MEP and MP Letters

[AnnaLaw]

I thought I'd start this as a new thread although not sure if it should be here or in Health and Legal. I'm also posting it to other forums because my Conservative MEP asked me to ask the forums to help by writing lots of letters.

I sent my letter on 7th Jan to all my MEPs and my MP and received this today.
This is the most promising letter I've received and it gives us another name to write to.
Nerj Deva, SE Conservative MEP, sent this to me today. He prefers email for letters, and says so in his Europarliament page, so I only sent an email.

Thank you contacting me with your concerns with the EU Tobacco Directive. I sympathise with your point that vaporises have helped you to substantially cut down on smoking, indeed, a number of my constituents have attested to their effectiveness

Please find below the response of the Martin Callanan, Conservative Spokesman for matters relating to the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety:

"You are not alone in contacting me on this issue - many constituents feel similarly strongly. I have examined the arguments and I see the potential e-cigarettes offer as harm-reduction devices to improve human health. I am particularly convinced by the fact that e-cigarettes offer concentrated nicotine to addicts without the 4000 toxins and carcinogens found in tobacco smoke, that use of e-cigarettes removes the risk posed to non-smokers (and especially to children of smokers) by second hand smoke, that e-cigarettes appeal to adult smokers seeking to quit but not generally to children or those not yet addicted to nicotine, that traditional nicotine replacement therapies proposed by the NHS and the pharmaceutical industry have had very limited success in helping smokers quit permanently, and that thousands of British e-cigarette users (and millions across the EU and the world) are likely return to smoking if the directive is amended as foreseen and nicotine concentrations are limited to 4mg/ml. I have no doubt that this will lead to a large percentage of such users dying of smoking-related diseases they might otherwise have avoided, with all the personal and societal consequences this would mean. Such arguments have led me to conclude that the proposed changes to limit permitted concentrations of nicotine solution sold in the EU are counter-productive and will do much more harm than good.

Changes to EU tobacco legislation have been expected for some time but were delayed by the recent resignation of the previous European Commissioner for Health and Consumer Affairs, John Dalli. His replacement, Tonio Borg, has expressed a desire to change the law before his mandate expires in June 2014. To prevent the proposed changes concerning e-cigarettes and all the negative consequences that would arise, we must work hard in the year ahead to build solid majorities in both the Parliament and the Council.

As a member of the Parliament's Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety I will do everything in my power to make the arguments and convince other MEPs of the foolishness of diluting nicotine solution to the point of uselessness.

I would also encourage you to raise awareness among others in the vapourizing community. The internet offers considerable opportunities to draw the attention of a wide audience to the issue and to contact your elected representatives quickly and easily. If you have not already done so I would encourage you to write to your MP and request him to raise the matter in Westminster, and persuade other e-cigarette users to do the same. If we bring to the attention of the public, the political world and the media the strong arguments in favour of e-cigarettes as a harm reduction device and the number of lives which can be saved through their use, we have a very strong chance of winning the argument."

I hope you find this response useful, if you have any queries or concerns on any other matter please do not hesitate to get in touch, I shall be happy to help.

 

[Vapertron]

Excellent l'm still waiting for an answer from my mp as to what the health minister said when he read mine, nothing yet though

 

[AnnaLaw]

Excellent l'm still waiting for an answer from my mp as to what the health minister said when he read mine, nothing yet though

I guess for the Conservative MEP responsible for Public Health matters saying almost exactly what we're saying is good as MEPs have more say in EU affairs and he's a member of the committee in charge of this Directive, but I'n still waiting for a reply from the Secretary of State for Health. My MP, the Education Secretary, said he'd pass my cocerns on to Jeremy Hunt and let me know what he says.

All my letters were sent on January 7th, some were also sent on December 21st.
You won't find Conservatives in WriteToThem, and I had a better response from individual emails rather than sending an identical one to seven of them. I found the Conservatives on the EuroParliament site, they're all there including phome and fax numbers, office addresses, the lot.

I've only had two MEP replies, the first, from a Lib-Dem, appe\ared to show a complete lack of knowledge and belief in Big Pharma. I'm waiting for the rest.

 

[Bryan123456]

I guess for the Conservative MEP responsible for Public Health matters saying almost exactly what we're saying is good as MEPs have more say in EU affairs and he's a member of the committee in charge of this Directive, but I'n still waiting for a reply from the Secretary of State for Health. My MP, the Education Secretary, said he'd pass my cocerns on to Jeremy Hunt and let me know what he says.

All my letters were sent on January 7th, some were also sent on December 21st.
You won't find Conservatives in WriteToThem, and I had a better response from individual emails rather than sending an identical one to seven of them. I found the Conservatives on the EuroParliament site, they're all there including phome and fax numbers, office addresses, the lot.

I've only had two MEP replies, the first, from a Lib-Dem, appe\ared to show a complete lack of knowledge and belief in Big Pharma. I'm waiting for the rest.

You're assuming there's some democracy in the EU. There's not - the European Parliament is just a talking shop. The Commissions are not accountable to it and do not report to it. In fact the Commissions and Commisioners can do what ever they like - even if it is 100% contradictory to a major majority vote in the parliament.

 

[AnnaLaw]

I have just received a second letter from my Lib-Dem MEP, the one that said I could get nicotine on prescription in order to stop smoking, the one who ignored everything I said.

I wrote back to her and sent links to independant studies and research.

I think I need to write again, this time finding studies addressing the arguments she uses this time round!

I ask everybody in the SE to write to her addressing these points as well.

Here is the letter:-

Many thanks for contacting me again regarding electronic cigarettes and pointing me in the direction of some very useful studies.

I am pleased that overall you support the proposed tobacco legislation. As far as the regulation of nictotine-containing liquid used in e-cigarettes are concerned, I am staying up-to-date with developments in this field.

My main concern is the health effects of electronic cigarettes. Although preliminary tests of the original e-cigarettes produced by Ruyan, a Chinese electronics company, suggest that they are relatively harmless in comparison with smoking, there are now many different models on the market that have not been tested. Further, a draft review by the WHO's Tobacco Regulatory Group notes that the extent of nicotine uptake and the safety of e-cigarettes have yet to be established.

One of my Liberal Democrat colleagues in the European Parliament, Marielle de Sarnez, has recently written a question to the European Commission about the use of electronic cigarettes. A copy of her question is copied here for your reference. I will of course keep you updated when an answer to this question is provided by the Commission.

Over the last few years, more and more people in Europe have started using electronic cigarettes. According to a study by the Commission's Directorate-General for Health and Consumers, 7 % of EU citizens claim to have tried them and the total value of the EU market was between EUR 400 and 500 million in 2011. These new e‐cigarettes, which can be recharged using cartridges containing nicotine and flavourings, use a mechanism that produces water vapour, rather than burning tobacco which produces tar. Manufacturers claim that they are less harmful than standard cigarettes. However, it is still not completely clear how smoking electronic cigarettes affects people's health. The World Health Organisation does not think that they should be used to wean people off standard cigarettes and still classifies nicotine as a ‘very dangerous’ substance. According to a 2010 study by the French National Research and Safety Institute, the liquid used to recharge the cigarettes also contains traces of propylene glycol, which can be toxic if consumed in large amounts. The French Agency for the Safety of Health Products (AFSSAPS) does not recommend that people use e‐cigarettes to give up smoking, because it is still not clear how they affect human health. The agency's fear is that people who are not addicted to cigarettes and nicotine would develop an acute addiction by using these products. In 2010, the Commission, in its answer to a parliamentary question, said that it would look into the issue of electronic cigarettes and assess ‘the impact of a (…) revision of the Tobacco Products Directive’

Given that it is not clear how electronic cigarettes affect consumer health and whether they can lead to addiction, does the Commission intend to carry out a study into the potential risks of e‐cigarette use, particularly among young people? Does it plan to revise EU legislation on smoking to take account of its findings?

I will continue to monitor the situation closely and look forward to the European Commission’s response on e-cigarettes in order to make an informed decision regarding their use before the first vote takes place on 25th February.

Yours sincerely,

Catherine Bearder​

She misses the point that we don't want to stop using nicotine and a delivery system that isn't always cigalikes and pre-filled cartos, and that kids see ecigs as uncool, or that cigarettes aren't being banned so the more who use ecigs the better, or that all contents are approved for medical use already!

 

[hyperheavenly]

Dear Ms.

Many thanks for your email. I have been looking into the European Tobacco Directive and electronic cigarettes.

The draft legislation of the European Tobacco Directive was published on 19th December 2012. It was brought in to address several issues, including the labelling of tobacco products, internet sales of tobacco goods, and what to do regarding products that do not contain tobacco but are closely linked with those that do.

With respect to electronic cigarettes, the proposal states that products that have a nicotine concentration exceeding 4mg per ml may only be placed on the market if they have been authorised as medicinal products. Products with a lower concentration can be sold as consumer goods, so long as they feature an appropriate health warning. The given reasoning for this particular regulation is that the rapid increase in the market for nicotine containing products means that it is important to act quickly before more people develop a nicotine addiction.

Since this is only draft legislation at the moment, the next step is for this proposal to be discussed in the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers. It is expected to be adopted in 2014, and would come into effect from 2015-2016. In the European Parliament and Council, representatives can make amendments or vote against the bill. If, however, the bill passes with the regulation on nicotine containing products, then it will need to be transposed into UK law.

However, this is already an issue which the government is concerned about. On 10th July 2012, the then Minister of State for Health Services said that the electronic cigarettes posed a potential danger to consumers. He cited data showing that there can be a greater variability in the content of electronic cigarettes compared to normal ones, making them more dangerous to users. The Minister went on to point to a consultation carried out in March 2011 by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). The consultation considered whether to bring all nicotine containing products within the medical licensing regime. The response to it suggested that there was strong support for doing so, and the MHRA plan to make a final decision on the matter in spring 2013.

I hope I have answered your questions, but if I can be of any more help please do not hesitate to get back in touch.

Kind regards,

Gary Streeter

 

[Mark]

*face palms*

 

[EthelKing]

OK - here I go again! I got another reply from the assistant to Mary Honeyball MEP:

Dear Mr ,

Many thanks for writing to me about the important issue of the EU Tobacco Products Directive, and how it will affect electronic cigarettes.

Because e-cigarettes are a relatively new product they are regulated differently in each EU country. Some countries allow e-cigarettes to be sold without any regulation at all. Others have banned the sale of e-cigarettes. As the UK is part of the EU's internal market it is important that we harmonise the way we deal with this product, otherwise consumers could be buying unregulated products which do not conform to basic safety standards, either within their own country, or by easily purchasing it over the internet from a neighbouring country.

The European Commission has proposed that all 'nicotine containing products' with more than 2mg per unit should not be classed as tobacco products. Instead, under the Commission's proposals, nearly all e-cigarettes will need to get authorisation as a pharmaceutical product, in the same way as nicotine patches, sprays and gums.

Of course there is a balance to strike. On one hand e-cigarettes have the potential to be a helpful way to help somebody quit smoking entirely and greatly improve their health. On the other hand e-cigarettes currently can contain up to 48mg of nicotine - far more than a regular cigarette, making them highly addictive.

As nicotine is the drug that makes cigarettes addictive, somebody that tries e-cigarettes could be much more likely to go on to smoke regular cigarettes. Furthermore, there is no evidence that e-cigarettes are safe, and it is concerning that they are being marketed as a 'healthy' alternative to smoking.

Currently we do not have any conclusive evidence either that e-cigarettes are helpful for giving up smoking, or that they encourage it.

While we do not have this scientific evidence to rely on I think it is wise to have a cautious approach to e-cigarettes. If they are effective in helping people to stop smoking, then it is appropriate that they are regulated in the same way as other smoking cessation tools, such as nicotine patches.

The Commission proposal is not final and there will be many months of negotiations by the European Parliament, as well as health ministers from the UK and other EU countries, before the legislation is agreed. During this time Labour MEPs will be looking carefully at all of the measures and trying to find the best way to ensure that we effectively reduce smoking rates in the UK and across Europe.

Thanks again for writing to me on this important issue.

Best wishes



Heath Woodward
Assistant
Mary Honeyball MEP

Of course, I spent the next four hours formulating a reply (twenty minutes to draft it, and three and a half buggering about with it!). Here it is...

Show Details
From
Uncle Ethel (edited)
To
Heath Woodward

Dear Mr Woodward,

Thank you for your comprehensive and well-considered response to my letter, which I have read with interest.

From you reply, I am given the impression that "E-cigarettes" are regarded as a form of unlicenced medication, and this misunderstanding should not be allowed to perpetuate. Although some users may be using "e-cigarettes" to withdraw from tobacco use completely, the vast majority of users, myself included, have exercised their freedom of choice to choose what is arguably an inherently safer method of enjoying nicotine as a recreational habit.

The comparison between "vaping" and smoking is also erronous. Aside from the act of inhalation, and the inclusion of nicotine in "e-liquids", there are very few similarities. The effects of inhaling propylene glycol in air to saturation point was described as "completely harmless" by Robertson et al. as early as 1948.

With regard to nicotine addiction. I am addicted to nicotine. I am not going to become any more addicted to nicotine by using a higher nicotine containing fluid. I have found that the exact opposite has happened, I started using a 24mg/ml liquid when I first started "vaping" and have reduced the amount to suit my taste and need to 15mg/ml over the course of a year. When trying to understand the nicotine content of an "e-liquid" one must consider that the actual absorption of nicotine in the lungs is estimated to be between 40 to 60% of the total available, therefore the proposition of reducing the maximum non-medicinal strength of e-liquids to 4mg is effectively making it of no benefit whatsoever for the majority of users.

You have also quoted that the liquid contained in e-cigarettes can be as much as 48mg/ml, and I would ask where this information was obtained. The maximum available strength I have seen for sale in the UK is 24mg/ml. I have no doubt there are some rare examples of higher strengths, but I do feel that the number of users buying such strengths are very few and far between.

Many people, being either unwilling or unable to quit smoking, have chosen "vaping" as a method of nicotine delivery which results in the vapourisation of a liquid containing less than seven chemical elements - mainly propylene glycol, glycerine, water, flavouring and nicotine (the rest being trace elements). Given that smoking is the alternative employing the direct inhalation of a combusted material containing over 7000 different chemicals, including 60 known carcinogens and proven to be the cause of 1 in 5 premature deaths and directly responsible for debilitating chronic lung diseases such as emphysema, chronic bronchitis and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease - not to mention peripheral vascular disease - there seems to be little positive reason why all EU states and the EU Parliament allows the continued sale of traditional tobacco products.

Whilst I accept that the evidence that nicotine is not an "innocent" ingredient of "e-liquids" - even on the most basic level of comparison between "e-cigarette" vapour and tobacco smoke, the argument that says vapour is safer is very hard to dispute if common sense and probability are employed.

It seems illogical that any individual government, let alone one which governs all EU states, would consider discounting or making ineffective a method of tobacco harm reduction with the potential to save the lives and improve the well being of hundreds of thousands of smokers. It appears that the European Parliament will make it's decision based on a lack of evidence that proves "vaping" is in any way comparable or worse to cigarette smoking. To effectively ban by regulation as a medicine (or at best reduce the efficacy of "vaping" to a nicotine level which renders it all but useless to the majority of users) a significant development in tobacco harm reduction seems somewhat fatuous.

I have quoted the following from a recent newspaper article (by Lionel Shriver, taken from the Guardian article linked below), whilst strong, summarises my feelings on this matter rather well:

"What's truly evil is attempting to deny people addicted to a profoundly damaging substance the opportunity to transfer that addiction to a product most medical professionals rate as 99% harmless. The gathering European opposition to electronic cigarettes is the result of knee-jerk cultural prejudice, puritanical vindictiveness, corporate collusion, and the unconscionable greed of tax authorities that won't be able to heap the same punitive, confiscatory, opportunistic duties on a product that doesn't hurt anyone."

To that end, I would like to thank you once again for your response, and trust that my opinions as both a "e-cigarette" user and constituent will be taken into account when you are deciding how best to support the Directive.

Yours sincerely,

Uncle Ethel (Mr) -Edited

European Respiratory Society - "Electronic Cigarettes Do Not Damage The Heart".
Electronic Cigarette Industry Trade Association (ECITA) - "French Study Shows Significant Health Improvements For Smokers Using Electronic Cigarettes"
The Guardian - "No Smoke Without Ire"
TIME - Business & Money - "Can electronic Cigarettes Challenge Big Tobacco"

Still can't help but feel I'm pissing in the wind though! As an aside, I sat down and worked out, at a very basic level, the comparison of nicotine yield in an average fag and nicotine absorbed when vaping. I've got to say, the results were grim and not particularly good news for us filthy vapers! It was a bloody brain-ache too! My missus couldn't understand it, and she's an experienced research nurse!

Sorry for the length of this post - but after all the swearing and cursing, I just had to share!!!! AND it's another excuse to say what I want via the genius pen of Lionel Shriver!

 

[AnnaLaw]

Several things stand out in the Lib-Dem letter such as

According to a 2010 study by the French National Research and Safety Institute, the liquid used to recharge the cigarettes also contains traces of propylene glycol, which can be toxic if consumed in large amounts.

I thought that propylene Glycol was the main diluent, is used in medical inhalers and nebulisers and has been approved as safe for inhalation in medicines for the last 70 years!
In fact I thought that the only content not approved medically (on its own) was flavourings!

I recently got a link to the ASH report at http://www.ash.org.uk/files/documents/ASH_715.pdf
It seems that there is zero communication in the aim for zero nicotine.

 

[Mark]

That's a great letter Lee and pissing in the wind is better than wetting your pants mate
Not sure what the grim results are you mentioned? I thought it was generally accepted that nic absorption rate from ecigs was about a third of that from smoking? Makes sense to me but I'm no scientist!