Posts

An 'explosion' of youth exposure to e-cigarette TV ads

Michelle Healy, USA TODAY

As the federal government moves to set rules that would ban the sale of electronic cigarettes to minors, a new study shows that TV ads for the products have increased dramatically during programs most likely to be watched by adolescents and young adults.

According to the study published online today by the journal Pediatrics, between 2011 and 2013 exposure to e-cigarette TV ads increased by 256% among adolescents ages 12 to 17 and by 321% among young adults, ages 18 to 24.

Approximately 76% of the ads seen by each of the two age groups occurred while watching cable networks — most often AMC, Country Music Television, Comedy Central, WGN America, TV Land and VH1. They also appeared on broadcast network programs that were among the 100 highest rated youth programs for the 2012-2013 TV season, including The Bachelor, Big Brother and Survivor, the study finds.

One brand, blu eCigs, owned by tobacco company Lorillard, accounted for almost 82% of all nationally aired e-cigarette ads viewed by 12- to 17-year-olds.

“The tobacco industry and e-cigarette industry say that they are not advertising products to youth, but they are advertising products on a medium which is the broadest based medium in the country,” says Jennifer Duke, lead author of the study and a public health researcher at RTI International in Research Triangle Park, N.C.

With a national television audience that includes 24 million viewers between the ages of 12 and 17, “as e-cigarette advertisements increase for adults they are by default also increasing exposure to youth,” Duke says. “It’s hard to argue that only adults are seeing these ads,” she adds.

Ads for traditional cigarettes have been banned from TV since 1971. A proposed rule, released in April by the Food and Drug Administration, would ban the sale to minors of tobacco products that are currently unregulated, including e-cigarettes, cigars, pipe tobacco and hookahs. The rule would also require require ingredient disclosure, federal approval and warning labels. Marketing and advertising restrictions are currently not part of the proposed rule.

Commercial: blu eCigs ad that aired during study

Commercial: NJOY ad that aired during the study

In a statement, blu eCigs said it has “proactively set limitations on when and where” its product “can be marketed in an effort to minimize any potential exposure to minors.” A part of the criteria used “is to screen all marketing opportunities to ensure that our TV ads only run with media targeting an adult audience of 85 percent or greater.”

The new study, which analyzed Nielsen television audience measurement data, did not focus on the content of the commercials or the audience intentionally targeted by the ads, only who had exposure to them, Duke says.

The finding that these “unregulated advertisement messages about the benefits of e-cigarettes are out at a large and increasing volume” is alarming because “there are no counter messages by the public health community,” she says.

Among the safety concerns about the battery-powered devices that turn nicotine-laced liquid into a vapor that users inhale, is that nicotine (derived from tobacco leaves) is addictive and may lead users to try other tobacco products.

E-cigarettes have not been fully studied by the FDA, but a laboratory analysis of several samples conducted by the agency in late 2008 found trace amounts of carcinogens and toxic chemicals, such as diethylene glycol, an ingredient used in antifreeze.

Results of the new media study provide “the strongest evidence that there has been an absolute explosion of youth exposure to e-cigarette advertising on television,” says Matthew Myers, president of the advocacy group Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids.

“It’s particularly disturbing precisely because Congress removed cigarette advertising from television because of the unique impact TV advertising has on young people,” Myers says. ” When e-cigarette manufacturers say that they don’t market to minors, it’s deja vu all over again. This study demonstrates the importance of FDA moving rapidly and decisively to protect our nation’s children.”

Grand Forks targets e-cigs: New ordinance gets early approval from city committee

By Charly Haley, Grand Forks Herald
Electronic cigarettes may soon be more regulated in Grand Forks if a recommendation for a new city ordinance is approved by City Council next week.
An ordinance prohibiting possession of e-cigarettes by minors and prohibiting vending machines that sell e-cigarettes was proposed to the City Council Service/Safety Committee by council member Bret WeberTuesday. The committee voted unanimously to support the ordinance, which will go to the full City Council next week for final approval.
E-cigarettes are not technically a “tobacco product,” which is why they aren’t regulated under existing city ordinances, Weber said.
But they are a vehicle for nicotine in a vapor form, which is still damaging to health, he said.
According to Food and Drug Administration reports, e-cigarettes can increase nicotine addiction and may lead people to try regular cigarettes, which are known to cause disease.
The proposed Grand Forks ordinance states that e-cigarettes will have the same regulations as other tobacco products.
Haley Thorson, a Grand Forks Public Health nurse, said there are only two e-cigarette shops that she knows of in Grand Forks: SnG Vapor and Vapor Stars. Some convenience stores also sell simple e-cigarettes, she said.
A big part of the problem, Weber said, is that e-cigarettes are often marketed toward youths. “There are ‘Hello Kitty,’ e-cigarettes,” he said.
Members of the Red River High School Student Council and the Grand Forks City Youth Commission attended the Service/Safety Committee meeting to support Weber’s proposal of the ordinance.
E-cigarette use among youth in North Dakota has almost tripled from 2011 to 2013, according to a report provided by the Grand Forks Public Health Department. The trend is growing nationally as well, according to the report.
In Minnesota, it is illegal by state law for minors to buy e-cigarettes, Weber said. At least eight communities in North Dakota have passed or are currently discussing ordinances that regulate sales of e-cigarettes to minors, according to the Public Health report.
http://www.grandforksherald.com/content/grand-forks-targets-e-cigs-new-ordinance-gets-early-approval-city-committee

E-Cigarette Makers Going After Youth, Report Finds

BY MAGGIE FOX, NBC News

E-cigarette makers may say they welcome regulation and don’t want to sell to teenage nonsmokers, but their advertising dollars paint a very different picture, according to a report released Thursday.

E-cigarette makers spent $39 million on ads from June through November 2013, much of it on programming targeting youth, the anti-tobacco organization Legacy found.

“Overall, these research findings indicate that, despite their publicly stated intentions, some e-cigarette companies are reaching youth with their advertising,” Legacy says in its report.

“Moreover, the only national brand owned by a major tobacco company, blu, is reaching a significant portion of young Americans with its advertising. The effects of this are apparent, with nearly all young people aware of these products and use among young people rising rapidly.”

Health officials from several major U.S. cities say that’s why federal regulators need to act. They can restrict sales and limit where people may smoke or “vape,” but they cannot restrict national ads.

“There are some areas where our hands are tied and that particularly is in marketing,” said New York City health commissioner Dr. Mary Travis Bassett.

“They need to do more to protect kids from the effects of TV,” added Los Angeles County health commissioner Dr. Jonathan Fielding.

The fear is a whole new generation of people will become addicted to nicotine before federal regulations can be written, let alone take hold, the health commissioners told a news conference. New York, Chicago, Boston and Los Angeles County are among the big city areas that have restricted sales and use of e-cigarettes.

Even some public health experts say e-cigarettes may be a useful alternative to burned tobacco cigarettes for smokers. But they also agree that it would be bad to encourage or even allow non-smoking children to become addicted to the nicotine in e-cigarettes.

Legacy was set up in 1999 as part of the Master Settlement Agreement when major tobacco companies agreed to pay more than $200 billion to states and territories. The states wanted some of the money to be used for an organization dedicated to studying and providing public education about the impact of tobacco.

Just last week, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration said it would seek to regulate e-cigarettes, because they contain nicotine, the addictive substance in tobacco. Most e-cigarette makers said they’d welcome some regulation.

Legacy did two studies looking at the marketing of e-cigarettes, and asking teens and young adults what they knew about them. It found e-cigarette TV ads reached 29.3 million teens and young adults from January through November 2013, including 58 percent of 12- to 17-year-olds.

Taken together, the two reports show e-cigarette makers using tactics that have long been banned for regular cigarettes, the report says.

E-cigarette makers dispute this. “The products are being advertised to adults,” said Cynthia Cabrera, executive director of the Smoke Free Alternatives Trade Association. “If children are watching during that time, it’s possible, but they are being marketed to adult consumers, to adult smokers.”

Public health experts say 90 percent of smokers start by the age of 20. They worry that e-cigarettes sold in flavors such as bubble gum and Gummi bear are targeted mainly to younger teens.

“While cigarette advertising is prohibited on television, it is currently fair game to use television to promote electronic cigarettes. Using broadcast and online advertising has allowed the e-cigarette industry to promote its products in a way that has broad reach and is largely unregulated,” Legacy says.

“Every day that industry is growing very, very rapidly,” LA’s Fielding said. “And you can be sure that big tobacco is going to wind up in the driver’s seat with respect to marketing. Don’t let them undo decades of efforts to de-glamorize smoking.”

http://www.nbcnews.com/health/kids-health/e-cigarette-makers-going-after-youth-report-finds-n94166

Proposal would ban e-cigarette sales to minors, allow advertising

By: Reuters, INFORUM
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Food and Drug Administration proposed rules on Thursday that would ban the sale of e-cigarettes to anyone under 18, but would not restrict flavored products, online sales or advertising, which public health advocates say attract children.
The long-awaited proposal, which would subject the $2 billion industry to federal regulation for the first time, is not as restrictive as some companies had feared and will likely take years to become fully effective.
Bonnie Herzog, an analyst at Wells Fargo, said the proposal is “positive for industry.”
But public health advocates lamented the fact that the proposal does not take aim at e-cigarette advertising or sweetly-flavored products, which they say risk introducing a new generation of young people to conventional cigarettes when little is known about the long-term health impact of the electronic devices.
“It’s very disappointing because they don’t do anything to rein in the wild-west marketing that is targeting kids,” said Stanton Glantz, a professor at the Center of Tobacco Control Research and Education at the University of California, San Francisco.
FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg said at a briefing on Wednesday that the proposal represented the first “foundational” step toward broader restrictions if scientific evidence shows they are needed to protect public health.
That declaration worries some companies.
“The window is still open for a more draconian approach,” said Jason Healy, president of Lorillard Inc’s blu eCigs unit, which holds roughly 48 percent of the market. “I think the proposal shows a good science-based reaction here from the FDA, but there is a lot we have to go through during the public comment period.”
Lorillard, together with privately-held NJOY and Logic Technology account for an estimated 80 percent of the market. Other big tobacco companies, including Altria Group Inc and Reynolds American Inc, are also entering the market.
E-cigarette advocates welcomed the FDA’s light touch.
Dr. Michael Siegel, a professor of community health sciences at Boston University, said a ban on flavorings would have “devastated the industry, as the flavors are a key aspect of what makes these products competitive with tobacco cigarettes.”
Similarly, a ban on all e-cigarette advertising “would have given tobacco cigarettes an unfair advantage in the marketplace,” he said.
NO FREE SAMPLES
A law passed in 2009 gave the FDA authority to regulate cigarettes, smokeless tobacco and roll-your-own tobacco and stipulated the agency could extend its jurisdiction to other nicotine products after issuing a rule to that effect. E-cigarettes use battery-powered cartridges to produce a nicotine-laced inhalable vapor.
In the short term, the new rules would prohibit companies from distributing free e-cigarette samples, forbid vending machine sales except in adult-only venues and prohibit sales to minors.
Companies would also be required to warn consumers that nicotine is addictive, but no other health warnings would be required. The addiction warning would have to be added no later than two years after the rule is set and the e-cigarette companies would not be allowed to make health claims in any advertising.
The proposal is subject to a public-comment period of 75 days.
Vince Willmore, a spokesman for the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids, said the proposal “by no means does everything we think needs to be done, but it starts the process. What is critical now is that they finalize this rule and then move quickly to fill the gaps.”
He said the FDA should aim to establish the rule within a year, but many are skeptical the agency will act that quickly.
“The reality of these things is that every step takes years,” said UCSF’s Glantz. “By not addressing the youth-directed marketing it means it won’t be addressed for a very long time.”
Some e-cigarette companies that sell primarily through convenience stores were surprised at the lack of restrictions on online sales, since it can be difficult to verify a customer’s age over the Internet.
“The Internet thing is very surprising to me,” said Miguel Martin, president of Logic Technology. “It reduces the visibility of the sales of the products and the type of products that the government has awareness of.”
The new rules would also require companies to submit new and existing products to the FDA for approval. They would have two years to submit applications from the time the rule goes into effect. Companies may continue selling their products and introducing new products pending the FDA’s review.
In the meantime, e-cigarette companies would be required to register with the FDA and list the ingredients in their products. They would not be required to adhere immediately to specific product or quality control standards. That could come later, Hamburg said.
THE “VAPING” INDUSTRY
E-cigarettes and other “vaping” devices generate roughly $2 billion a year in the United States, and some industry analysts expect their sales to outpace the $85 billion conventional-cigarette industry within a decade.
Advocates of e-cigarettes claim they are a safer alternative to conventional cigarettes, since they do not produce lung-destroying tar, though long-term safety data is thin.
The FDA’s proposal leaves many questions unanswered about how new products would be regulated over the long run. One key question relates to how products are approved.
Under current law, new tobacco products can be approved if they are “substantially equivalent” to a product that was on the market before Feb. 15, 2007. It is unclear whether any e-cigarettes were on sale before then, to be used as a benchmark.
Mitch Zeller, head of the FDA’s tobacco division, said at a briefing that the agency would be seeking more information during the public-comment period on whether the “substantial equivalence” pathway is even valid for e-cigarettes.
If it is not, e-cigarette companies would have to use a different process, which would require them to prove their products are appropriate for public health, a higher hurdle to clear.
Also up in the air is the regulatory fate of some cigars. The current proposal would include e-vaping products and other tobacco products, but premium cigars may be excluded.
The FDA said it would seek public comment on whether all cigars should be regulated equally. One option proposed by the agency is to regulate them all. The other is to define a category of premium cigars that would not be subject to the FDA’s authority.
Physicians said the possible exemption of premium cigars from regulation was troubling.
“Any exemption for any kind of tobacco product proven to cause lung and heart disease and cancer is unacceptable,” said Harold Wimmer, chief executive of the American Lung Association.
Cigar companies, backed by some members of Congress, had lobbied heavily for a regulatory carve-out for premium cigars. In a December 2013 letter to Hamburg and Sylvia Mathews Burwell, director of the White House’s Office of Management and Budget, 24 Republican lawmakers asked that premium cigars be exempt.
“As you know,” they wrote, “premium cigars are a niche product with an adult consumer base, much like fine wines. The majority of people who enjoy a cigar do so occasionally, often in social or celebratory settings.”
Under the proposed rule, premium cigars are considered those wrapped in whole tobacco leaf, made manually by combining the wrapper, filler and binder, have no characterizing flavor, have no filter, tip or non-tobacco mouthpiece and are relatively expensive.
http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/432967/group/homepage/

Are Electronic Cigarettes A Public Good Or A Health Hazard?

BY MICHAEL BLANDING, Forbes

When electronic cigarettes first appeared a little over a decade ago, they were hailed by public health advocates-as well as some smokers-as a godsend: a tool to help smokers quit while mitigating the most harmful effects of tobacco. “The [e-cigarette] market is producing, at no cost to the taxpayer, an emerging triumph of public health,” one health advocate said.

Consisting of a small barrel-shaped design that mimics an actual cigarette, the devices vaporize a liquid nicotine solution, which is then inhaled without the tar and carcinogens found in smoke. Powered by a battery and controlled with a microchip, users can adjust the amount of nicotine they inhale, gradually weaning themselves off of their addiction if they choose.
“The value proposition of e-cigarettes is clear,” saysJohn A. Quelch, Charles Edward Wilson Professor of Business Administration at Harvard Business School. “They provide the dubious pleasure of nicotine without all the cancer-inducing toxins associated with tobacco.”
Very quickly, however, enthusiasm faded, when some public health advocates began worrying that the cure was worse than the disease.
The very fact users could control the amount of nicotine they ingested led to worry that e-cigarettes would cause smokers to take in more nicotine, rather than less. Even more worrisome, “eCigs” could provide a gateway for young people to start smoking tobacco cigarettes, or even lure ex-smokers back to the habit.

Electronic Cigarette Smoking(Photo credit: planetc1) 

This has created a dilemma for health regulators, says Quelch. Do they regulate e-cigarettes in order to decrease the number of new smokers who may pick up the habit, or do they apply a light hand in order to increase the number of existing smokers who will quit.
“Put crudely,” says Quelch, “how many nicotine addicts is it worth the risk of creating to have one tobacco smoker quit?”

That is one of the many dilemmas Quelch explores in the HBS case, E-Cigarettes: Marketing Versus Public Health, written with HBS Research Associate Margaret L. Rodriguez. It examines the consequences of the products as they have become more popular — and as the big tobacco companies have gotten in on the game. Quelch, who holds a joint appointment at HBS and Harvard School of Public Health, wrote the case for a new course debuting next year called “Consumers, Corporations, and Public Health,” which will enroll both MBA and MPH students to consider the intersections of business and health.
“One of the themes in the course is the tension that exists, quite understandably, between regulators and commercial interests,” says Quelch. “Most people are used to hearing about that in the context of financial regulation, but similar issues apply in other sectors of the economy including health care.”
In the case of electronic cigarettes, existing evidence indicates that they have led to a net decrease in smoking. Of the 43.8 million smokers in the United States in 2012, 3.5 million converted to eCigs; during the same period only 1.3 million eCig smokers converted to tobacco. That means a net decrease of cigarette smokers of 2.2 million, or 5%.
At the same time, 2.8 million nonsmokers converted to electronic smokes. But even that doesn’t tell the whole story, says Quelch, since it leaves out the number of smokers who would have taken up smoking tobacco if e-cigarettes didn’t exist, as well as the number of smokers who would have quit cold turkey without the availability of electronic products. “To really determine the public health impact of e-cigarettes requires a lot of sophisticated market research and analysis,” says Quelch.
A Smoking Market

Uncertainty over health data hasn’t hurt the product’s popularity. In 2013, electronic cigarettes tripled in sales in the U.S. to approximately $3 billion. (The overall tobacco retail market in the US is valued at around $100 billion.) Almost 10% of high school students have tried them, according to the Centers for Disease Control, and a growing percentage of middle school students are joining the parade. In 2012, Goldman Sachs declared electronic cigarettes one of the top 10 disruptive technologies to watch.
Like most disruptive technologies, electronic cigarettes were developed by small entrepreneurs with brand names like Logic eCig (founded 2010), Blu (2009) and NJOY (2006). By 2013, according to the case study, the e-cigarette category featured more than 200 brands and their growth was threatening sales of tobacco cigarettes.
“If I am a tobacco manufacturer seeing my sales cannibalized by e-cigarettes, I have two choices: develop my own e-cigarette brand or buy an e-cigarette company,” says Quelch.
Number three tobacco company Lorillard LO -2.47%was the first to blink, buying up Blu in 2012 for $135 million and aggressively pushing them at convenience store counters. “Distribution of Blu immediately increased by a factor of three,” says Quelch. Other top manufacturers Phillip Morris and Altria followed suit, acquiring their own brands and using their shelf-space clout to increase visibility of the alternative products.
The growing sales of electronic cigarettes also caught the attention of regulators. The products had been completely unregulated–they could be advertised on TV and sold to buyers of any age on the Internet. But once the major tobacco brands began acquiring e-cigarette makers and displaying those products alongside their mainstay cigarettes, regulators took particular notice.
Public health advocates and parents alike worried about the variety of flavors, including cotton candy, that might make “vapes” attractive to children. Some states and cities responded with restrictions on sales and advertising, and, in April, the Financial Times reported that the World Health Organization will call for e-cigarettes to be regulated just like tobacco cigarettes. The US Food and Drug Administration, under mounting pressure to act, plans to offer marketing and product regulations for electronic cigarettes in the near future.
Ironically, if regulation does go forward, it might help the major tobacco companies, by limiting the marketing playbook of the competitors that were cannibalizing sales of their products.
“Altria or Phillip Morris know how to deal with regulators,” says Quelch, “but with all those entrepreneurs coming out with flavors and advertising, they would no longer be able to get traction in their business.”

Tobacco Companies Take Control 
Quelch predicts the big three tobacco companies will gain control of the eCigs market and then undermarket their electronic products in order to retain market share for their more profitable tobacco cigarettes. “Cigarette companies will manage the marketing of e-cigarette brands to maximize profitability for their shareholders,” says Quelch. “Meaning they’ll be able to manipulate prices in order to control the speed with which tobacco users migrate to e-cigarette brands.”
That means that electronic cigarettes, which are now significantly cheaper on a smoke-per-smoke basis than heavily taxed tobacco competitors, will probably start climbing in price and eventually become equal to tobacco brands. That could create an even bigger windfall for Phillip Morris, Altria, and Lorillard. Even if eCigs are regulated like regular cigarettes, they probably won’t be taxed like regular cigarettes, since the tax is on tobacco, not nicotine (and doesn’t apply, for example, to nicotine gum or nicotine patches)-and any new taxes are a nonstarter these days in Congress.
By pricing electronic and tobacco cigarettes to sell similarly at retail, the tobacco companies could reap enormous profits, concludes Quelch-at the same time giving them cover against criticism by allowing them to point to “healthier alternatives” in their product portfolios.
When entrepreneurs first created e-cigarettes and marketed them as a way to quit smoking, they probably didn’t intend to eventually pad the bottom line of mainstream big tobacco companies. But playing out the scenario to the end, that is exactly what may happen-and all in the absence of any definitive data showing whether e-cigarettes are more or less harmful to public health than tobacco smokes.
By pointing out such dichotomies and unintended consequences, Quelch hopes he can motivate MBA students to think more deeply about the public health impacts of business decisions-as well as getting MPH students to think about the business forces that shape public health. Only then will decisions be made that properly balance the greatest good of the public with the ability for entrepreneurs to turn a profit.

Federal regulations loom for e-cigarette industry

By MICHAEL FELBERBAUM  The Associated Press
RICHMOND, Va. – Smokers are increasingly turning to battery-powered electronic cigarettes to get their nicotine fix. They’re about to find out what federal regulators have to say about the popular devices.
The Food and Drug Administration will propose rules for e-cigarettes as early as this month. The rules will have big implications for a fast-growing, largely unregulated industry and its legions of customers.
Regulators aim to answer the burning question posed by Kenneth Warner, a professor at the University of Michigan School of Public Health: “Is this going to be the disruptive technology that finally takes us in the direction of getting rid of cigarettes?”
The FDA faces a balancing act. If the regulations are too strict, they could kill an industry that offers a hope of being safer than cigarettes and potentially helping smokers quit them. But the agency also has to be sure e-cigarettes really are safer and aren’t hooking children on an addictive drug.
Members of Congress and several public health groups have raised safety concerns over e-cigarettes, questioned their marketing tactics and called on regulators to address those worries quickly.
Here’s a primer on e-cigarettes and their future:
WHAT ARE E-CIGARETTES?
E-cigarettes are plastic or metal tubes, usually the size of a cigarette, that heat a liquid nicotine solution instead of burning tobacco. That creates vapor that users inhale.
Smokers like e-cigarettes because the nicotine-infused vapor looks like smoke but doesn’t contain the thousands of chemicals, tar or odor of regular cigarettes. Some smokers use e-cigarettes as a way to quit smoking tobacco, or to cut down.
The industry started on the Internet and at shopping-mall kiosks and has rocketed from thousands of users in 2006 to several million worldwide who can choose from more than 200 brands. Sales are estimated to have reached nearly $2 billion in 2013.
Tobacco company executives have noted that they are eating into traditional cigarette sales. Their companies have jumped into the business.
There’s not much scientific evidence showing e-cigarettes help smokers quit or smoke less, and it’s unclear how safe they are.
WHAT IS THE FDA LIKELY TO DO?
The FDA is likely to propose restrictions that mirror those on regular cigarettes.
The most likely of the FDA’s actions will be to ban the sale of e-cigarettes to people under 18. Many companies already restrict sales to minors, and more than two dozen states already have banned selling them to young people.
Federal regulators also are expected to set product standards and require companies to disclose their ingredients and place health warning labels on packages and other advertising.
Where the real questions remain is how the agency will treat the thousands of flavors available for e-cigarettes. While some companies are limiting offerings to tobacco and menthol flavors, others are selling candy-like flavors like cherry and strawberry.
Flavors other than menthol are banned for regular cigarettes over concerns that flavored tobacco targets children.
Regulators also must determine if they’ll treat various designs for electronic cigarettes differently.
Some, known as “cig-a-likes,” look like traditional cigarettes and use sealed cartridges that hold liquid nicotine. Others have empty compartments or tanks that users can fill their own liquid. The latter has raised safety concerns because ingesting the liquid or absorbing it through the skin could lead to nicotine poisoning. To prevent that, the FDA could mandate child-resistant packaging.
The FDA also will decide the grandfather date that would allow electronic cigarette products to remain on the market without getting prior approval from regulators — a ruling that could force some, if not all, e-cigarettes to be pulled from store shelves while they are evaluated by the agency.
The regulations will be a step in a long process that many believe will ultimately end up being challenged in court.
WHAT ABOUT MARKETING?
There are a few limitations on marketing. Companies can’t tout e-cigarettes as stop-smoking aids, unless they want to be regulated by the FDA under stricter rules for drug-delivery devices. But many are sold as “cigarette alternatives.”
The FDA’s proposals could curb advertising on TV, radio and billboards, ban sponsorship of concerts and sporting events, and prohibit branded items such as shirts and hats. The agency also could limit sales over the Internet and require retailers to move e-cigarettes behind the counter.
WHAT DOES THE INDUSTRY THINK?
The industry expects regulations, but hopes they won’t force products off shelves and will keep the business viable.
E-cigarette makers especially want the FDA to allow them to continue marketing and catering to adult smokers — some of whom want flavors other than tobacco. They believe e-cigarettes present an opportunity to offer smokers an alternative and, as NJOY Inc. CEO Craig Weiss says, make cigarettes obsolete.
“FDA can’t just say no to electronic cigarettes anymore. I think they also understand it’s the lesser of the two evils,” said James Xu, owner of several Avail Vapor shops, whose wooden shelves are lined with vials of liquid nicotine flavor, such as Gold Rush, Cowboy Cut and Forbidden Fruit.
WHAT DO PUBLIC HEALTH OFFICIALS THINK?
Some believe lightly regulating electronic cigarettes might actually be better for public health overall, if smokers switch and e-cigarettes really are safer. Others are raising alarms about the hazards of the products and a litany of questions about whether e-cigarettes will keep smokers addicted or encourage others to start using e-cigarettes, and even eventually tobacco products.
“This is a very complicated issue and we must be quite careful how we proceed,” said David Abrams, executive director of the Schroeder Institute for Tobacco Research and Policy Studies at the American Legacy Foundation, in a recent panel discussion. “I call this sort of the Goldilocks approach. The regulation must be just right. The porridge can’t be too hot, and it can’t be too cold.”
http://www.newsday.com/business/federal-regulations-loom-for-e-cigarette-industry-1.7794606

Other Views: E-cigarette sellers take page from Big Tobacco’s book

— USA Today
Just when smoking has finally lost its glamour, along come electronic cigarettes and an avalanche of sexy new ads that promote “vaping.”
In one, actor Stephen Dorff, shirtless, talks about taking “back your freedom” while inhaling vapor on Lorillard’s blu eCig. (Can anyone say Marlboro Man?) In another ad for blu, former Playboy centerfold Jenny McCarthy leans forward seductively into the camera before saying: “I feel free to have one almost anywhere.”
For a product whose main appeal is supposed to be that it’s not a traditional cigarette, e-cigarette makers have sure taken a lot of pages from Big Tobacco’s playbook. Which is not surprising. Many of the sellers are the same companies that made billions of dollars addicting people to a product that kills 480,000 a year.
The marketing push is enough to trouble anyone who believed that, after a half-century battle, the nation finally had smoking on the run and that fewer teenagers would get hooked and die prematurely.
E-cigarettes — battery-operated nicotine inhalers that contain no tobacco — have the potential to help some smokers quit. But the jury is still out on whether and how well they may work. In the meantime, the potential for nicotine addiction is high, and there’s no good reason to use e-cigarettes other than trying to quit smoking.
Federal law prohibits cigarette makers from sponsoring sports and entertainment events, handing out free samples and selling certain flavored cigarettes. TV ads were banned in 1970.
But for e-cigarettes, it’s open season. Makers have sponsored music festivals, fashion shows and IndyCar racing. You can buy e-cigarettes or liquid refills in everything from Cherry Blast to Gummy Bear. Is the public really supposed to believe that e-cigarettes are not being marketed to minors?
The dangers of e-cigarettes may not be as obvious as those of traditional smokes, but new problems are emerging.
For example, the nicotine-laced liquid the devices use, which comes in small vials and large containers, can be toxic if touched or consumed. Calls to poison control centers about misuse, mostly by children, have risen to 217 a month this year, almost 10 times the number in 2011.
Also troubling is that more teenagers are experimenting with e-cigarettes. In 2012, 1.8 million middle-school and high-school students tried them, double the number the year before. One in five of the middle-schoolers who experimented said they’d never smoked before. It doesn’t help that about 20 states allow sales of e-cigarettes to minors.
So what’s the right response? At least until more studies are done, all states should treat the new devices as they treat cigarettes, with bans on youth sales and indoor use. And the Food and Drug Administration, which has been slow to assert its authority to regulate e-cigarettes, ought to get on with it.
More independent research would determine if e-cigarettes really can help smokers quit. Or if they carry other health risks. For now, the nation ought to ensure that a new generation doesn’t get hooked on a different and potentially dangerous product.
http://www.theadvertiser.com/story/opinion/2014/04/20/other-views-e-cigarette-sellers-take-page-from-big-tobaccos-book/7951623/

Lawmakers say e-cigarette makers target kids

BY SEAN LENGELL, Washington Examiner
A group of congressional Democrats released a report Monday accusing the electronic cigarette industry of pushing their products on children and teens.
The report shows a significant increase in recent years in the marketing of e-cigarettes to minors through social media, radio and televisions advertisements, and sponsoring events with young audiences.
“From candy flavors to rock concert sponsorships, every single company surveyed in this report has employed a marketing strategy that appears to target youth,” said Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin of Illinois, who helped spearhead the report.
“For years, federal regulations prohibiting tobacco companies from targeting young people have helped to protect a new generation of smokers from getting hooked on nicotine. Now, we must close this new gateway to addiction to protect our children.”

The lawmakers, who say their report is the first comprehensive investigation of e-cigarette marketing tactics, was compiled using responses from eight e-cigarette manufacturers and other publicly available information.
The report found that six of the companies that responded to the lawmakers’ survey market their products in flavors that can appeal to children, like cherry, chocolate, peach and grape mint.
It also showed that e-cigarette manufacturers have more than doubled spending on marketing between 2012 and 2013. Last year, six leading e-cigarette companies spent a total of $59.3 million on marketing alone.
“E-cigarette makers are starting to prey on kids, just like the big tobacco companies,” said Rep. Henry Waxman of California, a co-sponsor of the report. “With over a million youth now using e-cigarettes, [the Food and Drug Administration] needs to act without further delay to stop the companies from marketing their addictive products to children.”
Federal law prohibits the sale of tobacco cigarettes to anyone under 18, but there is no such restriction for e-cigarettes. The limited federal oversight has led to a boom in the e-cigarette industry, with sales doubling annually since 2008 and 2013 revenue expected to reach at least $1.5 billion.
The lawmakers called on e-cigarette companies to “take immediate action” to prevent the sale of their products to children and teenagers, including product promotion through social media and event sponsorships intended for youth audiences.
They also asked the companies to stop all radio and TV advertisements.
Six of the eight companies said they support some form of regulation, including restrictions on the marketing and sale of e-cigarettes to children and teens, the lawmakers said.
The legislators also have asked the FDA to ban the sale of e-cigarettes to minors and to implement rules to prohibit misleading product claims on e-cigarettes.
The other lawmakers who sponsored the report are Sens. Tom Harkin of Iowa, John Rockefeller of West Virginia, Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, Edward Markey of Massachusetts, Sherrod Brown of Ohio, Jack Reed of Rhode Island, Barbara Boxer of California and Jeff Merkley of Oregon, as well as Rep. Frank Pallone Jr. of New Jersey.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/lawmakers-say-e-cigarette-makers-target-kids/article/2547210

E-cigarette firms targeting young people, lawmakers say

By: LALITA CLOZEL, Los Angeles Times
WASHINGTON — E-cigarette companies are preying on young consumers by using candy flavors, social media ads and free samples at rock concerts, according to a report released Monday by Democratic legislators.
A survey of nine electronic-cigarette companies found most were taking advantage of the lack of federal regulations to launch aggressive marketing campaigns targeting minors with tactics that would be illegal if used for traditional cigarettes, according to a report released by Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) and signed by 10 other Democratic lawmakers, including California Sen. Barbara Boxer and Rep. Henry A. Waxman of Beverly Hills.
According to the report, based on information from the eight companies that responded, five of the surveyed companies more than doubled their marketing expenditures between 2012 and 2013, regularly promoting e-cigarettes on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram.
Producers have come up with an array of creative flavors, a practice that was banned for traditional cigarettes by the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009. E-cigarette flavor names include pumpkin spice, chocolate treat, snap! and cherry crush.
E-cigarette companies have sponsored popular events and distributed free samples in shows, including the Coachella Valley Music and Arts Festival, as well as Mercedes-Benz Fashion Week. They have employed celebrities to promote their products, including Courtney Love, pop singer Sevyn Streeter and rapper Chris Brown. Streeter and Brown were featured in a music video that included an e-cigarette product placement.
“In the absence of federal regulation, some e-cigarette manufacturers appear to be using marketing tactics similar to those previously used by the tobacco industry to sell their products to minors,” the report said.
According to a September 2013 study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the percentage of high school students that had tried e-cigarettes doubled between 2011 and 2012 to 10%.
Because e-cigarettes, which produce a nicotine-laced vapor, have not yet been deemed a tobacco product by the Food and Drug Administration, they are not constrained by federal regulations that prohibit sales to minors, television and radio advertisements, and free sampling, according to the report.
The FDA is considering labeling e-cigarettes as tobacco products, which would place them under the agency’s authority.
“With over a million youth now using e-cigarettes, FDA needs to act without further delay to stop the companies from marketing their addictive products to children,” Waxman said.
Twenty-eight states have banned e-cigarette sales to minors, and most of the surveyed companies said they prohibited vendors from selling their products to children.
But the survey found that policies varied company to company, and only three out of eight had ever conducted compliance checks.
Several of the companies said they avoided running television advertisements specifically targeting young audiences, but they nevertheless aired commercials during prime-time shows that rated well among children and teenagers, including the 2013 Super Bowl and the TV show “Breaking Bad,” the report said.
Six out of eight companies surveyed said they favored more regulation, specifically regarding sales to minors. One company, Lead by Sales, which produces White Cloud Cigarettes, did not respond to any of the survey questions.
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-congress-ecigarettes-study-20140415-story.html

Chuck Schumer goes after marketing of e-cigarettes to kids

BY / NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

Fearful big tobacco could hook a new crop of smokers, Sen. Chuck Schumer says he’s backing legislation to stub out the marketing of e-cigarettes to children.
Schumer said tobacco companies are upping the appeal of vaping devices by making kid-friendly flavors like cotton candy and gummy bears.
“They are making a campaign to go after kids and that must stop,” Schumer said Sunday.
He vowed to push the so-called Protecting Children From Electronic Cigarette Advertising Act through the Senate. The legislation would close loopholes in advertising laws that tobacco companies have exploited to hook kids.
Schumer cited a study published last week in JAMA Pediatrics, which found that adolescents who smoke e-cigarettes are seven times more likely to smoke traditional cigarettes.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/chuck-schumer-e-cigarette-marketing-kids-article-1.1716091#ixzz2vgNEUEZf