then stabbed us in the back by voting to ban the devices we use.
"REGIONAL MEP Chris Davies supports an EU ruling that will continue to make electronic cigarettes readily available." Sorry, but this is the exact opposite of the truth. The new EU law means that most electronic cigarettes, including all of the most effective ones, WON'T be available any more. They will be much less available than they were before the EU stuck its unwanted nose in. Many of Davies's fellow MEPs recognised this and voted to remove e-cigs from the Tobacco Products Directive, where they have no business being anyway (they don't contain tobacco) but sadly not enough. Davies, on the other hand, sent months telling e-cig users he was on our side then stabbed us in the back by voting to ban the devices we use. FergusM
  • Score: 29

1:14pm Tue 4 Mar 14

RobC UK says...

Hey Chris, have look at this.

http://www.eureporte
r.co/magazine/2014/0
...facturers/

An extra 105,000 deaths a year.

Not too bad eh? You must be very proud.
Hey Chris, have look at this. http://www.eureporte r.co/magazine/2014/0 ...facturers/ An extra 105,000 deaths a year. Not too bad eh? You must be very proud. RobC UK
  • Score: 24

1:17pm Tue 4 Mar 14

localpeasants says...

If ECIGS could be such a game changer, why did you vote for something that in October and amendment 170, ( which we were told was a RED LINE ) came back from Trilogue with a whole new DIRECTIVE tagged on ?. Parliament did NOT compromise, they CAVED IN to pressure from Member States and lobbyists to maintain the STATUS QUO of revenue streams etc, this is not Democracy its a disgrace.
As for Tobacco regs, Warning labels on packets, people will just ignore them as they always have and youngsters will just get designer cigarette cases or boxes as they do with mobile phones. Flavours and menthol will just be added by people to their tobacco.
The whole TPD was a shambles and finished with a dogs dinner, NO my dogs dinner makes far more sense than the TPD. The TPD was designed from a designers perspective, any GOOD design will consult about USERS requirements whilst designing because it will be the USERS that have got to USE the design. This principle was totally ignored in the case of the TPD, the DESIGNERS KNEW BEST and if the design does'nt work then its the USERS fault for not using and operating it properly "IN ACCORDANCE WITH" relevent directives- SUCH ARROGANCE ASTOUNDS ME.
WE WILL get sensble regulation at the end of the day, so come with us and be a voice of reason like MATT WRIDLEY.
If ECIGS could be such a game changer, why did you vote for something that in October and amendment 170, ( which we were told was a RED LINE ) came back from Trilogue with a whole new DIRECTIVE tagged on ?. Parliament did NOT compromise, they CAVED IN to pressure from Member States and lobbyists to maintain the STATUS QUO of revenue streams etc, this is not Democracy its a disgrace. As for Tobacco regs, Warning labels on packets, people will just ignore them as they always have and youngsters will just get designer cigarette cases or boxes as they do with mobile phones. Flavours and menthol will just be added by people to their tobacco. The whole TPD was a shambles and finished with a dogs dinner, NO my dogs dinner makes far more sense than the TPD. The TPD was designed from a designers perspective, any GOOD design will consult about USERS requirements whilst designing because it will be the USERS that have got to USE the design. This principle was totally ignored in the case of the TPD, the DESIGNERS KNEW BEST and if the design does'nt work then its the USERS fault for not using and operating it properly "IN ACCORDANCE WITH" relevent directives- SUCH ARROGANCE ASTOUNDS ME. WE WILL get sensble regulation at the end of the day, so come with us and be a voice of reason like MATT WRIDLEY. localpeasants
  • Score: 20

1:21pm Tue 4 Mar 14

RobC UK says...

Sorry the above link is broken.

http://www.eureporte
r.co/magazine/2014/0
2/26/105000-smokers-
will-be-killed-every
-year-by-tpd-ban-on-
e-cigarettes-say-man
ufacturers/
Sorry the above link is broken. http://www.eureporte r.co/magazine/2014/0 2/26/105000-smokers- will-be-killed-every -year-by-tpd-ban-on- e-cigarettes-say-man ufacturers/ RobC UK
  • Score: 14

1:22pm Tue 4 Mar 14

exvaper says...

Thank you Chris Davies. Because of people like you I will be back on the dread cancer sticks very soon. 18mg is just not good enough, not by half. Stick batteries are not powerful enough. Cartomisers don't work FOR ME. Vaping is a personal thing and all the choices THAT MAKE VAPING WORK will be taken away. Thank you Chris Davies. Thank you very much.
Thank you Chris Davies. Because of people like you I will be back on the dread cancer sticks very soon. 18mg is just not good enough, not by half. Stick batteries are not powerful enough. Cartomisers don't work FOR ME. Vaping is a personal thing and all the choices THAT MAKE VAPING WORK will be taken away. Thank you Chris Davies. Thank you very much. exvaper
  • Score: 21

1:25pm Tue 4 Mar 14

Jo Lincoln says...

"We don't yet know the long term consequences of using e-cigs", says Chris Davies; and yet there are many thousands of people whose use of e-cigarettes goes back several years with no reported ill-effects.

Compare this to the much smaller sample sizes and shorter durations of pharmaceutical long term tests - usually of the order of a few hundred subjects undergoing testing for a year or less - and it looks like we in fact do have some empirical evidence pointing us towards the LT effects of e-cigarettes. This point is most often very conveniently overlooked by people who know better. People like Mr. Davies, for example, who has worked closely with some of those very same people in recent months.

Consider also that the Tobacco Products Directive is hoping to achieve a reduction in smoking prevalence in the EU of a mere 2% over a period of five years. In the UK that amounts to a little under 250,000 people stopping smoking; and by stopping smoking I mean the definition of stopping as given by the NHS stop smoking service as somebody who has declared themselves free of tobacco for a four week period.

Keep that tiny figure in mind when you consider that EU regulation of e-cigarettes could mean around 700,000 e-cigarette users in the UK alone return to using lit tobacco due the much reduced efficacy of e-cigarettes as a nicotine delivery method, and it becomes clear that not only is this indeed, as Mr. Davies points out, all a massive compromise but it is one that shouldn't really please anybody.

The EU proposals are not regulation, they are restriction. Restriction of an already successful disruptive technology that is making significant inroads into reducing tobacco prevalence with no public funding and which is controlled by already perfectly adequate consumer protection regulations.

Mr. Davies has voted in support of a public health disaster of epic proportions. Given that he worked very closely with e-cigarette users for quite some time before the final vote it seems astonishing that he chose, in the end, to support the very regulation that he knows will be so destructive.
"We don't yet know the long term consequences of using e-cigs", says Chris Davies; and yet there are many thousands of people whose use of e-cigarettes goes back several years with no reported ill-effects. Compare this to the much smaller sample sizes and shorter durations of pharmaceutical long term tests - usually of the order of a few hundred subjects undergoing testing for a year or less - and it looks like we in fact do have some empirical evidence pointing us towards the LT effects of e-cigarettes. This point is most often very conveniently overlooked by people who know better. People like Mr. Davies, for example, who has worked closely with some of those very same people in recent months. Consider also that the Tobacco Products Directive is hoping to achieve a reduction in smoking prevalence in the EU of a mere 2% over a period of five years. In the UK that amounts to a little under 250,000 people stopping smoking; and by stopping smoking I mean the definition of stopping as given by the NHS stop smoking service as somebody who has declared themselves free of tobacco for a four week period. Keep that tiny figure in mind when you consider that EU regulation of e-cigarettes could mean around 700,000 e-cigarette users in the UK alone return to using lit tobacco due the much reduced efficacy of e-cigarettes as a nicotine delivery method, and it becomes clear that not only is this indeed, as Mr. Davies points out, all a massive compromise but it is one that shouldn't really please anybody. The EU proposals are not regulation, they are restriction. Restriction of an already successful disruptive technology that is making significant inroads into reducing tobacco prevalence with no public funding and which is controlled by already perfectly adequate consumer protection regulations. Mr. Davies has voted in support of a public health disaster of epic proportions. Given that he worked very closely with e-cigarette users for quite some time before the final vote it seems astonishing that he chose, in the end, to support the very regulation that he knows will be so destructive. Jo Lincoln
  • Score: 32

8:31pm Tue 4 Mar 14

Nick_morris@sky.com says...

As with all things Chris, the devil is in the detail. Could you please explain to us, in detail, how leak free tanks are made. Bearing in mind they MUST have airflow they MUST have an air opening. By function they cannot be guaranteed leak free unless they are cartridges containing wadding, like generation 1 look alikes which deliver very poorly. How will leak free refilling be accomplished? It appears to me, and everyone I've spoken to, some of whom are very intelligent mechanical & fluid dynamic engineers, that this requirement cannot be met. Again, please explain the mechanics in detail, after all it would be mad to cast a law with no clue as to how it can be implemented. I think we all look forward to your reply.
As with all things Chris, the devil is in the detail. Could you please explain to us, in detail, how leak free tanks are made. Bearing in mind they MUST have airflow they MUST have an air opening. By function they cannot be guaranteed leak free unless they are cartridges containing wadding, like generation 1 look alikes which deliver very poorly. How will leak free refilling be accomplished? It appears to me, and everyone I've spoken to, some of whom are very intelligent mechanical & fluid dynamic engineers, that this requirement cannot be met. Again, please explain the mechanics in detail, after all it would be mad to cast a law with no clue as to how it can be implemented. I think we all look forward to your reply. Nick_morris@sky.com
  • Score: 6

3:00pm Thu 6 Mar 14

saintsfan says...

Some people are so up their own backside with their self-importance that they refuse to acknowledge that e-cigs are not dangerous. Tobacco smoking went on for decades before anyone tested the content or impact of tobacco. But e-cigs have hardly been around five minutes and they are banned?

Quite easy really. I have managed to use my e-cig in every place in St Helens that has adopted an equally ignorant and snooty approach and haven't been caught in the act at all. Why not? Well, because they don't contain tobacco, they are not cigarettes, they do not emit smoke, and so nobody knows that I'm actually using one. Has brought me great pleasure too because it's one in the eye to all those self-appointed do-gooders who know nowt and want to push me back on to the cancer sticks, St Helens Council being a leader in the field.
Some people are so up their own backside with their self-importance that they refuse to acknowledge that e-cigs are not dangerous. Tobacco smoking went on for decades before anyone tested the content or impact of tobacco. But e-cigs have hardly been around five minutes and they are banned? Quite easy really. I have managed to use my e-cig in every place in St Helens that has adopted an equally ignorant and snooty approach and haven't been caught in the act at all. Why not? Well, because they don't contain tobacco, they are not cigarettes, they do not emit smoke, and so nobody knows that I'm actually using one. Has brought me great pleasure too because it's one in the eye to all those self-appointed do-gooders who know nowt and want to push me back on to the cancer sticks, St Helens Council being a leader in the field. saintsfan
  • Score: 0

11:42pm Thu 6 Mar 14

Dragonmum says...

The regulatory framework thrust upon the EU Parliament by the Commissioners last December was tailor- made to fit the feeble quasi-ecigs being produced by the recently emerged players in the market, Big Tobacco. These, with their weak nicotine levels, unsatisfactory battery performance and, frankly woeful lack of flavour will hardly be a runaway success in wooing the 20+ a day smoker. That is irrelevant to them of course, because either way they win. The losers are
the small firms who pioneered the e-cig and now provide employment in an industry which caters to the needs of almost 2 million vapers in the UK alone. At a time of high unemployment the country should be providing encouragement in the form of grants and tax breaks to these firms, not colluding in crushing them. I was disappointed, but not surprised that Chris Davies, and others who had made all the right noises earlier in the process, did not support the move to take the ecig out of a directive which should never have applied to it in the first place. I am too cynical about politicians to expect anything else. Sadly this could lead to those 700,000 deaths - it has never been about Public Health, it has always been about Corporate Cash, be it Tobacco or Pharmaceutical so we just have to force the EU to re-think this, which we are well on the way to doing. That is not just the UK. Vapers Euro-wide are fighting this too - that's a lot of people with !a lot of votes
The regulatory framework thrust upon the EU Parliament by the Commissioners last December was tailor- made to fit the feeble quasi-ecigs being produced by the recently emerged players in the market, Big Tobacco. These, with their weak nicotine levels, unsatisfactory battery performance and, frankly woeful lack of flavour will hardly be a runaway success in wooing the 20+ a day smoker. That is irrelevant to them of course, because either way they win. The losers are the small firms who pioneered the e-cig and now provide employment in an industry which caters to the needs of almost 2 million vapers in the UK alone. At a time of high unemployment the country should be providing encouragement in the form of grants and tax breaks to these firms, not colluding in crushing them. I was disappointed, but not surprised that Chris Davies, and others who had made all the right noises earlier in the process, did not support the move to take the ecig out of a directive which should never have applied to it in the first place. I am too cynical about politicians to expect anything else. Sadly this could lead to those 700,000 deaths - it has never been about Public Health, it has always been about Corporate Cash, be it Tobacco or Pharmaceutical so we just have to force the EU to re-think this, which we are well on the way to doing. That is not just the UK. Vapers Euro-wide are fighting this too - that's a lot of people with !a lot of votes Dragonmum
  • Score: 2

9:11am Fri 7 Mar 14

frankly says...

I smoked the dreaded real thing until last June and wentonto e/cigs.. They have helped my needs, cost much less and saves me pounds. I still act like I did with real ones and don't use them where real ones are banned, so whats the problem..oh how this government would like to tax them.. the bigger producers do check for safety, its those on market stall and shady shops that you have to avoid..E CIGS FOREVER NOW
I smoked the dreaded real thing until last June and wentonto e/cigs.. They have helped my needs, cost much less and saves me pounds. I still act like I did with real ones and don't use them where real ones are banned, so whats the problem..oh how this government would like to tax them.. the bigger producers do check for safety, its those on market stall and shady shops that you have to avoid..E CIGS FOREVER NOW frankly
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree