Abstract
E-cigarettes have been readily available to global markets since 2004. However, regulations have lagged behind popular use and availability. As policies emerging from national health agencies have an important role to play in shaping consumer health, we examined the existing and upcoming national regulations surrounding e-cigarette availability and use in a convenience sample of English- and French-speaking countries, including Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Australia and New Zealand. There is substantial international variation in regulatory policies and the extent to which these are enforced. Of the countries considered in this review, the US has regulations that remain the most permissive, whereas those in Canada and New Zealand are the most conservative. However, regulations in Canada, Australia and New Zealand are easily bypassed through Internet imports and lenient enforcement. European health agencies are paving the way for Member States to take appropriate steps to regulate e-cigarettes according to their own jurisdictions. Currently, national regulations of e-cigarettes appear to be ill-defined in terms of shaping the future of e-cigarette availability and use. National regulations should be strengthened to reflect the public health implications of e-cigarettes and to emphasize their difference from consumer products.
Key Words: E-cigarettes, regulation, health policy
Mots Clés: cigarette électronique, réglementation gouvernementale, politique sanitaire
Résumé
Les cigarettes électroniques sont aisément accessibles sur le marché mondial depuis 2004. Cependant, la réglementation est en décalage par rapport à leur consommation et à leur disponibilité. Les politiques des administrations nationales de la santé ont un rôle important à jouer dans la santé des consommateurs; c’est pourquoi nous avons examiné les règlements en vigueur et en préparation portant sur la disponibilité et la consommation des cigarettes électroniques dans un échantillon de commodité de pays anglophones et francophones: le Canada, les États-Unis, le Royaume-Uni, la France, l’Australie et la Nouvelle-Zélande. Les politiques de réglementation et la mesure dans laquelle elles sont appliquées varient beaucoup à l’échelle internationale. Parmi les pays à l’étude, les É.-U. avaient les règlements les plus permissifs, tandis que le Canada et la Nouvelle-Zélande avaient les plus stricts. Toutefois, les règlements au Canada, en Australie et en Nouvelle-Zélande sont facilement contournés par les importations sur Internet, d’autant plus que l’application des règlements laisse à désirer. Les administrations européennes de la santé préparent la voie aux États membres pour qu’ils puissent prendre les mesures qui s’imposent pour réglementer la cigarette électronique selon leur compétence. À l’heure actuelle, les règlements nationaux semblent mal définis pour ce qui est de préparer l’avenir de la disponibilité et de la consommation des cigarettes électroniques. Il faudrait les renforcer pour tenir compte des répercussions pour la santé publique de la cigarette électronique et pour mieux définir leurs différences par rapport aux biens de consommation.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements: Funding for this project was provided by a grant from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR; KRS-134302). K. Filion holds a CIHR New Investigator award.
Conflict of Interest: None to declare.
References
- 1.Health Canada. Notice - To AU Persons Interested in Importing, Advertising or Selling Electronic Smoking Products in Canada. 2009. [Google Scholar]
- 2.U.S. FoodDrug Administration. Issue Snapshot on Deeming: Regulating Additional Tobacco Products. 2014. [Google Scholar]
- 3.Australian Government Department of Health. Electronic Cigarettes. 2013. Therapeutic Goods Administration. [Google Scholar]
- 4.Austalian Government Department of Health. Tobacco Product Regulation and Disclosure. 2014. [Google Scholar]
- 5.New Zealand MedicinesMedical Devices Authority Medsafe. Categorisation of Electronic Cigarettes. 2014. [Google Scholar]
- 6.Erbach G. Electronic Cigarettes. Library of the European Parliament. 2013. [Google Scholar]
- 7.Agence nationale de sécurité du médicament et des produits de santé. Cigarette électronique-Point d’information. 2014. [Google Scholar]
- 8.MedicinesHealthcare Products Regulatory Agency. Press Release: UK Moves Towards Safe and Effective Electronic Cigarettes and Other Nicotine- containing Products. 2013. [Google Scholar]
- 9.European Commission. Directive 2014/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of3 April 2014 on the Approximation of the Laws, Regulations and Administrative Provisions of the Member States Concerning the Manufacture, Presentation and Sale of Tobacco and Related Products and Repealing Directive 2001/37/EC. Official Journal of the European Union. 2014. [Google Scholar]
- 10.World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems: Report by WHO. 2014. [Google Scholar]
- 11.New Zealand MedicinesMedical Devices Authority Medsafe. Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS), Including E-cigarettes. 2014. [Google Scholar]
- 12.Ministère des Affaires Sociales, de la Santé et des Droits des Femmes. Cigarette Électronique: L’interdiction de Vente aux Mineurs Votée par les Députés. 2013. [Google Scholar]
- 13.European Commission. Revision of the Tobacco Products Directive: E-Cigarettes. 2013. [Google Scholar]
- 14.Dutra LM, Glantz SA. Electronic cigarettes and conventional cigarette use among us adolescents: A cross-sectional study. JAMA Pediatri. 2014;168:610–17. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2013.5488. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.U.S. Department of HealthHuman Services. How Tobacco Smoke Causes Disease: The Biology and Behavioural Basis for Smoking-Attributable Disease: A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health; 2010. [Google Scholar]
- 16.Burstyn I. Peering through the mist: Systematic review of what the chemistry of contaminants in electronic cigarettes tells us about health risks. BMC Public Health. 2014;14:18. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-14-18. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Ministère des Affaires Sociales, de la Santé et des Droits des Femmes. Programme National de Réduction du Tabagisme. 2014. [Google Scholar]
- 18.Public Health England. E-cigarette Uptake and Marketing: A Report Commissioned by Public Health England. 2014. [Google Scholar]
- 19.Cahn Z, Siegel M. Electronic cigarettes as a harm reduction strategy for tobacco control: A step forward or a repeat of past mistakes? J Public Health Policy. 2011;32:16–31. doi: 10.1057/jphp.2010.41. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Ministère des Affaires Sociales, de la Santé et des Droits des Femmes. Programme National de Réduction du Tabagisme. 2014. [Google Scholar]
- 21.Nova Scotia Legislature. An Act to amend Chapter 12 of the Acts of 2002, the Smoke-free Places Act, and Chapter 14 of the Acts of 1993, the Tobacco Act. 2013. [Google Scholar]
- 22.Queensland Government. New Law Takes Fire at E-cigarettes. 2014. [Google Scholar]
- 23.Gourdet CK, Chriqui JF, Chaloupka FJ. A baseline understanding of state laws governing e-cigarettes. Tob Control. 2014;23:iii37–40. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2013-051459. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]