Clive Bates has uploaded a new post on his blog. He talks about "The Four Pillars" for regulation of e cigarettes and other nicotine delivery systems - what he calls "low risk" products.
I think his Four Pillars are good. Please read his post HERE for his rationales.
The problem is still the ideology of the Tobacco Control Industry Complex. The ideology has morphed into a collusive, corrupt, profitable self sustaining anti nicotine "group". Society has been engineered so profoundly by the Anti Tobacco Complex, that the public mind can be activated very quickly to believe anything. In Spain the fear of electronic cigarettes has been a good example of what might happen world-wide if prohibitionists get their way. Carrying on smoking is very profitable to the Complex, and in Spain, that is exactly what is happening. Smokers have been turned away from electronic cigarettes.
I personally think that even vapers' "friends" in the Tobacco Control Complex - and there are a good few, have NO IDEA of how powerful the "group" is. They themselves, have been engineered, and like Dorothy and all the people in The Land of Oz, do not understand who is working the machinery.
Nevertheless, Clive's Four Pillars are well good for a perfect vaping world. But the world is controlled by Oz - the Tobacco Control Complex. The curtains need to be drawn back on THAT. Then Spain won't happen to the whole world.
These are Clive's excellent regulatory "Pillars"
1.To raise the standards of products and industry practice
Rationale: Primarily to increase consumer confidence and to provide appropriate protection of the health and safety of users.(read more on the post)
2. To maintain and enhance the appeal of the reduced risk products relative to cigarettes
Rationale: To encourage the greatest number of smokers to switch – retaining focus on the dominant health effect: the health and welfare improvement to smokers who switch, rather than marginal reductions in risk to vapers.(read more on the post)
3. To promote, rather than inhibit, innovation, diversity and competition in low risk alternatives to smoking
Rationale: So that these products become better alternatives to smoking over time and more smokers find products that suit them.(read more on the post)
4. To protect against unwanted or unintended consequences
Rationale: Avoiding practices or products that would tend to increase smoking, but recognising that regulators control product specifications and business practices, not the behaviour of users (see discussion on regulating population effects). (read more on the post) End quote
And then follows these pleasing visuals to demonstrate the sweet spot in regulating nicotine delivery systems..
From his post, quote
A further point… this graphic illustrates the potential for mischief in regulation: the tacit collusion between regulators and large players to raise regulatory barriers to entry. It might be unintentional or even well-meaning on the part of the bigger players, (my bold) but the effect can be predatory in terms of its impact on the market as a whole:
"It might be unintentional or even well-meaning on the part of the bigger players"? No Clive - you are too nice! Who will pull open the curtain and expose the great Oz?! While he is "great and powerful", your perfect four pillars cannot stand. The Wizard will use all his tricks to obfuscate your truth unless he is exposed. Who will be Dorothy? I do not have the answer.
Dorothy needs to be a "leader" in the land of Oz, with enough drive to get to The Emerald City. And then, with enough courage, to pull open the curtain. The Great Oz will be unable to rule the land when it is seen who he really is. Until then, the people in the Land of Oz will simply go on believing.
It's SUCH a shame!
(The Great Oz is the ruler of the Land of Oz and highly venerated by his subjects who believe he is the only man capable of solving their problems. Eventually, it is revealed that Oz is actually an ordinary conman, who has been using a lot of elaborate magic tricks and props to make himself seem "great and powerful.")