September 12, 2019

FDA to Ban Flavored E-cigarettes

Editor's note: We couldn’t be more proud of one of our teammates, Isaac Rose-Berman, who penned his first op-ed this week in USA Today: “How college students can bridge American divides: 'Study abroad' in Alabama or New York.” Please give it a read, and share far and wide!

“The federal government will act to ban thousands of flavors used in e-cigarettes, President Donald Trump said Wednesday, responding to a recent surge in underage vaping that has alarmed parents, politicians and health authorities nationwide.” AP News

See past issues

From the Left

The left is generally in favor of the ban.

“To market a product as less harmful than cigarettes is to damn it with faint praise… As stories pile up of sicknesses, side effects, and the potential for long-term consequences, it’s clear that ‘safe’ and ‘safer than smoking cigarettes’ are vastly different things.”
Amanda Mull, The Atlantic

“One in five high school students used e-cigarettes in 2018, an increase of 78 percent over 2017. E-cigarette use was up by nearly 50 percent among middle schoolers in the same period. More than three and a half million American children now use e-cigarettes, with 97 percent of users aged 12 to 17 choosing flavored products… E-cigarette companies insist their goal is to help people quit smoking. But 13-year-olds don’t start using cotton-candy-flavored pods for Juul devices to kick a cigarette habit. Much more often, e-cigarettes lead kids directly to nicotine addiction…

“To those of us on the front lines of the fight against tobacco use, the tactics companies are employing to sell e-cigarettes — flavorings, unfounded health claims and the hiring of celebrity promoters — are all too familiar. They are the same strategies that tobacco companies have long used to get kids to try cigarettes. There’s still much we don’t know about the connection between lung illness and vaping.  But we do know that one Juul pod contains about as much nicotine as an entire pack of cigarettes, and that nicotine harms brain development… Banning flavored e-cigarettes is the most important thing we can do to reduce use among young people.”
Michael R. Bloomberg and Matt Myers, New York Times

“There is no reason vaping products should be available in bubble-gum flavor except to induce young people who are most at risk. The FDA sent a warning letter on Monday to the most popular vaping manufacturer, Juul Labs, complaining the company has made claims in school presentations that its products are less dangerous than tobacco without an appropriate FDA order. The FDA must remain vigilant against marketing to and use of vaping by young people. Overall, this is a complex problem of science, business, technology, culture and public health. Vaping began with very little regulation. Whatever the outcome of the current spate of illness, it is now clear that in the public interest, it must be rigorously scrutinized and controlled.”
Editorial Board, Washington Post

It’s worth noting that “evidence that these products help people avoid combustible cigarettes is limited. [On the other hand] the fact that they’ve introduced a whole new generation of young people to a highly addictive and possibly dangerous habit is indisputable… A ban on flavored products will help curb the teen vaping epidemic, but stricter age restrictions and a more aggressive clampdown on deceptive marketing should follow. Then there’s the black market: The devices people are buying on the street and the liquids used in them demand more attention. Finally, this crisis makes it even more clear that marijuana products shouldn’t continue to exist in confusing regulatory limbo.”
Max Nisen, Bloomberg

Some point out that “fifty-three people died from mass shootings in August alone and there have been more than 9,000 gun deaths so far in 2019. Still, the Trump administration, willing to act fast when it comes to mango-flavored vaping liquid, has backed away several times from the idea of passing universal background checks on gun purchases. Trump wrote in a 2000 book that he supported an assault weapons ban but hasn't embraced the idea in office. The Odessa, Texas, shooter who killed seven people in August and wounded 22 others had previously failed a background check and purchased the AR-style rifle used in the attack through a private sale, avoiding a background check… The administration says vaping is a deeply concerning epidemic but is turning a blind eye to another, much more deadly health crisis: gun violence.”
Susan Rinkunas, Vice

Regarding the Cadillac tax, “high-premium employer-based plans raise the cost of health care for everyone by encouraging the overconsumption of expensive services. This means that even Medicare and Medicaid face higher prices. Quite aside from its benefits for the health-care market, the Cadillac tax would also have the effect of expanding the tax base and making the tax code more efficient. It would raise revenues by about $15 billion a year… Rather than killing or delaying the Cadillac tax, Democrats should be trying to make it operational. The tax would raise revenue, lower costs, increase the efficiency of the tax code and give the Obamacare individual market its best chance at success.”
Karl W. Smith, Bloomberg

“The two issues with which he is most often associated, support for a balanced budget and opposition to free trade, put him at odds with both of our major political parties. An old-fashioned, soft-spoken Southerner, he nevertheless held views on so-called ‘social issues’ that would be to the left of the mainstream of the Republican Party, both then and now. He was a fervent supporter of the Vietnam POW/MIA movement in the late '80s and early '90s, but he was not in any sense a hawk. Never mind 2003. Perot opposed the first war in Iraq in 1990… Perot's death should be mourned by all Americans who regret the fact that it is no longer possible to make reasoned, non-ideological arguments about questions of public import, and by the devolution of our political life into mindless partisan squabbling.”
Matthew Walther, The Week

From the Right

The right generally opposes the ban.

From the Right

The right generally opposes the ban.

“There have been six deaths in America possibly linked to vaping —six deaths out of the more than 11 million people who report using e-cigarettes. If you're keeping track at home, that's a fatality rate of .0005%. By comparison, 88,000 people die from alcohol-related causes every year. An estimated 128,000 people die from prescription pills annually… if we are going to start banning unhealthy substances, we have a lot of banning to do before we get to comparatively mild and safe e-cigarettes.”
Matt Walsh, Daily Wire

“A bad idea, for at least two reasons. One: Leaving tobacco-flavored e-cigs on the market risks funneling kids who currently get their nicotine fix from fruit-flavored candy-like products towards something that tastes much more like real cigarettes. If the fear with vaping is that it’s a gateway drug for tobacco products, why the hell would you want to condition children to crave nicotine that tastes like tobacco?... [and] Although scientists are unsure what’s causing the cases of lung disease, even critics of vaping like former FDA commissioner Scott Gottlieb suspect that black-market products are to blame. In which case the last thing the feds should want to do is… push demand for fruit flavors entirely onto the black market, right?”
Allahpundit, Hot Air

“Banning flavored e-cigarettes could only make the situation worse, driving users to the black market where they are more likely to encounter these dangerous chemicals. It’s unfair to blame a whole category of products on the bad actions of illegal actors. An analogous situation would be if Kentucky started banning the sale of moonshine by legal distillers because a black market batch caused some drinkers to go blind. In both cases, government action in the form of investigation, prosecution, and issuing health guidelines may certainly be justified. However, a broad-stroke ban against otherwise legal, health-certified products would be government overreach.”
Casey Given, Washington Examiner

Some, however, argue that “according to research out of the University of California-San Francisco, smoking e-cigarettes daily doubles your risk of a heart attack and when combined with traditional cigarettes, your risk increases five-fold… study after study has shown that while using e-cigs is not as bad as smoking traditional cigarettes, they are just as addictive. That is precisely what the big tobacco companies are after. A new generation hooked on nicotine, delivered ‘healthily’ through e-cigarettes…

“Five e-cig companies dominate 95 percent of the market (JUUL, MarkTen XL, Logic, Vuse and Blu). While those names don’t sound like big tobacco, 35 percent of JUUL is owned by Altria Group (maker of Marlboro cigarettes), and MarkTen XL is also owned by Altria. Vuse is owned by British American Tobacco, Logic by Japan Tobacco Inc., and Blu by Imperial Brands. Altria and Philip Morris are also partnering to sell a new brand of e-cigs called IQOS.  Big tobacco has simply repurposed themselves, under new brand names, to continue to profit off the pain and suffering of millions of people.”
Liberty Vittert, Fox News

Former FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb writes, “The industry’s failure to confront the youth vaping epidemic leaves e-cig companies vulnerable to those who doubt that the major brands are responsible stewards of their products… Manufacturers need to separate legitimate e-cigs from illegal adulterants by publishing detailed information on their ingredients, by taking meaningful steps to limit youths’ access to their products and its appeal to them, and by fully embracing an FDA application process that they’ve largely fought… The longer that legitimate e-cigarette companies reject their obligations to help distinguish acceptable products from dangerous ones, the more they will be lumped in with those contributing to the growing glut of illegal products. That’s bad for preserving their businesses, and it’s bad for protecting the public health.”
Scott Gottlieb, Washington Post

“If a dozen drones or missiles can do the kind of damage to the world economy as did those fired on Saturday—shutting down about 6 percent of world oil production—imagine what a U.S.-Iran-Saudi war would do to the world economy. In recent decades, the U.S. has sold the Saudis hundreds of billions of dollars of military equipment. Did our weapons sales carry a guarantee that we will also come and fight alongside the kingdom if it gets into a war with its neighbors?… the nation does not want another war. How we avoid it, however, is becoming difficult to see. John Bolton may be gone from the West Wing, but his soul is marching on.”
Patrick Buchanan, The American Conservative

“NBC and MSNBC embraced Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts in the first debate of Democratic presidential candidates Wednesday night, treating her like the star of the show. The debate led off with Warren, who had a huge popularity advantage from the start… NBC anchor Savannah Guthrie started it off sounding more like Warren’s press secretary. ‘You have many plans – free college, free child care, government health care, cancelation of student debt, new taxes, new regulations, the breakup of major corporations,’ Guthrie said, before teeing up an economy question. Guthrie even used Warren’s plan to break up tech companies as the foundation for a question for Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey… the round-robin final comments also ended with Warren, as Maddow asked her for the ‘final, final statement.’ That let NBC bookend the entire debate with Warren and Warren.”
Dan Gainor, Fox News

President Trump should be happy. As much as Warren is articulate, obviously intelligent, and energetically supported by Democrats, she would also be far easier to defeat than Joe Biden… Considering Trump's economy, the president is well placed to defeat Warren.”
Tom Rogan, Washington Examiner

A libertarian's take

“Why did Modi pick this moment to do something so radical? Violence in Kashmir had been trending downwards for the last year, after all. The main reason, besides President Donald Trump's alarming offer to mediate a settlement, is that he wanted a distraction from India's mounting economic woes. India's GDP growth dropped from over 8 percent to 5.8 percent over the last year, and it is widely expected to dip further. Just as ominous has been the crash in consumer demand. India's usual problem has been an insufficient supply to meet its voracious appetite for vehicles, cell phones, and other similar goods. But sales figures for all consumer goods have posted a precipitous decline, slamming businesses that are dramatically scaling back investments.”
Shikha Dalmia, Reason

Get troll-free political news.

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.