Five Years On And The EU Has Learned Nothing

Today Snowdon reported that the EU is set to travel to COP8 in Geneva and demand that vaping be treated exactly the same as smoking for advertising purposes.

In fact, more than that, it will demand that even scenes in films portraying smoking and vaping should be classed as advertising.

In preparation for the event, various documents have been circling the global anti-smoking community to get a consensus on what to ban next. The depiction of tobacco use in the arts is one candidate. You can read the WHO's proposal here. The most notable part of the document is the WHO's intention to include tobacco use on film and television as tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship (TAPS) because:

Entertainment media content such as movies, music videos, online videos, television programmes, streaming services, social media posts, video games and mobile phone applications have all been shown to depict and promote tobacco use and tobacco products in ways that may encourage youth smoking uptake... Therefore, policies that reduce youth exposure to entertainment media depictions are required.

Note the word "may" in there. Because, as usual with tobacco control, there is no evidence whatsoever except for archetypal junk science from - you guessed it - Stan Glantz. They're interfering in the public's entertainment on the say-so of criminally-conflicted and arguably insane single-issue maniacs.

As Snowdon points out, the EU delegation to the FCTC's COP8 in Geneva - of which the UK will be a part - is actually trying to get e-cigs included in this daft policy.

The EU is one of the FCTC's members and, due to its size, it is rather influential. So have they objected to this? Yes, they have. But not because the proposals are too extreme. They object because they don't go far enough. In particular, the EU wants vaping to be included.

The EU welcomes the report of the Expert Group on tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship and supports its recommendations... [The EU] stresses that TAPS [tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship] regulatory frameworks and their implementation at national, regional and international levels do not only cover all tobacco products, both traditional and emerging ones such as heated products, but should also consider tobacco-related products such as ENDS.

Isn't that incredible? Five years ago the EU were forced to abandon total prohibition of e-cigs - apart from medically licensed ones with a maximum of 4mg nicotine - in their Tobacco products Directive (TPD) but not without a massive struggle.

At the time ASH were arguing for exactly that too. It was only once a lighter touch was applied and Public Health England - acting on recommendations from the Nudge Unit - turned guns away from vaping, that they apparently had an epiphany. The results we have seen since on smoking prevalence are astounding.

Now, you'd think that the EU might look back on 2013 and recognise that they regulated from a position of laughable ignorance back then, wouldn't you? They should be deeply embarrassed about it. But no, today's revelations suggest that they still haven't a fucking clue.

Five years on and the EU has learned absolutely nothing, judging by this

Vapers saw back then how intransigent, opaque, anti-democratic and abusive the EU is. It is why a vast majority voted for leave in the referendum. All this is doing is proving that they were right to do so.

As I understand it from COP7 in India, any EU proposal will be subject to approval from member states in meetings prior to the event. Once a position is agreed, no member state (including the UK) will have any power to object at COP8 because the EU represents all 28.

I guess we will see how serious the Department of Health really is about its Tobacco Control Plan if it allows the EU to do this. The ASA is already working on proposals to relax advertising restrictions on e-cigs rather than prohibiting all marketing outright, so direction of travel in the UK couldn't be further removed from the EU's position. And as for the proposal to ban all media online, this could mean that even bodies like NCSCT (involved in smoking cessation) would not be able to produce films for Facebook and Twitter.

If, as I suspect, the UK Department of Health - who, remember, are advised by ASH about FCTC matters - doesn't nip this in the bud, all arguments that we are better in the EU because we can have input will be washed away. If UK government policy which has produced brilliant results can be undermined by an anti-democratic gravy train urging an entirely unelected and unaccountable global cartel - both of which entirely cut the public out of their discussions - to prohibit vaping adverts worldwide, you have to ask what is the point of being in the EU delegation when we could represent the UK instead. And boy would we be hassling the fuck out of the Department of Health if they proposed this unilaterally. We tried that with the EU and they just cocked a deaf 'un.

We're watching you DoH and ASH. Very. Closely.

This is as daft as it gets and makes me 100% certain that I voted the right way in June 2016. The more of this sickening behind-closed-doors bureaucracy we can chip away at, the better. 

Congratulating The Fox For Killing The Livestock

Today is World No Tobacco Day and to mark the occasion the Brussels-based Smoke Free Partnership - whose members include ASH and Cancer Research UK - held a lunchtime event at the EU parliament. 

The keynote speaker was Vytenis Andriukaitis, the Lithuanian Health Commissioner. If you are a vaper, you may be staggered as to what he said. Here is an edited excerpt of the speech which you can read here. 

How can we 'ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages' – our worldwide sustainable development goal for 2030 – without reducing smoking?  

How can we reach the specific target of "reducing by one third deaths linked to chronic diseases" without reducing one of the main causes of such diseases – smoking? 

And finally, how can we succeed in achieving "no poverty" or "zero hunger" – other related goals – without reducing the harm that tobacco causes? 

The answer is: We can't!

And to whom did he address this heart-rending rhetoric?

I am talking here about the revised Tobacco Products Directive that Linda and I negotiated: Linda as the rapporteur at the time and myself as the Health Minister of the country holding the EU Presidency. 

And I would like to thank once more Linda - and also the Smoke Free Partnership - for their tireless work and commitment to this cause.

The Linda in question is Linda McAvan, Labour MEP and the woman who stubbornly drove through the disgraceful regulations on e-cigs which have hampered take-up of the devices in this country and - in some cases - led to draconian measures in other EU member states which amount to a de facto ban. 

E-cigs are proving to be a huge success in tempting smokers away from tobacco - which Andriukaitis seems to want very much, they have already led to more people quitting smoking than the entire TPD Impact Assessment hoped would occur. Yet today he was congratulating McAvan, a person who did everything in her power to have e-cigs eradicated from the EU, and thereby whose actions have protected the tobacco trade more than any other individual in the whole of Europe. 

This is like a farmer watching his chickens get slaughtered then giving an award to the fox that did it. You simply couldn't make such cretinous ignorance up!

Interestingly, Andriukaitis had very little to say at all about e-cigs specifically, just this one-liner. 

And of course we need to consider carefully how to address eCigarettes or novel tobacco products.

"Consider carefully"? Isn't that something that should have been done when the directive was being drawn up, not now four years later when you've dumped a whole load of fuckwitted arsebiscuitry on an entire continent. 

His brief and evasive mention of e-cigs also suggests - as the evidence piles up as to plummeting smoking rates due to vaping - that they're just a little bit ashamed of themselves, don't you think?

The EU seems to be packed with low-grade, low-intellect, broomsticks-in-suits like Andriukaitis; thick as a whale sandwich yet handed power over half a billion people. Roll on March 29th 2019.

Tobacco Control Kills

If like me you have spent the past week or so hoovering up eliquid and vaping accessories at quite ridiculous knock-down prices, you'll know that today is the last day of one of the most successful real-world public health experiments in history.

Prior to the EU's disastrous Tobacco Products Directive (TPD) - overseen by a crook and driven through by vacuous MEPs - e-cigs operated as a consumer product in a bustling and innovative free market. It was not - despite what tobacco control liars say - unregulated considering manufacturers were abiding by 20 or so consumer product regulations. The results were stunning! Latest figures for the UK show that there are now 2.9 million vapers, of which over half of them have quit smoking entirely.

This spectacular success all ends tomorrow.

Instead, tomorrow sees the start of a system of regulations which will strangle the pizzazz out of the e-cig market and for no discernible reason. The EU and its tobacco control lobbyists have never been able to credibly justify any of the ridiculous regulations which were forced on the UK government by the EU's TPD. Let's run through a few of them.

Maximum nicotine strength 20mg

The first time I thought e-cigs might have the potential to be something really quite game-changing was when a friend gave me one to try at 30mg. It gave the same throat kick as smoking and I was impressed. Soon after, I tried another which was only 16mg and it was like sucking on air, it took me quite a while to get used to a level that low, many will not bother.

Even ASH admit that 6% of vapers currently use liquid which is stronger than 20% which, by law, they will no longer be able to buy from tomorrow, equating to 174,000 vapers (in reality it will be more than that because manufacturers are erring on the side of caution and limiting to 18mg).

What these 174,000 vapers will do is anyone's guess but it's clear that many will find that vaping no longer offers them the same experience and go back to smoking. It doesn't matter though, because ASH says fuck 'em. What's more, around 20% of vapers - and I am amongst them - first use liquid which is stronger than 20mg. Apply that to the 2.9 million and that's over half a million vapers who might not now be using e-cigs if the TPD had been in operation when they first dabbled with one. Presumably ASH says fuck them too.

Those who demanded this have given no credible reason whatsoever for such an arbitrary and futile restriction. It will 'save' no lives and can only have the effect of deterring smokers from switching and driving current vapers back to tobacco. Tens of thousands, or even hundreds of thousands of them, and all because of entirely unnecessary regulations lobbied hard for by tobacco control. According to tobacco control's own rhetoric, one in two of those tens or hundreds of thousands will die as a result, and that's just in the UK.

Tobacco Control Kills.

Advertising bans

Tobacco control has been telling us for years that the best way to stop people smoking is to stop tobacco being advertised. By the same token then, surely, the advertising bans that the TPD forces on manufacturers and vendors will have the same deterrent effect.

The TPD bans e-cig adverts from TV, radio, newspapers, magazines and the internet, it also bans e-cig companies sponsoring events plus anything else that could possibly be seen in another EU country ... presumably so foreigners are deterred from switching to vaping too.

According to tobacco control, 50% of smokers who are not tempted away from smoking - by e-cig advertising which is now banned - will die as a result of continuing to smoke.

Tobacco Control Kills.

Maximum tank of 2ml & Maximum bottle size of 10ml

I'm currently using a 5ml tank and topping it up from a 100ml bottle. Both of these are banned under the terms of the EU's TPD which tobacco control lobbied for. There is no decent reason for this, no-one in tobacco control has been able to properly explain the point of any of it.

Of course, this just makes vaping fiddly and time-consuming, plus produces waste and inconvenience. If a product is to be seen as more attractive than smoking in order to tempt smokers away from tobacco, it beggars belief that tobacco control has put in place regulations which make vaping more difficult which can - as with the other pointless regulations - only have a deterrent effect.

Additionally, the very same TPD says that you can only buy tobacco in large grab bag sized 30g and upwards and you're not allowed to buy smaller packs of ten either, only 20s. The logic of rules which make you buy less e-liquid but more tobacco can only be guessed at, you have to ask what the blithering fuck these tobacco control halfwits were smoking themselves when they came up with such Baldrickesque cunning plans.

Making vaping a chore will inevitably turn many people off, especially since it's already a common refrain that e-cigs are far more complicated than just buying a pack of 20 from the corner shop or supermarket. Not one smoker will be attracted to vaping by the extra inconvenience of buying more bottles, refilling a tank more often, and fiddling about a bit more than is currently the case.

50% of those who don't make the switch, according to tobacco control, will die.

Tobacco Control Kills

Now, this is without even mentioning the supply side problems such as expense to vaping companies of commissioning and submitting dozens of expensive notifications for every single product and combination of products they sell, and having a 6 month wait after notification before being able to market their wares (which has driven innovation and therefore attracted switchers). The cost has already driven many out of business, along with those who derived much of their income from cross-border sales that are now also banned.

All these restrictions will have no effect on 'saving' anyone at all! The only possible outcome will be that many smokers will continue to smoke.

The TPD has, perversely, bolstered the cigarette market while dealing a huge blow to a vaping market which was rocketing along and contributing to record low smoker prevalence. And all because ASH and their disgusting European chums in tobacco control had little to do so thought they'd get involved in something they still don't understand.

It's always been clear that tobacco controllers were close to jumping the shark when it came to vaping. But from tomorrow, with the installation of a pointless and entirely spiteful TPD, many people will now see that they didn't just jump it, they pirouetted at the apex and nailed the dismount.

Remember that next time you hear any tobacco controller laughably say they are part of a 'health group'. 

Health? Yeah, Right

Yesterday saw the release of CJEU judgments on the EU's Tobacco Products Directive (TPD) which should prove to anyone that the EU and its agencies are far from scrupulous and could even be deemed to be deliberately corrupt.

As Snowdon points out in the Spectator, the TPD is fatally flawed under the very terms that the EU claims it was set up for.

Remarkably, none of it is explicitly in the name of health. The EU has no mandate to set health policy and so all of the new laws in the Tobacco Products Directive have to masquerade as market harmonisation measures. But where is the harmony? Sweden keeps its exemption from the EU’s ban on smokeless tobacco (‘snus’). Countries which ban the sale of e-cigarettes, such as Finland, will not be encouraged to lift their prohibitions. Menthol cigarettes will be banned across the EU despite no member state seriously contemplating a ban of its own. Every country must have graphic warnings on fag packs making up 65 per cent of the surface area, but if countries want to go the whole hog and introduce their own ‘standardised packs’ they are free to do so.

It's a total crock, and serves only to show that the EU is a gaggle of regulators glad-handing other career pecksniffs to perpetuate a tax-funded merry-go-round to the benefit of nobody but themselves.

In the case of e-cigs, it's not just that there is no market harmonisation, but also that there is only one outcome for public health (as if they really care about that), and it is a net negative.

In the same week that the Royal College of Physicians joined Public Health England in lauding the benefits of vaping, the EU Directive - tabled by prejudiced self-serving lunatics three years ago - proves that those who screamed for it are on the wrong side of history.

A Government impact assessment has warned that the restrictions set down in the Tobacco Products Directive could drive users back to smoking, as well as hiking the price of e-cigarettes and creating a black market of products that fall outside the new regulations. 

The Department of Health fears are revealed the day after the Royal College of Physicians (RCP) issued a report strongly promoting the use of e-cigarettes as a healthier alternative to smoking.

Could? It's quite clear that the TPD will drive many back to smoking. I don't know of many smokers who have switched to e-cigs who didn't start on 24mg nicotine content or higher when they first took up vaping. Even one of the most ardent pro-vaping advocates began with 36mg before reducing and getting into the alternative.

Let's be clear here, the TPD's 20mg limit (which will more likely be a top level of 18mg due to companies being terrified of fines for straying over) can only possibly result in more smokers finding e-cigs unsatisfactory and continuing to smoke. What's more, there are many vapers using 24mg and beyond for whom the experience will now be less satisfying than smoking so they will return to buying tobacco.

ASH - being part of the tobacco industry themselves, of course - are over the moon about this.

Press release: ECJ rules #TPD is lawful; gives backing to UK's policy on standardised packaging https://t.co/mnoYIdfmun

— ASH (@ASH_LDN) May 4, 2016

So determined are ASH to legitimise the pointless and absurd attack on 'Big Tobacco' that plain packaging represents, that they are happy to kick vaping in front of an express train. I know I say this a lot, but it proves categorically that the tobacco control industry has no care about health whatsoever, should be in prison, and will hopefully be going to hell for eternity.

The TPD ASH are enthusiastically backing was based on no proper evidence at all, beholden to no public consultation or impact assessment and - as I think we can all remember -  avoided scrutiny by our own parliament thanks to the idiocy of Anna Soubry and the oleaginous string-pulling of the DoH's Andrew Black.

And if that wasn't bad enough, here is the type of ridiculous poppycock that the EU court's decision was based upon.

68 – An e-cigarette can be smoked for a much longer time without interruption and many more drags can be taken than from a conventional tobacco product.

It's quite clear from that that the court didn't have any idea of the product they were ruling on, and were departing from their remit. E-cigs 'smoked? 'Drags'?

The case was nothing to do with what e-cigs can and can't do, or how they are used, it was supposed to be whether the TPD enhanced or detracted from the free European market and harmonisation of Europe-wide legislation.

On the plus side, yet again e-cigs are exposing corrupt tobacco control liars. After skulking in the shadows, tobacco control industry cockroaches are being held up to the spotlight of disdain and now even dragging the EU and its smug and complacent anti-democratic practices into sharper view as well.

Long may that continue.

If you ever thought tobacco control industry troughers had any care about health (see today's crap from across the Atlantic too), you should really think again.

Vapid Anti-Vapers; Vapid Government; Vapid EU

You may have read here often that the incessant state-funded campaigns against smoking - and state-funded assaults on any other enjoyable legal product for that matter - have absolutely nothing to do with health. Well, it seems The Times is now coming to the same conclusion.

In a superb editorial yesterday, the newspaper excoriated the coalition of the stupid, insane and corrupt lined up against e-cigs.

The big tobacco companies, the health regulators and governments have not agreed on much. They have, however, formed an unhealthy alliance to prevent the spread of e-cigarettes.

They forgot to mention pharmaceutical industries which lobby for legislation to protect their limp and pitifully unsuccessful products too, but we'll forgive the writer that considering the rest was a forthright condemnation of the vested interest-riddled, weepy willow shitsacks who dream up fantasy panics to agitate against vaping.

Tobacco (and more so pharmaceutical - DP) companies are worried that their revenues are going up in smoke. Health regulators worry that inhaling nicotine vapour might be a gateway to smoking tobacco. Governments rely on the taxes that tobacco provides. The evidence against this alliance is now overwhelming.

Indeed it is, as I mentioned just last week.

[NCSCT] also points out that recreational use of nicotine is nothing much to worry about, because it's not. This is now the position of government advisers PHE and also the state's network of Stop Smoking Services

Which makes The Times editorial's denouement pretty much perfect.

The case against e-cigarettes is wrong in the abstract. Nicotine is a legal drug and so is the ingestion of its vapour. The task of government is to provide good information and to help people to cease activities that are damaging to them. If people then want to use e-cigarettes, they should be allowed to. 

They are proving themselves to be successful in helping people to stop smoking while respecting individual freedom. Public Health England is right. Vaping should be encouraged and the lobbyists seen off.

Quite.

As an aside, the editorial was entitled "Vapid Anti-Vapers" which is inadvertently humorous considering the prior witterings of a certain loathsome Aussie rust-jointed walking carcass you may have heard of.

Does the e-cigarette "vaper" have any etymological connection to "vapid"? Faux smoke & ember .. seems to fit?

— Simon Chapman AO (@SimonChapman6) May 31, 2012

I had no idea that "#vaping" was derived from "vapid". Now clearer. https://t.co/cc1j1UB4fS

— Simon Chapman AO (@SimonChapman6) May 1, 2014

Back atcha, Chappers, you decrepit fruitfuck, you.

So we in the UK seem to be presented with a bit of a disjointed situation. The government's prime 'public health' advisers, PHE, are in favour of encouraging e-cig use; the government's boots-on-the-ground local service providers, NCSCT - entrusted with taxpayer funding to deliver the government's apparent objective of reducing smoking prevalence - are in favour of encouraging e-cig use; and an established and globally-respected news outlet is also now in favour of encouraging e-cig use.

E-cigarettes should be welcomed as a good way to stop smoking

Indeed, even the Prime Minister himself has said the same!

"I think we do need to be guided by the experts. We should look at the report from Public Health England but it is promising the see that over all, one million people are estimated to have used e-cigarettes to help them quite or have replaced smoking with e-cigarettes completely. 

"So I think we should be making clear that this is a very legitimate path for many people to improve their health and the health of the nation."

Well why isn't the government "guided by the experts" then? Why is the government position still dedicated to forcing smokers to "stop using nicotine completely" and of the ignorant opinion that "addiction to nicotine, we would consider harmful"?

In fact, why - as again highlighted by The Times - is the government actively working at EU level to kneecap e-cigs and effectively ensure that the financial attraction vaping offers is wiped out?

Electronic cigarettes are set to soar in price under plans by Brussels to tax them at the same punitive rate as tobacco. 

Vaping will be brought into line with cigarettes and cigars as the EU tries to help governments to raise more money.

Raise more money? Fancy that!

Experts say that a tax rise will damage public health because higher prices will discourage smokers from switching to vaping. A report published yesterday shows that in Britain about 20,000 smokers a year give up because of e-cigarettes — as many as quit through all other stop-smoking aids combined. 

However, ambassadors from all 28 EU countries have agreed to take the first steps towards imposing higher duty, quietly telling the European Commission to come up with plans by next year to reclassify e-cigarettes as tobacco products for tax purposes.

All of them? Including the UK? Well yes, it does mean that.

The UK ambassador to the EU is Ivan Rogers - appointed by the UK government to collude with other unelected EU ambassadors on issues such as this one - and there he is agreeing with all other member states that e-cigs have to be included in the Tobacco Tax Directive and nobbled. In order to raise more money for the government and bow down to tobacco control's best mates in big industry, the UK government seems happy to abandon their stated position of encouraging smokers to quit and instead vandalise a route which has proved successful for many tens of thousands of people.

As with anything to do with the EU, the public have no say.

I'd say the UK government - if it is taking David Cameron's words in parliament seriously - should indeed be guided by the evidence just as PHE, NCSCT and The Times have been. But - and I get rather tired of keep pointing this out - it's never been about health, so they are doing the polar opposite. And there's not much sign that they will be guided by what The Times rightly describes as "overwhelming" evidence in the future either, especially when they can continually bypass democracy by scurrying off to the EU and demanding more stupidity.

Appalled that EU set to tax e-cigarettes at same levels as tobacco. All vapers must vote to Leave EU! https://t.co/6HrvCIyYL4

— Nigel Farage (@Nigel_Farage) March 2, 2016

He's not wrong. Can we leave yet?

Could Tobacco Control Extremism Help Us Get Out Of The EU?

As piss poor legislation goes, the EU's updated Tobacco Products Directive (TPD2) - which regulates e-cigs to within an inch of their life along with other ideologically stupid nonsense - ticks a lot of idiocy boxes for law-making and proves the public are correct in despising modern politicians and bureaucrats.

It hasn't been missed by those campaigning against our membership of the EU either, I mean how could it? Their role is to highlight how inept and pathetic the EU is and why we'd be better off out. So TPD2 is a Godsend.

In October those campaigning to leave saw the TPD as a perfect example of counterproductive EU over-reach, just the sort of thing to get hackles rising about unnecessary Brussels interference.

The innovation to help smokers quit that could save millions of lives is being held back by EU rules. 

If you are one of the country’s three million vapers, or you know somebody who you would like to quit smoking, then you should vote ‘Leave’ in the EU referendum.

Yep, can't argue with that.

By way of example, in 2013 I travelled to Brussels to take part in a protest against the TPD on the day the EU parliament held a debate in which the views of voters were roundly ignored.

Prior to that vote, MEPs had received tens or even hundreds of thousands of emails and other messages from vapers throughout the continent pleading with them not to pass the crap legislation they were planning to. As vapers waited in Place de Luxembourg for news, those who had ventured inside came out to report that not only had we all been ignored, but tobacco controllers were high-fiving and hugging each other at having killed off vaping for good!

I have to point out that this included many who now claim to be onside with e-cigs and the concept of harm reduction.

The decision taken that day - to regulate e-cigs as medical devices - was later turned over by the parliament before the democratic process was abandoned entirely and Article 20 of the TPD was crafted in camera, well away from prying eyes, with no scrutiny or voting process whatsover. It was also passed without anyone bothering to weigh up how it might harm legal industries and the public by way of an impact assessment.

What is even more damning for the way laws and regulations are introduced within the EU is the ignorant and incompetent behaviour of Anna Soubry  - the most ridiculous minister the UK has ever had the misfortune to suffer, or "repulsive little liar" depending on your viewpoint  - in endorsing such an appalling decision by the EU.

To explain the above, she went to the EU - behind the back of parliament and bypassing all proper scrutiny - to vote on a directive about which she knew virtually nothing. Yet she claimed, and I quote:

"I'm not going to pretend that I just did what my officials said because it wasn't like that in any event."

So she, instead, claimed that she was able to vote as she did - or subvert democracy to use the proper term - by keeping a parliamentary committee in the dark, in order to unilaterally vote on a set of measures without even knowing what was on the table. It was clear that she was under the impression that e-cigs had been dropped from the TPD altogether.

This is without mentioning the way the TPD was rigged from as early as the consultation stage by vested interests and infiltrated by pharma lobbyists from its very inception. Oh yeah, and we'll also not mention the mysterious support for the TPD we weren't allowed to see when the EU were ignoring public rejection of the directive, and let's also pass over the TPD originating commissioner's sacking for soliciting bribes.

TPD2 is the EU at its very worst. It proves beyond doubt that the entire edifice is corrupt to the core, entirely undemocratic, a hostage to vested interests and state-funded NGO trouser-stuffers, contrary to the public good, and long overdue for being dismantled.

So it was interesting to see this tweet over the weekend.

EU's TPD II will kills large part of e-cig market. In turn, kill people. https://t.co/hIY13bST94

— Matthew Sinclair (@mjhsinclair) February 27, 2016

Sinclair is a sidekick of Matt Elliott, Chief Executive of the Vote Leave campaign and the mastermind behind No To AV winning the AV referendum in 2011 from a very low base (but finishing with 67% of the vote).

It's clear that the TPD has been identified by the 'out' campaign as an archetypal example of EU over-reach and UK government kow-towing to anti-democratic Brussels. Soubry was able to bypass our own government despite being completely unaware of what she was voting for, simply because of the harmful power the EU wields over the UK. By the same token, the public was barred from any input by multiple levels of bureaucracy, despite corruption arguably being a factor in at least three different ways.

What happened with the TPD was that the public - who unusually engaged in record numbers with an EU directive - were sidelined in favour of hideously biased NGOs, professional lobbyists, crooks, charlatans and shit-for-brains politicians who knew they could just say "well, you know, EU" and avoid an arse-whipping. The TPD illustrates that the EU Commission creates laws which it wants to inflict on the EU electorate, and if we object the answer is not to listen, but instead to dodge, obfuscate, gerrymander, and - if all else fails - take proceedings behind closed doors to ensure the Commission's proposals are railroaded through and the public's views are treated with contempt.

It's a good tactic from the 'leave' campaign to use the TPD as an example of how disgraceful EU law-making can be. No-one asked for the TPD, it was just decided that it was about time the EU had another one. It deliberately avoided public engagement and - in fact - connived and conspired to do the very opposite of what public opinion demanded by way of democratic engagement. Instead it reinforced the agendas of a small number of state-funded and policy-based careerists - many of whom lie as a matter of course - despite their not understanding the subject matter, and the rules it set in stone are unchallengeable for the UK and other member states for a decade at least. It's also a brilliant example of why the term 'regulation' is not always anything to do with making anything safer or more efficient, and why the tobacco control industry really couldn't give a shit about health.

It's only one of many policy areas where EU interference is unnecessary and quite pathetic - recent 'worthy' goals of the EU have focussed on regulating hoovers, candles and toasters - and you can be sure that in each area the public will not have requested the interference, and will be given short shrift if they even attempt to object.

But when you have a city in Belgium packed to the gills with thousands upon thousands of regulators, what else are they going to do but regulate? Consequences fly out the window when a gravy train is in full flow.

Lord's Prayer - 66 words
10 Commandments - 179 words
Gettysburg address - 286 words
EU regulations on the sale of cabbage - 26,911 words

— Eamonn Butler (@eamonnbutler) 24 February 2016

What is particularly interesting for we who watch these events, though, is how the relatively niche issue of the TPD has been taken up by the 'Leave' campaign so enthusiastically. We've always known that the tobacco control industry is the most disingenuous, mendacious, corrupt and rancid of all state-funded lobby groups, but here we have those who wish to leave the EU recognising it and shining some light under the rocks where tobacco control sits grubbily sucking on our taxes and spreading discord and hate.

Now, wouldn't it be delicious if the egregious abuse of truth, democracy, transparency and civil discourse - which the tobacco control Goliath trades upon to keep itself at the taxpayer trough - turns out to be instrumental in getting us out of the EU whose opaque and anti-democratic practices they love so much?

More EU E-Cig Idiocy: Thou Shalt Not See Adverts

On Friday, I highlighted the stupidity of the e-liquid labelling requirements laid out under the EU's Tobacco Products Directive (TPD), effective in May 2016.

That's a lot of scaremongering nonsense for an e-cig accessory which has accounted for zero deaths amongst the many millions of European vapers over a ten year period, isn't it? 

All that (misleading) info will have to be printed on a label barely 2 cm tall by 6 cm wide, so will be all but illegible anyway. This is what you get when you pay thousands of regulators in Brussels to sit around thinking about what to regulate next to save themselves from the dole.

Well now, via Planet of the Vapes, we can see the equally idiotic legislation surrounding advertising which is being implemented by our elected government who are bound by EU law to do so at the behest of the unelected EU Commission.

The document covers “No advertising of electronic cigarettes in the press etc” – making it an offence not only to publish an advert but also to procure an advert in a publication therefore jointly making the advertiser and the buyer of the advert culpable for any transgression. 

Secondly the article covers “No advertising of electronic cigarettes in information society services” – covering pretty much all electronic media, websites, apps, blogs etc. 

“Sponsorship of events etc. - No person may sponsor, with the aim or effect of promoting electronic cigarettes or refill containers”

It is currently unclear as to what the difference is between promotional material and what is informational material.  Could it perhaps be that reviews are also covered by this stringent regulation?

Or, to put it more succinctly, here's a slide from the E-Cig Summit earlier this month.

Click to enlarge

So, the EU - and the British state - want smokers to quit smoking, while prominent UK tobacco controllers and the government's own 'public health' advisory body concede that e-cigs "can help smokers to quit". However, after May 2016, visibility of e-cigs as an alternative to smoking is going to be reduced to near zero thanks to the TPD ensuring that e-cig vendors - and possibly consumers too - will be prohibited from telling smokers about their existence on all widely disseminated media!

It's some of the most unjoined-up political thinking ever witnessed in this country, surely? It truly beggars belief.

Of course, there will still be some who will be allowed to promote e-cigs, albeit boringly, as the PHE statement back in August revealed.

PHE is committed to ensure that smokers have a range of evidence-based, effective tools to help them to quit. We encourage smokers who want to use e-cigarettes as an aid to quit smoking to seek the support of local stop smoking services.

Stop smoking services? You mean organisations which are currently crying out for information about vaping from consumers because they simply do not understand them? It would seem so.

Therefore, after May 2016, you won't be allowed to see any communications from e-cig manufacturers, vendors and possibly consumers - who all have in-depth knowledge of the products and how they work - but will be perfectly able to receive advice and information from state agencies who wouldn't know one end of an e-cig from the other.

In other words, state capture of a thriving and successful market which will be transformed into an impotent, invisible, and ineffective one because of baseless scaremongery, entrenched industry lobbying, tobacco control industry rent-seeking and EU incompetence.

Yep, that's about standard. Because, y'see, the state - domestic and EU-wide - is utterly incompetent, hypocritical, and certainly not your friend. See how it works yet?

EU E-Cig Idiocy Beginning To Emerge

It's been a busy week hence scarcity of content here these past few days, but a tweeted pic from Wednesday deserves a wider sharing.

As an example of how pointless, absurd, staggeringly stupid and tyrannical state vandalism can be, the proposed format for e-liquid bottle labelling after implementation of the EU Tobacco Products Directive (TPD) in May next year can't be beaten.

Here, from a screened presentation (hence the low res) is what it will look like.

That's a lot of scaremongering nonsense for an e-cig accessory which has accounted for zero deaths amongst the many millions of European vapers over a ten year period, isn't it? Nice that - in amongst the self-aggrandising bullshit - EU pen-pushers allowed a little blue box for the manufacturer to tell consumers what they're buying though, I suppose.

What's even more insane is where it has to be displayed. Because, y'see, the TPD demands that the maximum bottle size for e-liquid must be 10ml from May 2016. In case you don't know how small that is, here's a 10ml bottle to scale.

All that (misleading) info will have to be printed on a label barely 2 cm tall by 6 cm wide, so will be all but illegible anyway. This is what you get when you pay thousands of regulators in Brussels to sit around thinking about what to regulate next to save themselves from the dole.

I predicted laughable, perverse, and utterly stupid outcomes like this back in 2013, before the TPD had been passed. I wasn't far wrong.

1) It will illustrate - as if it were needed - the wilful disregard the EU has for democracy and balanced debate. 

2) It will show conclusively that the EU is an organisation more interested in self-perpetuating than looking after its citizens in a responsible manner. 

And 3) it will show you how extremist tobacco control bastards operate, because it ain't ever been about health.

So it's not surprising that such a serious political platform as the Leave.EU referendum campaign group sees the TPD as a perfect example of EU over-reach and counterproductive meddling. Worse still, despite the UK being far more enlightened about vaping than other countries, because this is a directive - set in motion by an unelected EU Commission - there is stuff all the Westminster government can do about it, it's happening whether our elected MPs like it or not.

Can we leave yet?

EU Confirms It's Not About Health

Via Clive Bates and the FT, it seems the EU is the latest organisation to prove your humble host correct.

A document has come to light (here) which shows early plans are being made to add excise duty - otherwise known as sin taxes - to e-cigs.

(a) Do you experience problems in your Member State because E-cigarettes and other (new) nicotine containing products are currently not excisable products? 

(b) What are your impressions of the development and size of the market of E-cigarettes and other (new) nicotine containing products? Are there any signs of substitution of the regular tobacco products? 

(c) What do you think of the option to adjust the scope of excisable products by including a nicotine-based category?

In other words, so many people are switching from tobacco to vaping, member states are suffering a drop in income. This, apparently, is deemed to be causing "problems".

Incredible, isn't it? The EU has, for decades, liberally pissed away our cash on nagging, cajoling, hectoring, intervening, regulating, legislating and bullying smokers to quit. But now that many have done exactly that with e-cigs, it's cocking up member state budgets so screw health, it's now all about revenue raising.

Bates fisks their moronic plan into the middle of next week, so do go have a read.

On a personal note, though, thank you to e-cigs for yet again proving the Puddlecote motto correct ... it's never been about health.

Northern Ireland Rejoices At Being 'Helped'

Former Tory health minister Andrew Lansley dropped a penny in a well in 2012 and made a wish.

"We don't want to work in partnership with the tobacco companies because we are trying to arrive at a point where they have no business in this country"

Rejoice! Because thanks to his unstinting support, ASH, and their fellow tobacco control prohibitionists have made his wish come true and 'helped' 900 Northern Irish citizens to kick their filthy habit of being employed.

Britain's last tobacco factory is set to shut its doors permanently with the loss of around 900 jobs. 

The Ballymena plant in County Antrim, Northern Ireland, is a major employer in the area. 

Ian Paisley Jr, MP for North Antrim said: "I am not in the habit of scaremongering or crying wolf. For the past five years since I became Member of Parliament for North Antrim I have warned about the serious unintended consequences for jobs in North Antrim if government both locally nationally and in Europe continues to over regulate the already heavily  regulated tobacco industry. 

"Indeed,  in July 2012 I warned that 1000 jobs were under threat. Unfortunately those warnings fell on deaf ears. This was despite me arranging over twenty on site visits of politicians from all parties and the government to see the impact more regulations would have on jobs."

I'm sure that Andrew Lansley and ASH will be punching the air in delight at this news, but I reckon Ballymena residents will have a different view.

You see, ASH regularly cry crocodile tears about the plight of the poor and try to piggy-back their bullying tactics as part of the general 'progressive' movement. But here we are with 900 British people about to be rendered unemployed - thanks partly to ASH - when the true cause of health inequalities is poverty and, yes, unemployment. ASH should know this because it's inequality 101 and what their beloved BBC teaches secondary school kids, for crying out loud.

There are significant differences in life expectancy of at least 10 years between different groups in society. Those living in poverty generally have poorer life chances and poorer health because of lower living standards, including poor housing and poor diet. 

Those in lower paid, unskilled jobs have a greater risk of accidents at work and can suffer from stress linked to unemployment.

In fact, BBC Bitesize goes further in its section on collectivism (i.e. that the state is Mother, the state is Father).

Even when an individual seems to be responsible for their situation, for example by smoking, drinking too much or eating a poor diet, collectivists argue that this is caused by poor life chances.

And there can be no poorer life chances than being in a household deprived of work by stratospherically-paid, trouser-stuffing, tax-sponging ideologists who actively work to put employees of a legal industry on the dole.

I think we've also seen another anti-smoking lie nailed today. Back in 2010, one of ASH's mates - Henry Featherstone - produced a pile of steaming garbage where he came to the stunningly dismissive conclusion that high taxes and regulation of tobacco would impose a cost of precisely £nil.

Yes, really.

When considering smoking economics, the role of the manufacture and sales of tobacco within the economy is often cited.

The 'economist' (Henry Featherstone, who {cough} left Policy Exchange pretty sharpish after he'd produced his policy-led dog's breakfast) then proceeded to talk about everything else but the threat of job losses in order to ignore their resultant financial cost.

For these reasons we exclude the role of business from our calculation. 

How convenient.

Unite the union is now mourning the loss of an annual £60 million to the Ballymena wage economy once the JTI factory closes, which I'd say adequately passes the tobacco control industry's scream test, wouldn't you?

Henry with Debs at the ASH AGM

Maybe sometime soon, Lansley, ASH, and their pal Henry should plan a visit to Northern Ireland to explain how removing the tobacco industry from Britain is a brilliant thing; that their policies are quite wonderful; and that their intervention has had no financial impact whatsoever.

I'm sure the locals will really appreciate talking to them about it.

Government Of The People, By The People, For Ignoring The People

And so it came to pass, as predicted here on Tuesday, that the EU Tobacco Products Directive - corrupt and disingenuous as it is - was approved overwhelmingly yesterday.

I'll get round to writing more on that (I hope) when unusually demanding recent Puddlecote Inc pressures have eased, but for now it's pertinent to say that the whole fiasco was a bastardisation of democratic process. Bypassing proper debate and objective consultation, the EU just steamrollered it through anyway. The snus ban was maintained despite being harmful to European health, and after ignoring overwhelming public disapproval; bans on tobacco flavours, smaller tobacco pouches and packs of ten were promoted on the back of utter piffle; and effective e-cigs banned from 2016 despite huge evidence of their benefits but only innuendo and lies in favour of the ridiculous regulations now inflicted on them.

The last of those, of course, also entailed the EU machine cocking a deaf 'un to a cacophony of protests from thousands of EU citizens while instead listening intently to a tiny minority of mostly state-funded career prohibitionists. If two million vapers had descended on Brussels, each accompanied by their happy GP, it wouldn't have made a monkey's fart of a difference.

The whole thing was a stitch-up from start to finish.

Now, thanks to the transparency afforded by the internet they would dearly love to restrict, we can shine a light on these political lobbyist cockroaches and their next planned distortions of democracy, this time in Westminster.

Yesterday, the House of Commons Health Select Committee unveiled their report on the new quango, Public Health England (PHE). It's enlightening stuff.

The Committee is concerned that there is inadequate clarity about how the organisation will approach crucial policy issues such as obesity, minimum unit pricing of alcohol, and standardised packaging of tobacco products. The public expects PHE to be an independent and forthright organisation that will campaign on behalf of those public health objectives and policies which it believes can improve the nation’s health. We note that PHE focused in the first instance on achieving a smooth transition to the new arrangements and the Committee believes that PHE has so far failed to set out a clear policy agenda.

Really?

So it doesn't matter that the UK public is deeply opposed to bashing the poor via minimum alcohol pricing and that half a million people objected to plain (standardised) packaging of tobacco - a thumping majority - when consulted?

Nor, it seems, would it matter if PHE reviewed the evidence in favour of these measures and found it wanting. They are expected to campaign FOR them anyway.

Elsewhere, we find:

PHE staff do not have freedom to contradict Government policy

Hmm, if so, that would surely mean that PHE's submission to Cyril Chantler's review of plain packaging is indeed government policy?

"Public Health England believes there is substantial and compelling evidence to support the introduction of standardised packaging, and this is the right policy for the country." 

"This paper restates PHE’s support for the introduction of standardised packaging at the earliest opportunity"

It very much looks like it, I'd say.

And yet politicians still seem baffled as to why we despise every man jack of them. Bizarre.

If You Don't Want The Result, Look Away Now

Tomorrow morning, the EU will vote to approve the new Tobacco Products Directive.

It was written by someone who has since been effectively fired over bribery allegations, and I do mean 'allegations' because there was - without doubt - a perfectly reasonable explanation for his jetting off to the Bahamas to scout for places amenable to stashing "sums of up to $100 million" just before being accused of soliciting €60 million via an intermediary.

Still, that's all water under the bridge for the EU. No point in dragging such an inconvenient fact up again. It's not like a billion 400 million Europeans deserve a binding directive which is entirely whiff-free, now is it?

So the process moves effortlessly on to tomorrow's vote which is taking place from 10:30am GMT and you'll be able to watch it here if you have the time. Of course, most will be at work around then so - if that applies to you - here's the result.

I think we're going to require a new EU directive on time travel considering Jean-Paul's remarkable ability to speak "after the vote" but still manage to get his opinions published the day before. I'm not sure that all precautionary avenues have been exhausted to prove that time travel is safe, do you?

Frippery aside, it's fitting that a directive which was written under dubious circumstances; was rigged from the very beginning; was furthered by a Maltese replacement who didn't have a clue about his subject matter; was bombarded by pharma and EU-funded lobbyists while the public were dismissed as tobacco stooges; and as recently as Friday saw its wording altered without debate or discussion, should now be declared as a foregone conclusion without so much as a pre-determined vote being cast.

There are very few certainties in this world, but tomorrow will exhibit two bankers in tandem to the detriment of Europe as a whole. Tobacco control has never been about health and the EU has never been about democracy.

Can we leave yet?

Now, I'm sure that the above may have dampened your expectations of the event but there may yet still be something unpredictable to look out for. The BBC reports that the stand out most liberal nation in the EU is sending a representative to speak tomorrow.

The voting session will be interrupted by a formal address to MEPs from Milos Zeman, the President of the Czech Republic.

And rumour has it that he may be contemplating blasphemy by talking about {gasp} the freedom to smoke! So place your bets, ladies and gentlemen. Will he be browbeaten by McAvan and her cronies or stick to his script and enrage legions of tax-sponging Euro tobacco control execs by mentioning the 'F-word'?

Milos, we double dare you!

Reactions To #EUEcigBan And ... Farage The Vaper?

Last night's EU 'deal' on e-cigs is still not set in stone, but it's interesting to see the differing reactions from the serious parties (I exclude Labour and the Greens from this because they are astoundingly ignorant on the matter).

Lib Dem Chris Davies seems to be largely happy!

Remember that we started off with the European Commission insisting that e-cigs should be classified as pharmaceuticals, and subject to expensive approval procedures and a host of regulations and restrictions in different countries. 

Almost all governments backed this stance.

So although the European Parliament voted for a different approach MEPs have had an uphill battle to get their wishes accepted. 

The deal negotiated between the Parliament and the Council of Ministers is not perfect (they never are). I would have preferred to see less regulation on concentrations and volumes, but when compared to the initial proposals I think our negotiating team have done a fantastic job.

Hmm, debatable.

For example, my own e-cig would be banned, as would the liquid I use and the bottles I buy it in. I would also not be able to mix my own liquid, and others who haven't yet found out about vaping would have trouble knowing much about it since "advertising will also be severely restricted". Apart from that, it's a stonking result!

Martin Callanan of the Conservatives is more forthright.

“This is a perverse decision that risks sending more people back to real, more harmful, cigarettes. 

“Refillable e-cigarettes would almost certainly be banned, and only the weakest products will be generally available. As many smokers begin on stronger e-cigs and gradually reduce their dosage, making stronger e-cigs harder to come across will encourage smokers to stay on tobacco. 

“E-cigarettes have helped people give up tobacco. They are not completely safe and they may need regulation but they are a great deal safer than cigarettes and this agreement will make them harder for smokers to obtain. 

“The fight is not over. National governments and the parliament plenary must still endorse this deal. We will continue to fight for sensible and proportionate regulation of e-cigarettes. 

“The EU keeps talking the talk on producing more sensible legislation. This legislation shows it clearly isn’t walking the walk. Thousands of e-cigs users have contacted me, and I will keep fighting for them until the last minute.”

Bravo!

While Ukip seem to have trumped the lot. Not just with an unequivocal condemnation ...

“This will lead to another ridiculous ban from the EU on the majority of e-cigarettes which are better for the health of smokers and for British manufacturers of e-cigarettes. 

“The EU should not be putting restrictions on a safer alternative to smoking. 

“E-cigarettes have been a lifeline for many people but this agreement will have the draconian effect of driving more 'vapers'* back to full tobacco cigarettes. 

“While the EU talks about guaranteeing direct subsidies to European tobacco growers from the EU budget, I suspect it also has its beady eye on the loss of tax revenues to national governments as people switch from tobacco to electronic cigarettes. 

“If the EU was truly interested in people’s health it would be helping to popularise rather than restrict e-cigarettes.”

... but also with a video of Farage admitting that even his 'incorrigible' smoking self could be tempted!

Nige the vaper? Please no!

Still, it would be churlish to set one against the other too much seeing as they have all - in their own way - admirably resisted disgraceful attempts by the tobacco control industry and their well-funded allies to destroy e-cigs.

It's rather more telling that the only factions desperately scrambling to protect Big Pharma and Big Tobacco profits on this issue are ... big industry-hating Labour and the Greens.

Says a lot, that.

The European Union And "The Rotten Hand Of Big Pharma"

Following on from yesterday's article here about the EU and its avoidance of democracy in favour of pharma lobbying, do watch VTTV's David Dorn explaining the disgrace in more detail and advising on how to go about embarrassing these motherfuckers into acting with decency.

Now, there may be many who think that there isn't a lot of point; that no-one in the EU is noticing. I can tell you that they certainly are.

A fellow jewel robber within the Berlaymont shared the EU parliament's social media briefing with me yesterday. It is a report sent out by parliament detailing the most significant mentions of the European Parliament on Twitter for each day. Here is their report for Monday.

·  “The European Union ignores science and common sense by making proposals that will damage the health of smokers and vapers” Ecigarette Research (230+ mentions) http://bit.ly/1aT4RIr

·  “They just don’t get it – Commission proposal for the regulation of e-cigarettes” Counterfactual (210+ mentions)  http://bit.ly/1cLmSHV 

·  “Bayer is suing Europe for saving the bees [petition]” SumofUs.org (100+ mentions today) http://goo.gl/ZVSkLY

·  “Prostitution: We need to see paying for sex as violence rather than vice” Independent (75+ mentions) http://ind.pn/1ekqOki

Top hashtags: #ep2014uk (180+ mentions) #eu (100+ mentions) #ep2014 (80+ mentions) #ecigs (75+ mentions)

A follow up e-mail received this afternoon simply said: "Same again today".

They're noticing, right enough. They might not like what they are seeing, but they are very aware of what is being talked about by real people.

This has always been the strength of the vaping community. Despite public health tax spongers continually pretending that objectors are merely front groups for whatever industry they are trying to destroy at any particular time, vapers are real people and can't be ignored. Politicians are timid souls, always easily scared at the thought of bad press from bully-boy prohibitionists, but they're far more terrified of real people holding them and their stupid pronouncements to account.

Electorate outrage - as highlighted at The Free Society today regarding what David Cameron described as the not "very sensible approach" in other areas of the Tobacco Control Directive (TPD) - is still a powerful weapon.

It's always been clear that the TPD was a deeply corrupt document, drafted by incompetent Maltese politicians and presented to a supranational body riddled with cronyism and infested by lobbyists whose motivation is anything but health. This leaked Lithuanian lunacy is just the latest shameful episode in its ill-begotten timeline.

On the plus side, it has exposed this arrogant and insular cabal for the revolting creatures that they have always been. I do hope that those who read here and harbour a deep dislike for the bully state will find a little time to shine a light on them by doing as David Dorn suggests above.

Whichever part of this ill-considered, pharma-designed, evidence-light, propaganda-heavy, illiberal and incoherent TPD nonsense you object to, do get writing, sharing, retweeting and generally making a fuss to make EU politicians notice more than they already do.

Pile it up, people.

The EU Doesn't Understand The Word No

My, haven't those pharma lobbyists been busy!

Via Clive Bates, it seems that Brussels is trying its best to ignore October's decision by the EU parliament and bring in medicalisation of e-cigs anyway.

A document has been leaked (see here) which details dozens of clauses which the EU's pharma sock puppets plan to insert into the tobacco products directive seemingly out of spite. As Bates describes:

Basically, the Commission has tried to smuggle in as much medicine-style regulation as possible, and then added the most restrictive commercial aspects of tobacco regulation on top – thus imposing the worst of both worlds for this most promising product. There are one or two acceptable things in the new draft, of course, but the very bad things listed hugely outweigh them all.

Now, my new gadget arrived at Puddlecote Towers on Saturday, this is the saucy little devil here.

So, for those who don't know much about vaping, let's measure how this one product would be affected by product-centric aspects of the EU's daft proposals.

- Allows only single-use cartridges.  No refillable units or tanks will be permitted.

Fail. Mine would be banned because it has a tank which holds {gasp!} a whole 3ml of liquid.

- Allows only flavours already approved for use in NRT.

Unless watermelon is a flavour allowed in pharma gum, my current favourite would be gone. Yes, watermelon, and you're laughing why?

- Limits nicotine density to 20mg/ml maximum with no justification

27mg here because it gives a satisfying kick. Knock it down and I'll be ordering more baccy from the milkman.

- Limits nicotine content of any container to just 10mg/unit.

Lots of little bottles instead of one big 30ml one, then? Of course, that's if I can find where to buy them because ...

- Bans all advertising in press or printed publications (except trade), on radio, TV and other audiovisual services and the internet.

I buy online. Without websites promoting their products, that's out the window too. This, naturally, also means that any smoker who is curious about e-cigs and wants to try them as a replacement - or even to quit - won't have a Scooby where to look.

It kinda looks like none of this is about health, doesn't it? That's probably because, as I have said many times before, anti-tobacco (and now anti-vaping) has never been about health. None of it. Only pharma profits.

As Bates describes:

Make no mistake, if implemented this proposal bans every product on the market today and would severely limit options for future products

Quite.

This does seem to give us a better understanding of the EU in general, though. France said no in a referendum on the EU Constitution in 2005, they were ignored; Holland also said no on 2005, they were ignored; Ireland said no to the Lisbon Treaty in 2008, they were told to vote again and come up with the 'correct' result.

The EU, it seems, simply doesn't understand what 'no' means, in any European language. Why the hell should they be bothered what you, the people, think? They have a plan and they're going to stick with it.

Please do go read Clive Bates' article in full and consider his suggestions for objecting to this illiberal and dictatorial behaviour to your elected rep. Whether you are a fan of e-cigs or not, this is symbolic of the problem we have with gutless politicians and their mesmerised idiocy in the face of the public health Mafia in general.

I'll be badgering my local politicos again, the poor souls. Cos you see that lovely bit of shiny up there? Out of my cold dead hands, you shitehawks.

An Object Lesson In The Art Of Ignoring The Public

The New York Times has provided us with an object lesson in how the tobacco control industry - and, by extension, the entire public health nanny state who hang on their coat-tails - contrives to ignore you.

Again, it is those mischievous e-cigs doing the exposing.

BRUSSELS — Facing a decision on whether to impose tight restrictions on a booming market for electronic cigarettes, members of the European Parliament received a pleading letter in September that was signed by thousands of former smokers worried that “the positive story of e-cigarettes may be about to come to an abrupt halt.” 

The signatures had been collected via a website, saveecigs.com, which proclaimed itself the voice of the “forgotten millions in this debate” — people who had taken up e-cigarettes to stop smoking, and their grateful families. 

The website, however, was not quite the grass-roots effort it claimed to be. The text of the letter it asked people to sign was drafted by a London lobbyist hired by Totally Wicked, an e-cigarette company. The website had been set up by a British woman living in Iceland who had previously worked for the owners of Totally Wicked.

That is enough. It's all that is needed to jerk the knee of glorious democratic thinkers of our age such as Martin McKee.

So the "army of vapers" not #astroturf then? NY Times looks under the turf #ecigs http://t.co/PGrLHMQvP8
— Martin McKee (@martinmckee) November 10, 2013

You see, a grass roots effort involving millions of consumers is only worth listening to if it is organised by ordinary Joes and Janes themselves.

They are supposed to come together organically; find huge funds to set up web sites and petitions; after - of course - keeping their eyes continually on the impenetrable machinations of EU regulatory bodies buried amongst thousands of EU web pages; and all without any company pointing potentially troublesome proposed legislation out to them.

No enjoying a life for you plebs, oh no. You must be as dedicated to trawling through acres of regulations on every subject you remotely care about as Martin McKee and the public health community - who are paid a hefty salary to do precisely that all day - or you are to be considered an industry stooge, just like half a million public consultation responses on plain packaging can be air-brushed out of political discourse as if they didn't happen..

But, unlike you, the other side are exempt from accusations of astroturfing. Despite, err ...

Among the companies arrayed against the e-cigarette industry were GlaxoSmithKline, the London-based pharmaceutical company, which sells Nicorette nicotine chewing gum in the United States, and Johnson & Johnson, the American consumer products company, which owns the manufacturer of Nicorette gum, patches and inhalers.

Now is not the time to draw attention to the billions in fines pharma companies have been served with for fraud and malfeasance, it's irrelevant because they have never lobbied McKee or anyone else in the tobacco control industry. Not. Ever.

Sponsored, yes, but that's OK, because professional tax-sponger McKee and his ilk quite like them, they fit their anti-vape and smoke agenda perfectly.

“Are these people all in the pay of e-cig companies?” said Linda McAvan, an influential member of Parliament’s environment and public health committee. “No. But they have been told by these companies that Brussels wants to take away their product. They are genuinely angry. But their anger has been fed.”

What? Consumers are angry about something they were told would prevent them from consuming a product they enjoy? How fucking outrageous! But it's OK, they've been alerted by an e-cig company, so we can just ignore them as astroturf groups.

Their complaints should dribble in weakly, haphazardly, and ignorantly so highly-paid McAvan and her chums can continue making hay with their personal preferences while the spotlight is anywhere but on their dubious and borderline criminal cockroachery. The public actually knowing what is going on is so very inconvenient, isn't it?

This is cognitive dissonance at its most stark. Thousands of vapers have engaged in the democratic process by writing to MPs and MEPs, while state-funded, pharma-sponsored public health pros desperately invent ways to ignore anything someone outside of their influence says.

And they call others sock puppets? Go figure.

MEP Carl Schlyter's Strange Definition Of Proof

If you haven't yet read it, do go have a look at Chris Snowdon's transcript of a German TV show which highlights the barely-disguised funding of anti-smoking groups by the pharmaceutical industry.

Despite a flood of pharma cash being diverted to organisations sharing mail boxes with the Smokefree Partnership, and one of their advocates - Florence Berteletti-Kemp -  formerly being on the payroll of one of those organisations, some still believe there is no corruption here.

I found this quote particularly hilarious.

MEP Carl Schlyter (Green Party, Sweden): “According to my internet research I was not able to detect any connection to the pharma industry.”

No proud pharma logos sponsoring their conferences; no openly-admitted cash support; he detected absolutely nothing. He is either a piss poor detective or a very fair guy - perhaps he is so scrupulous that he refuses to call out a tobacco control industry arm as being in the pay of big pharma until he sees an audit trail from payment to bank statement.

Well, that would be believable if it weren't for the appalling tosh he spouts when talking about anyone who opposes the TPD.

But Carl Schlyter MEP, health spokesman for the Greens, called it "a shameful day for the European Parliament, as a centre-right majority, led by the EPP group, has done the bidding of the tobacco industry and voted for weaker rules".

A clue as to whom Schlyter classes as the "tobacco industry" is in his EU group's registry of contacts which you can read here.

Out of 95 communications, only 14 are from what you or I would class a tobacco company. The rest are not tobacco companies in any sense of the word. A large majority were independent e-cig companies who have never sold even part of a single tobacco leaf. The rest were packaging companies, trade mark associations, state approved anti-counterfeiting groups ... and even the Good Clinical Practice Alliance.

Apparently, Schlyter can find no evidence whatsoever that Berteletti-Kemp is a pharma stooge despite the payments being clearly evident ... yet he is absolutely certain - beyond any doubt whatsoever - that anyone who opposed the TPD is motivated purely because of payments by the tobacco industry.

This includes, by the way, Adults For Adults who are condemned for sending this letter to MEPs.

We are a group of intellectuals and artists who observe the measures taken by the EU with growing concern. We ask you: do you really believe that it is the role of politicians to issue health warnings? Given mass poverty in Europe, homelessness, rampant youth unemployment and social radicalisation, do you not think that there are other, far more important, complex and pressing political challenges? 

Do you not think that the patronizing treatment of adults at the hands of politicians can have dangerous and damaging consequences? If you treat responsible adults like children who need to be given health warnings, you might open the door to people actually behaving like children at some point in the future. Do you really want that? Would you prefer timid, obedient and servile subjects to autonomous citizens?  

If the issue you raise is the health costs caused by individuals, the situation might quickly escalate as the public begins to name and shame other costly or no longer productive individuals or groups and considers ways of disposing of them. We have already been there in the previous century. Do you really want to play this dangerous game? If you encourage citizens to perceive others solely as a potential threat, you engage in scaremongering and worsen social divisions, all of which erodes Europe’s social cohesion, already under threat, even further. 

Finally, if you treat Europe’s citizens, who have voted you in, as if they were legally incompetent, you ultimately question your own democratic legitimacy – following this logic, you would have been elected by legally incompetent voters.

Quite.

They also sent each MEP this glorious visual indication of short-sighted stupidity.

Totally off-message for the Greens and Socialists, so they're shoved into the pigeon hole as tobacco apologists and ignored by criminal citation of FCTC Article 5.3. But, of course, Schlyter finds no similar agenda with the Smokefree Partnership despite pretty clear pharma funding schemes - they are allowed to lobby with as much big pharma cash as they can stuff in their trouser pockets simply because they agree with Schlyter's EU group. Nope, no corruption there, no siree!

It shows just how magnificent the victory for e-cigs was when Greens and Socialists had their ears so atrociously and undemocratically closed to objectors throughout the entire process.