Submission to Health Canada regarding proposed regulation to restrict nicotine content in vaping products.

Response to Minister Patty Hajdu and the Department of Health regarding Concentration of Nicotine in Vaping Products Regulations as proposed and published in the Canada Gazette Part 1, Vol. 154, No. 54, Pages 4192 – 4235.

In May of 2019, when you asked for my opinion on the future of regulation for vapour products, I provided you with 30 pages of it. There were multiple citations and links to academic studies and data. I don’t base my thoughts on what I feel. I formulate my opinions on what I read and how what I read is reflected in my experience. I put a lot of time into that submission.

 I see that I accomplished nothing;  in reading these proposed regulations (2 pages) and the RIAS (42 pages).

I Disagree with the regulations as proposed.

 I Disagree with the proposed 15 days “coming into force” period on page 4203. This time frame does not align with trade conventions. 15 days does not give me enough time to sell through the existing inventory on hand. I am still recovering from boxing up and sealing roughly $9500.00 worth of hardware that became non-compliant due to CRC regulations on January 1^st. I have no desire to throw out approximately $12,000  of product. Nor do I relish taking similar losses every time new rules drop because this government decided to treat my industry more harshly than any other adult product industry in Canada.

 As for the assumption on page 2116 that “With regard to retailers, it is assumed that any remaining stock of vaping products above 20 mg/mL nicotine will be returned to suppliers once the Regulations come into force.” – Assumptions are what regulatory bodies use to sleep easier at night with their decision making process. Most of that product will go in the dumpster, and small businesses will eat the loss.

 

I Agree with Health Canada’s recognition on page 4208 that “young persons” could still be attracted to vaping products below 20mg/ml”. Product use (and abuse) is determined by blood concentration, not the amount of nicotine in the liquid. Cutting the nicotine in the device will increase consumption both by (smoking and formerly-smoking) adults and youth looking to abuse the product. The primary difference is the abusers will be willing to do that; the adults get irritated if the vaporizer becomes an all-day pacifier, and they will go back to smoking.

 

This leads me to: “Furthermore, it is assumed that vapers who transition from vaping products above 20 mg/mL to 20 mg/mL nico­tine or below will consume, on average, the same amount of vaping product as an average person vaping with prod­ucts at 20 mg/mL nicotine or below.” (Page 4213). It disturbs me that Health Canada and the Ministry of Health appear not to understand both dependency and abuse mechanics. The trigger to use a nicotine delivery system is determined by the compound’s concentration in the blood and its impact on the brain. The concentration in the delivery system only determines how long and how often the device is used.

I Agree with the following statements:

 Total profit loss to vaping industry members who are also manufacturers of tobacco products may be mitigated by substitution of tobacco purchases from dual users who would go back to smoking and adult smokers who would continue to smoke instead of switching to vaping products at 20 mg/mL nicotine or below. – Page 4215.

 They would choose to purchase more ciga­rettes, hence offsetting the loss of sales of vaping products above 20 mg/mL nicotine. – Page 4215.

 Some current smokers who would try vaping products may find that vaping products at 20 mg/mL nicotine or below are not satisfying to them and could therefore end up being dual users or remain smokers. These persons would continue to be exposed to harmful chemicals from the long-term use of tobacco products. – Page 4216

 It is also anticipated that certain dual users could relapse to smoking only as a result of the proposed Regulations. – Page 4216.

 Although the above statements directly contradict multiple references to Canada’s Tobacco Strategy within the RIAS and as such:

 

I Disagree with the following statement and all other similar statements within the RIAS.

The proposed Regulations would support the CTS, which aims to reduce the burden of disease and death from tobacco use and its consequential impact on the public health care system and society. – Page 4217

Given the fact that the regulatory body understands that these regulations are unlikely to be effective in reaching the intended goal, and then follows with multiple statements explaining that adult smokers may keep smoking, dual users will stop trying to convert and that some current vapers will start smoking again;

 

NOTHING in these regulations advance, or even supports, CTS.

 

 

How many smokers is this government willing to let get sick and die while in a panic over nicotine?

 That’s not a rhetorical question. I am a Canadian citizen who used to smoke 2 packs a day and who still uses 60-90 mg a day of nicotine. I think it is not unreasonable to expect that this government explain their assignment of value to my life in comparison to that of a 17-year-old who got blind drunk last weekend on “birthday cake” flavoured vodka and took a puff on a Juul right after having unprotected sex and shortly before driving home while texting.

 

I want an answer.

 

 

 

 

 

Thomas Kirsop

 

                                                                                                                                 

 

 

Postscript.

 

 

 

• ·       Youth vaping is down in 2020. I watched Dr. David Hammond say so at a TOPS seminar last week.
• ·       Speaking of Dr. Hammond. That 2019 study that started this mess? The one that was so concerning he was on CBC saying youth smoking was up and “Damned right we should be worried”? -  Math error. Correction issued in 2020. Youth smoking was down.
• ·       I’ve heard about “Gateway” with regards to vaping and smoking for 6 years now. The youth who were a concern 6 years ago have transitioned to “young-adult” status currently. Smoking rates in that age group are also consistently declining. There is still no credible evidence of the “Gateway Theory.”
• ·       Youth Daily Vaping is at roughly 5%. Youth Daily smoking is too low for statistical accuracy (CTNS – CSTADS). Those two values have switched over the last 5 years. That’s not a bad thing if you are worried about things like lung cancer or emphysema.
• ·       Cochrane updated their evidence review this year. Vaping as a cessation tool shifted one level of assessment to the positive.
• ·       The NASEM report this government is fond of quoting 3 lines from?  It’s 750 pages long. I read it. All of it. It would be best if you read it all too. Because it says a hell of a lot more than the roughly 50 words you keep repeating like a parrot.
• ·       RCP and PHE are still saying vaping is vastly safer than smoking. They still, after 5 and 7 years respectively, assign a quantifier of “unlikely to exceed 5% of the harms related to combustible tobacco and may well be less than this figure”. Now I don’t know which unnamed academic(s) gave you the “assumption” that vaping related morbidity and mortality is 20% that of smoking but, unless they are willing to come out publicly or publish, I hope they washed their hands after they went digging for that number.
• ·   Do I sound angry? My government has made it pretty clear they do not care about harm reduction and the well being of 4.5 million Canadians, including me. I think I have a right to be very angry.