At a near date but not yet public (a few months), the European Parliament will have to decide on a revision of the current TPD. Today is a certainty.
Behind the scenes, the European Commission is already maneuvering to guide the debates of parliamentarians and traditional lobbies are busy.
The adjustment elements of this new version of the TPD are all included in two key documents, which are indeed public.
- The SCHEER report,
- and the resulting report of the European Commission.
These documents are complex. We propose to popularize them to better understand the issues and dangers on the vape that we know today.
It's long, because there is a lot to explain, so take your time, a good set-up, a good juice, a coffee or a tea and let's get started.
This is a study, commissioned by the European Commission at SCHEER to answer the following question: are electronic cigarettes more dangerous than to not smoking ?
The opinion of the Vapelier: From the outset, the question is biased. The electronic cigarette is made to help the smoker quit smoking and, as all vaping advocates have long said: better to vape than to smoke and if you don't smoke, don't vape!
In the series of crazy questions that the Commission could have asked:
- Shampoo stings the eyes, should I stop washing my hair?
- My feet hurt, can I walk on my hands?
- It is not healthy to swallow toothpaste, should I clean my teeth outside of my mouth?
Be serious : This is a purely technocratic question that no one else would have had the presence of mind to ask. But by orienting the question in this light, the Commission simply sidesteps the central issue of tobacco risk reduction.
Smoking killed 75000 people in France in 2015 (Public Health France) or half a Covid.
The vape helps with smoking cessation, it therefore participates in the fight against this mortality and is scientifically recognized as being 95% less harmful than burnt tobacco (low range, some speak of 99%, but at the time of this writing, no one will say more because these percentages are scientific standards linked to the notion of the precautionary principle, a principle which will be lifted when and only when the already massive data concerning vaping, will be considered sufficient ... it is so at least in France , our English neighbor has already considered that this precautionary principle could be lifted).
Has the European Commission, which willingly brandishes the specter of the precautionary principle, forgotten that the most elementary precaution is above all to reduce the number of deaths?
SCHEER stands for Scientific Committee On Health, Environmental and Emerging Risks.
In French: Scientific Committee for Health, Environmental and Emerging Risks (CSRSEE, it's immediately less sexy…).
The method is simple: No method, no experimentation or scientific protocol.
This study is not carried out in the laboratory, but is based solely on the data collected from all the studies published in order to derive statistics.
We carefully avoid the controversies generated by some of these studies, we avoid validating the origins or provenance (who paid for it, under what conditions it was produced), we also avoid putting on the table the divergent scientific opinions of many 'between them…
In short, the goal is to compile everything or at least what is arbitrarily considered as important, without seeking to be exhaustive, but without forgetting to please the European Commission which settles the score.
The opinion of the Vapelier: There was no need to appeal to a scientific committee if it was not to do science. Might as well appoint three interns at the BAC level, it would have cost us less. But in a world where data is deified to the detriment of medical practice or pure research, is this any wonder?
In the category of cardboard methods, we could also:
- Make a wheel of fortune with "It's cool", "It's not cool" written on it and spin.
- Or even play the future of public health in battle.
Be serious : There are countless scientific studies favorable to vaping. We cannot pretend that they do not exist and we will never be able to compare the rumors spread during the EVALI crisis where students were vaping THC bought on the black market with the report from Public Health England which concludes that there has been a large decrease in risks with vaping instead of tobacco.
The question that can be asked is therefore: was it necessary to redo work previously done and under much less partial conditions?
WHAT ARE THE CONCLUSIONS OF THE SCHEER REPORT?
- Evidence of the risk of respiratory tract irritation due to prolonged exposure is moderate. However, the incidence rate is low.
- Evidence of the risk of long-term systemic effects is moderate.
- The evidence for the risk of cancers of the respiratory system due to prolonged exposure to nitrosamines, acetaldehyde and formaldehyde is low to moderate. The evidence of the risk of side effects, carcinogens, due to metals in the vapor is low.
- Evidence of risks of other side effects, such as neurological manifestations due to lung disease, is low.
- To date, there is no no specific data showing that the flavors used in the European Union present risks for users of electronic cigarettes in the long term.
- Evidence of risk of poisoning or injury from explosion and fire (of vaping equipment) is strong. However, the incidence rate is low.
- The evidence that e-cigarettes serve as a gateway to tobacco for young people is moderate.
- The proof that the nicotine in e-liquids promotes addiction is forte.
- The aromas have an important contribution on the attractiveness exerted by the electronic cigarette.
- The evidence for the role of electronic cigarettes in stopping smoking is low. The evidence for this role in tobacco reduction is low to moderate.
- Vaping is safer than smoking. Much more.
- Better to vape than smoke, that's for sure.
- You are not going to get cancer from vaping.
- Vape does not drive you crazy.
- The aromas are not harmful to health. We searched, we found nothing. It's too bad.
- If you do anything with your set-up, it can go wrong! But it is less common than with a smartphone. If you vape Unleaded 98, you will cough!
- We are not sure that the vape pushes young people to smoke. There should be a law banning vaping for minors. Ah, does that already exist? Ah… well, it should be applied then or allow the youngest to smoke, so that they would not vaporize.
- Nicotine is addictive. What do you mean, we already knew?
- If we remove the aromas, people will continue to smoke.
- We do not stop smoking with the vape. Or else, there should be a health policy that is more incentive-based and less repressive, in the English style because with them, it works better. But shhh… we didn't see anything.
En conclusion, the proof of the interest of the conclusions of the SCHEER report is low to moderate.
To follow up on the conclusions of the SCHEER report, the European Commission did not fail to make a report (it's a fad). The latter says this:
- Electronic cigarettes contain nicotine, a toxic substance.
- The Commission will base its decisions on risk management related to electronic cigarettes on the “scientific” opinion of the SCHEER report.
- The opinion in question highlighted the consequences of electronic cigarettes on health
- et the important role they play in the onset of smoking.
- The opinion advocates the application of the precautionary principle and the maintenance of the approach prudent adopted so far.
- However, it should be examined whether certain provisions could be more detailed or clarified.
- For example the provisions relating to the requirements for tank size ou labeling
- Or the provisions relating to the use of aromas and the use of nicotine-free fluids.
- Or the provisions relating to advertising.
- To the extent that electronic cigarettes constitute smoking cessation aids, their regulation should follow pharmaceutical legislation.
- We have just discovered that the vape uses nicotine to compensate for the lack of nicotine when you stop smoking! Take that away from me!
- We read everything well, we understood everything.
- The proof that vaping is dangerous is from strong to ultra-super-mega strong. Nothing was understood about the SCHEER report.
- Since the existence of the vape, the number of smokers has tripled. Or quadrupled. It's proven !
- There is an urgent need to do nothing effective to combat smoking. Apart from increasing taxes: it is useless, it increases the development of the black market but it brings in a max.
- We're still going to make it all more complex to prevent them from vaping, it could work.
- We will reduce the size of atomizers, especially disposables. It's win-win, it's going to annoy them and it's totally anti-ecological. Great your idea, Marcel!
- We are going to ban all aromas, the SCHEER report said that it was hyper-harmful, it has been proven. Yes, we read that correctly! And while we're at it, we're also going to limit non-nicotine e-liquids to 10ml.
- We banned them from advertising, we are going to hunt them on social networks now because they eat us in the hand.
- We're gonna give the baby to Big Pharma. Like that, liquids without aromas, surcharged and on prescription, we are sure that the vape will not spread.
En conclusion, the European Commission did not understand the concept of reduction risks or else, she pretends not to understand anything.
IS IT DANGEROUS FOR VAPE AND IF YES WHAT WILL IT IMPACT?
Because the European Parliament will have to decide on a revision of the current TPD and it will be based on the SCHEER report and on the recommendations of the European Commission, the answer is yes definitely yes.
It is even very dangerous because it would mean:
- The end of the aromas,
- The general limitation of containers to non-nicotine liquids to 10 ml,
- The ban on reconstructable atomizers,
- The takeover of a technology born from the field and developed by all the players in the vaping industry by Big Pharma,
- Not to mention a new tax which will not depend on the TPD but which remains more than likely.
Are we too pessimistic? No, to be convinced of this you only have to look at what is happening in the USA, Canada and elsewhere, all over the world. It is easy to imagine that Europe, and therefore France, might be tempted to align, as it always has.
The risk is immense, within a short period of time, of entering into a long period of prohibition. Confirmed vapers will always be able to "tweak" to get by. But what do we do with the 14 million smokers who will be left on the sand?
It is imperative to unite all forces:
- Liquid manufacturers,
- The vaping media and others,
- Facebook groups,
- Pro-vape associations, scientists (the real ones),
- Doctors… from France and elsewhere.
We must inform, mobilize everywhere, our friends, our parents, the friends of our parents, the parents of our friends, our social networks, to create the buzz.
A few months before the presidential elections, it is not too late to gain weight, which has always been lacking in the vape.
To start, we suggest you visit the excellent platform set up by One Shot Media: jesuisvapoteur.org.
jesuisvapoteur.org will give you all the information you need and even allow you to contact your deputy, simply, to inform them and let them know your opposition to this prospect.
The Vapelier and Vapoteurs.net fully support this initiative.
We are not alone, Vaping Post has joined the movement and other professional goodwill of the vape or not are in the process of doing so.
Vaping friends, smoking friends, let's all fight together by making our voices heard, it's not too late to get there.
Have a good vape, and above all take care of yourself.