SMOKING tobacco sends perhaps half of its long-term addicts
to an early grave, and inflicts chronic diseases on many of the rest. The
filthy habit is on the wane in rich countries, though it is still worryingly
popular with many of the young. Electronic cigarettes look like a promising
substitute: power from a small battery vaporises a solution containing purified
nicotine, delivering the hit that smokers crave without the toxins in tobacco
smoke. So you might imagine that the increasing demand for e-cigarettes would
be welcomed, and encouraged.
Not at the European Parliament. On October 8th it is due to
vote on a new tobacco-control directive. Its intent is to cut smoking and keep
children from taking it up (see article). But one of its main provisions would
have the opposite effect. It would treat e-cigarettes like medicines, which
includes requiring their makers to seek approval from the agencies that
regulate pharmaceuticals when they bring a new product to market. This would
greatly reduce the range of products available and increase their price. Even
the European Commission, which first proposed the approach, admits that this is
likely to slow the uptake of e-cigarettes. A vote for more curbs in Europe will
also surely send a signal to America’s Food and Drug Administration, which is
contemplating its own regulations.
E-cigarettes are not entirely risk-free. Little research has
yet been done about their long-term health effects. Nicotine is, in implausibly
large doses, a poison. Even in small ones it is addictive; and the amount of
the chemical dispensed by e-cigarettes varies from one brand to another. But it
is already clear that whatever health risks may emerge in studies of
e-cigarette use, they are vastly less lethal than traditional smokes.
Given the prospect of weaning the world’s billion or so
smokers onto something much less harmful, as well as protecting children and
others from second-hand smoke, there is a more sensible approach. Europe should
tighten the existing rules on labelling and quality control that affect
e-cigarettes. America should also increase oversight. Governments should then
invest in rigorous testing and see how the product evolves. For e-cigarettes
are changing rapidly in response to consumer demand. In America around 300m of
them will be sold this year, three times the figure in 2012.
This seems to worry pharmaceutical firms, which in Europe
are lobbying for curbs on e-cigarettes, a competitor to their nicotine patches
and other quitting aids. Big tobacco firms are working on e-cigarettes of their
own, as well as cigarettes that heat rather than burn the tobacco. But they
have an interest in slowing the switch to smokeless smokes. If the innovative
smaller firms that make most e-cigarettes have to seek a licence every time
they want to offer a new flavour or strength, the move towards safer nicotine
consumption will be slowed.
Careless regulation costs lives
So far it seems that most regular “vapers” of e-cigarettes
are smokers or ex-smokers. But over time the prospect of a relatively harm-free
nicotine kick could draw in many new users. This risk, and the lack of
long-term research on the residual risks of nicotine, argue for restricting the
sales of e-cigarettes to children. But as far as adults are concerned, they
should be subject to less regulation than alcohol (which is far more harmful)
and perhaps to no more than caffeine, another addictive and mildly poisonous
substance whose widespread use governments see no need to curb. The risk of getting
more people addicted to something relatively harmless is well worth taking,
given the opportunity for curbing dramatically the world’s single-most-harmful
voluntary activity. Politicians should stand back and let a thousand e-cig
brands bloom.
Article Credit: www.economist.com
No comments:
Post a Comment