US

Florida Editorial Board Rejects Proposed Constitutional Amendment To Restrict Vaping

No featured image available

Critics of a proposed amendment to restrict the use of vapor products in Florida called on officials Wednesday to learn more about harm reduction devices before pushing a statewide ban.

The Gainesville Sun editorial board are pushing an effort to dictate where vaping devices can be used a “premature” move that ignores existing peer-reviewed research showing vapor products greatly reduce health harms from combustible cigarettes. State regulators and voters should be patient in understanding the potential role of said products in reducing cigarette use before heavily restricting the devices, the editorial argued.

The state’s Constitution Revision Commission (CRC) is currently considering an amendment to appear on the November ballot that would ban devices in all workplaces in the state, as well as nursing homes and assisted living facilities. E-cigarette use adversely impacts Florida residents, as they are being unfairly exposed to secondhand “toxins” in the vapor released from the devices, former Republican state Sen. and CRC Commissioner Lisa Carlton claimed.

“While we agree that e-cigs raise sufficient health concerns to users to keep them out of the hands of minors, particularly high-schoolers, Carlton’s big-government crackdown on adult vapers, even if done under the guise of voter approval, should be rejected until we better understand the full health effects of e-cigs,” the editorial said.

Current evidence doesn’t warrant Carlton’s fears over secondhand exposure, it noted.

Journal of Aerosol Science’s January research showed vapor chemical levels released from e-cigarettes are well below the safety limits the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the World Health Organization suggested. Vaping is statistically 5,700 times less harmful to users than combustible cigarettes, drastically reducing the risk of developing smoking related illnesses, the study determined.

Despite scientific evidence, the proposal appears to be gaining support, including from Republican Attorney General Pam Bondi. “We are just keeping up with technology,” Bondi said on March 20.

“Carlton’s idea will likely pass because smokers of any stripe make good villains,” the editorial said. “But that should not be the standard. Here’s a radical idea: before we ban a perfectly legal product and shun its users, let’s fully understand the health risks. That might take time. Meanwhile, and if necessary, leave it to individual companies to decide whether their employees and customers should be subjected to the perils Carlton sees in the puff of a vaper’s smoke.”

The amendment will force former smokers back into smoking areas, negating the harm reduction benefits of quitting combustible cigarettes, those who now rely on vapor products to satiate their cravings said.

“If you had to go outside to vape, you’re going to be exposed to all of those hardcore cigarettes smokers, and the temptation is still there,” Brock Shaffer, a former smoker and worker at Purely Vapor in Tampa, Fla., recently told FOX 13.

The Constitution Revision Commission’s Style and Drafting Committee is currently reviewing the amendment. If it clears the commission’s final vote, it will appear on the November ballot, where it will need the support of at least 60 percent of voters to pass.

Follow Steve on Twitter