Vape 2019. Two states in the US have banned flavored e-juices and many more are planning to do so. President Donald Trump even wants to impose a ban at the supranational level.
The reason, at least according to politicians, is the outbreak of lung diseases linked to vejpning. At the same time, US authorities have long since more or less established that the lung damage suffered by nearly 400 American vejpers can be traced directly to incorrectly manufactured THC juice.
What do THC and cannabis have to do with flavors and what's really happening in the US?
Vejpkollen asked the question to Niklas Linder who is one of many players in the Swedish vejp market. He owns and runs the vejp shop Swedish Mixology, but is also involved in the industry organization VapeSweden, VSW.
"I think Americans are a bit confused about how to deal with the products from several perspectives: economic, political and health. You have to remember that the US doesn't work like Sweden: the health care bill from the enormous damage smoking causes is paid for by private individuals - if they can't pay, it's private companies that take the financial hit," says Niklas Linder.
So the US states are not losing money from the harmful effects of smoking, you say?
"For the states, traditional tobacco is a profit-making business, both financially thanks to tax revenues (tobacco products have particularly high taxes) but also through something called "The Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement", which is a settlement between the tobacco companies and the states in which the tobacco companies will pay the US states more than a trillion (!) dollars as compensation for being released from liability for the damage caused by the products. In the US, it is also common for private companies to financially sponsor politicians in various ways - which has a noticeable effect on politics. Both traditional tobacco companies and pharmaceutical companies are strongly opposed to e-cigarettes, as e-cigarettes have quickly taken large market shares from both industries. So a lot of effort is being put into countering the success of e-cigarettes through lobbying politicians, targeted media campaigns and even commissioned research with skewed results."
But surely there are more than just crass economic interests at play here? Surely the e-cig phenomenon has raised concerns among many that someone is trying to hide the potential dangers of the products?
"There is genuine concern and ignorance. There is simply a fear that e-cigarettes will both normalize smoking and have hidden dangers. Politics in the US is more emotional than we are used to, and it is easier to ban something new (which also steals money from the coffers) than to deal with the issue. The majority of Americans still believe that e-cigarettes are actually more dangerous than cigarettes and this is reflected in their policies. I also believe that what we are seeing in the US is an attempt by tobacco companies and pharmaceutical companies to limit the availability of e-cigarettes. By banning more than 90% of the products on the market, they are effectively ensuring that the proportion of e-cigarette users is reduced and the pharmaceutical companies are allowed to continue to pursue 'smoking cessation' to a greater extent. In addition, imposing unnecessarily high and specific requirements on products, such as tobacco character requirements (in flavors), shifts the advantage to tobacco companies."
But this is an agenda that tobacco companies and the pharmaceutical industry have had for a long time. Why is all this happening now, all of a sudden?
"In the US, the success of e-cigarettes has grown exponentially in recent years and tobacco companies, pharmaceutical companies and states have lost a huge amount of money from this. At the same time, these companies have not really had an angle of attack on e-cigarettes. Several attempts at 'fake research' to spread lies have been made without much success (scientists and industry have been able to quickly dismiss the studies as outright false). The media has hounded the industry with misleading scare headlines. Yet the product has continued to gain ground because, compared to cigarettes, there has been little harm and people generally enjoy the product and feel better.
But now people are getting "sick of e-cigarettes"...
"In recent months, liquids that can be used in e-cigarettes to get a high (marijuana-based liquids) have reached the black market in the US and caused serious damage as they are based on oils that cannot be inhaled. This was simply a new angle of attack on e-cigarettes of all kinds for the companies, which yielded better results than previous attempts. For the first time, the media were able to show pictures of young people in hospitals and state that they had been harmed by e-cigarettes (because the detail of their use of illegal black market drugs is often omitted from reporting) and this was an incredibly effective strategy. It's simply easier to reach the hearts of the common man with scary headlines if you can also show damaged young people and give people a face to sympathize with."
What are the consequences of these bans in the rest of the world?
"In 2019, it is to be hoped that most authorities, especially in the EU, will see through the emotionally-driven and privately-sponsored machinations of US politics. But the truth is that the US is still a major power and its decisions ripple out to affect the rest of the world's politics to varying degrees. In the EU, there are generally no governmental economic incentives to restrict the success of e-cigarettes and a healthier population, but we may see further restrictions on supply."
Do you think something similar could happen in Sweden?
"We have seen examples of emotionally driven debates and great ignorance among politicians when it comes to e-cigarettes. This ignorance was particularly evident when the excise tax was introduced, which increases the cost to the consumer by SEK 25 per 10 ml of nicotine-containing liquid. The justification was that 10 ml of e-juice (the amount of nicotine is irrelevant) is equivalent to 100 cigarettes, which is completely unrealistic and was protested without success. I would say that the e-cigarette market in Sweden would be in much worse shape if it were not for EU legislation that actually overrides our national laws. The whole issue of e-cigarettes is handled cautiously or not at all here and the easy way out (restrictions and bans) is taken."
Is there any justification for the criticism that specific flavors in e-juice encourage young people to start using e-cigarettes?
"Young people have always been and will always be inclined to flirt with the forbidden and this is probably simply the driving factor behind them trying both tobacco and e-cigarettes. There is no denying that flavoring is something that makes the product much more pleasant to use - of course it is! But the idea that young people would start using e-cigarettes primarily for the flavoring is a bit of a stretch; drinks and various sweets are both cheaper and much more accessible to them."
How do you notice the interest of young people in your work?
"One positive trend we've noticed is that many newly turned 18-year-olds buy a cheap starter kit of nicotine-free e-juices to get their fascination with "smoking" over with and shortly thereafter simply quit when interest wanes. E-cigarettes work just as well without nicotine (and the flavor is more distinct), so you don't get hooked. My personal opinion is that nicotine-free e-cigarettes have probably prevented many people from falling into the lifelong addiction that traditional cigarettes create."
Outlook:
Read more about the vape ban in New York
Read more about the lung damage suffered by vejpare in the US
Read more about the taste bans in the US
Read more about Donald Trump's stance on vaping
