Email
Password
(Forgot Password?)
Six years after the ban on tobacco advertising and sponsorship in the UK, a London-based sports body stands accused of breaching the law by promoting a cigarette brand on its website.[1] The Association of Tennis Professionals (ATP) which represents the world's top male tennis players, is responsible for the sponsorship contracts for the various international tournaments. The next ATP World Tour tournament, which is due to take place in Basel, Switzerland from 31 October to 8 November, is sponsored by Davidoff, a cigarette brand manufactured by Imperial Tobacco. The Swiss indoor tournament is believed to be the only one in the world to be sponsored by a tobacco company.
British-based Imperial Tobacco acquired the Davidoff cigarette brand in 2006 and has exploited the weak law in Switzerland which still allows events to be sponsored by tobacco companies, although tobacco advertising on television is banned. However, the televising of the event means that tobacco advertising will be beamed into the homes of more than one billion people worldwide, [2] contrary to Article 13 of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control which has been signed by 160 countries worldwide. [3]
ASH has written to the ATP urging the organisation to end its ties with the tobacco industry when the current contract comes to an end and is seeking clarification from the Department of Health regarding the possible breach of UK law.
Jump to full article »
What started as a noble cause with lobbying groups like the American Cancer Society, Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights and Mother's Against Drunk Driving, is now morphing into a multi headed monster as they became a victim of their own success. Both have campaigned and succeeded in getting stricter laws on drunk drivers and smoking which most all of us applaud. They don't seem to be satisfied with just protecting the victims any more. They are now taking aim at personal freedom as they move to control your behavior even when your behavior in public or private is not harmful to anyone else. . . .
Several anti-smoking groups are going after this product to be included in bans instead of embracing it as a better product than tobacco cigarettes. These groups may be following the misguided propaganda being put out by special interest organizations that have an allegiance to the big business of pharmaceuticals and tobacco. The electronic cigarette produces no second-hand combustion smoke because there is no combustion. The tobacco companies don't make e cigarettes and probably don't care much for their existence.
This unconscionable behavior from "people who are supposed to care" makes Kyle Newton, owner of eCigarettesChoice.com, take a step back in disbelief. "I lost my mom, her sister and my grandmother to cigarette related deaths within the last six years. I just wished e cigarettes could have been available a long time ago. If I didn't believe in this product, I wouldn't be so adamant about promoting it."
One organization that shows no particular allegiance to special interest money is Action on Smoking and Health (ASH). In their October 2009 briefing, ASH in the United Kingdom released a favorable position on electronic cigarettes which is the exact opposite position taken by a few the control groups in the United States.
A NEW court ruling could spark a price war on cigarettes in Ireland with disastrous effects for people's health, anti-smoking group Ash Ireland has warned.
The European Court of Justice yesterday declared that Ireland cannot set minimum prices for tobacco because it distorts competition and benefits manufacturers.
Although this is an interim opinion, it could open the way for cigarette sellers to start discounting heavily on price, which could lead to more young people taking up the habit and reducing the incentive to quit, said Dr Angie Brown of Ash.
The Government has ditched plans to ban smoking in cars when children are passengers, Sky News Online can reveal.
Enlarge photo
The news comes as a woman was convicted of smoking in a vehicle containing a three-year-old child in what is believed to be one of the first prosecutions of its kind in Australia.
Britain was considering moves to introduce similar legislation next year as part of its review of 'smoke-free laws' introduced three years ago.
But a spokeswoman for the Department of Health told Sky this has now changed.
"The Government does not have any plans at this point in time to introduce legislation to prohibit smoking in private cars," she said.
It is another bizarre twist in the electronic cigarette battle over the safety of this new product that has hundreds of thousands of followers across the United States and a growing number of supporters around the world.
ASH UK has all but put their name on the dotted line in endorsement of the e cigarette as a safe and plausible substitute to the traditional tobacco cigarette with their new report and also agrees with the e cigarette industry that they may be an acceptable alternative to tobacco. . . .
While ASH does believe that e cigarettes may be a good alternative to tobacco, they have some concerns about the e cigarette and states "most deliver a low dose of nicotine which may not give a typical smoker a sufficient 'hit' to satisfy cravings, discouraging smokers from continuing to use them."
ASH UK does not seem to be worried about high doses of nicotine, but rather that the e cigarette does not deliver enough nicotine which is a direct contradiction of the American based ASH, which has been openly caught in a conflict of interest in its attack on e cigarettes in the United States by accepting funds from major pharmaceutical companies who may compete in an open market someday concerning cessation products.
http://www.ecigarettesnational.com is a full service retailer of the e cigarette.
ASH UK (Action on Smoking and health - ash.org.uk) have finally taken the step of providing a brief in regards to their position on electronic cigarettes and the ecig industry is hailing it as a phenomenal breakthrough towards mass acceptance of this fascinating technology.
ASH is a campaigning public health charity that works to eliminate the harm caused by tobacco and by potentially supporting electronic cigarettes, this charity may be the large scale support that this product needs.
"We want our customers to benefit from our products in ways never before possible but for that to happen we need large scale support and ASH UK should be commended for publishing such a sensible and professional report."
The state in their report (http://www.ash.org.uk/files/documents/ASH_715.pdf)that "Preliminary tests of the original e-cigarettes produced by Ruyan, a Chinese electronics company, suggest that they are relatively harmless in comparison with smoking." and that "products should be made available that deliver nicotine in a safe way, without the harmful components found in tobacco. Most of the diseases associated with smoking are caused by inhaling smoke which contains thousands of toxic chemicals. By contrast, nicotine is relatively safe. Therefore, e-cigarettes, which deliver nicotine without the harmful toxins found in tobacco smoke, are likely to be a safer alternative to smoking. In addition, e-cigarettes reduce secondhand smoke exposure since they do not produce smoke."
Owner of the leading online retailer cheapelectroniccigarettes.co.uk, Michael Kitt, hailed this report as "excellent news for the industry".
Electronic Cigarette users finally take a stance. Well, at least one did.
In a recent PRLog press release entitled "Kudos to the FDA ... bravo ASH, Cancer Research agencies, Federal Governments et al ..." that was recently published, it praised the work of ASH and a public thank you to point out the dangers of the electronic cigarette. This press release was posted on the Action on Smoking and Health website as being a congratulations for Professor John Banzhaf and the work of ASH in their recent fight.
However there is a big problem. The press release is totally bogus.
On it's face value, it is quite humorous and oozing of sarcasm. In reality, this is alarming.
Since it's conception in 2004, electronic cigarettes have been used by millions of users worldwide as a way to stop tobacco smoking. And for many, it has been very effective. to date, there has not been one single injury or death related to electronic cigarettes. However, there will be over 400,000 tobacco related deaths this year in smoking real cigarettes. . . .
As this reporter has stated time and time again, ASH is not the most accurate source for information regarding public health, and this recent stunt further underscores this. The recent bogus press release is just proof that as an organization, ASH does not study facts accurately, only looks for what it sees in it's narrow eyes, dismissed cold hard scientific facts, and many times uses misleading information to alarm the public about health hazards that simply do not exist.
As an organization that is supposed to be an organization that promotes the health of the American public, this is more of a health hazard. If a single individual can dupe a large organization like this, imagine what you don't know about what type of information you are receiving from it. . . .
This reporter thinks that John Banzhaf should step aside from his post. He may have made some strides back in the 1960, but in the 21st century, he can't even read a simple sarcastic press release correctly. From many this reporter interviewed, most people feel he is more of a liability to ASH than an asset. This latest farce only proves that all the more.
Deborah Arnott is a professional anti-smoker. She makes her living from it. She thinks she can "save lives". Since we all get a lifetime and she is not offering immortality, what she means is you might have a longer life.
Given the choice of 50 years as a free person or 70 years as a slave, she would choose slavery. I wouldn't. . . .
There are a lot of people who don't like smoke or smoking but there are a lot of people who do. Tobacco is a great calmer, it relieves stress, it can put you in a contemplativ . . .
Putting cigarettes "under the counter" is now quite funny. That's where a lot of people buy them already, so this is just going to get bigger. It will mean non-smokers will pay more tax, as revenue still has come to the government. From where? This is never debated, because the press has the same agenda as the government. We'd all be healthier without tobacco. I, for one, just don't believe it. Like alcohol, it won't go away. People will make their own and to stop that will need a bigger tyranny than we have now. Deborah Arnott won't mind so long as it's "smoke free".
A far more lawless society will emerge, and the statistics might please her. Others will know they are not true.
MORE than 15,000 young Scots take up smoking every year, campaigners will claim today.
Anti-cigs pressure group ASH will unveil the figure as they call for a ban on tobacco promotional displays in shops.
ASH Scotland chief Sheila Duffy said: "Fifteen thousand young people take up smoking every year. Retail displays have an impact on future smokers - not current ones.
"Removing displays may well incur a one-off cost, which I think the industry should bear if they want retailers to continue to stock their products.
"But it is a health measure that must be weighed against the cost to public health, lives and the NHS."
Ms Duffy will also tell a conference in Edinburgh today that despite a rise in the age to buy cigs to 18, four per cent of Scots 13-year-olds still smoke.
A displays ban would be introduced under the Tobacco and Primary Medical Services (Scotland) Bill, which will be debated in Parliament tomorrow.
Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) is delighted the Maori Affairs Select Committee has approved a request from MP Hone Harawira to hold an inquiry into the impact of tobacco use on Maori.
“The tobacco industry needs to be held to account and this forum provides an excellent place to do just that. As an industry that has such a devastating impact on tanagta whenua, it is only right that they must front before the committee,” said ASH communications manager Michael Colhoun.
Two new studies confirm earlier research showing that smoking bans in public places reduce heart attacks by 25%-35%, and that a nationwide smoking ban could prevent more than 150,000 heart attacks each year. Since heart attack hospital admissions are so expensive, and long-term care can be even costlier, Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) suggests that a national smoking ban could save almost as much as some other health care funding proposals, but with no tax on anyone.
A single heart attack admission can cost $15,000-$20,000 in totally unnecessary medical bills, so a nationwide ban on smoking could save the health care system $3 billion a year, just in terms of the initial hospital admissions. Since the long term care for persons who have had heart attacks can be many times that amount, and experts believe that smoking bans will also reduce the incidence (and the costs) of treating lung cancer, emphysema, and possibly even strokes, the potential savings could be $10-$20 billion a year, an amount comparable to many the revenue from many taxes now being proposed to fund health care reform.
"Here's a very simple technique which has proven to be feasible in dozens of states, and which has already saved billions of dollars, which Congress could do at the stroke of a pen, and slash health care costs for everyone without imposing a dime of taxes or adding one penny to the deficit," suggests public interest law professor John Banzhaf, Executive Director of ASH, America's first antismoking organization.
AN ANTI-SMOKING charity is to target young people in a bid to get them involved with government debate.
Edinburgh-based ASH wants youngsters to have their views considered by the Scottish Government as it processes its Tobacco Bill.
It has published a range of material particularly for teenagers, as well as creating a specific page on its website.
A few weeks ago, the FDA put out information that at first glance looked like the e cigarette was a danger to the public because of the diethylene glycol that was found in one of 18 cartridges tested.
The scare did not last long as thousands started researching the chemicals found in the test results to find that all of the chemicals listed are not only in tobacco cigarettes, but also in FDA approved cessation products and thousands of common consumer products that are on grocery store shelves.
Many have also started researching the money trail between special interest groups and those who would benefit from an FDA ban on e-cigarettes, particularly ASH, the Action on Smoking and Health. The group receives grants from Pfizer, the maker of the anti-smoking drug Chantix that has caused a disconcerting number of people who used it to commit suicide since it was released onto the market. PayPal, a popular payment processor online, recently stopped doing business with e-cigarette retailers due to whispers from ASH that the company could be held legally liable for their involvement in the processing of e-cigarette payments.
Even with all of the damage that was attempted by the FDA and special interest groups like ASH, the smokers and supporters of the product continue to sing the praises of the e cigarette in word and with their money as e cigarette sales continue to soar on a local level through retail merchants and nationally through online retailers.
A major retailer of electronic cigarettes has been sued in a multi-count civil action which seeks penalties of $25,000 for each sale as well as refunds to customers. Several other sellers of electronic cigarettes have avoided suits by entering into voluntary settlements, says public interest law professor John Banzhaf of Action on Smoking and Health (ASH), the organization which wrote to state attorneys general asking them to bring this type of legal action against the sellers.
According to the complaint, Smoking Everywhere "did not submit their electronic cigarettes to FDA for pre-approval because Defendants believed that they found a regulatory loophole that allowed them to sell electronic cigarettes without FDA approval, so long as the devices were not sold as smoking cessation devices." . . .
The complaint charges that Smoking Everywhere has engaged in the "deceptive sale and promotion of electronic cigarettes" which "causes immediate harm to public health, safety, and welfare." It says defendants made claims which were deceptive because "Defendants did not possess such evidence because such evidence does not exist." These claims included that e-cigarettes "are safer than traditional cigarettes."
The complaint also charges that Defendant wrongfully claims that its product contain "no harmful carcinogenic ingredients" and are "free of [cigarette-type] tar."
Defendants were also charged with failing to warn customers that "nicotine can cause dangerous increases in heart rate and blood pressure and should not be used by individuals with hypertension or heart disease."