In China, there are currently no regulations pertaining to the use and production management of e-cigarettes. In 2018, Chinese tobacco regulators urged the government to regulate the devices in the same way as other tobacco products.
In response to a recent paper reporting once again that vaping leads to smoking, experts pointed out “yet another one which provides no evidence that there is a gateway effect.”
“We are currently calling for relevant departments to look into regulation for standardized control on e-cigarettes and prohibit its public use like tobacco,” says Zhang Jianshu, president of the Beijing Tobacco Control Association. This call for regulations came shortly after the renowned Air China vaping-related incident, which made international news.
Subsequently at a press conference earlier this month, head of the National Health Commission (NHC) planning department Mao Qunan, said that the organization is conducting research on the devices with the aim of regulating accordingly. “The supervision of electronic cigarettes must be severely strengthened,” he said. The NHC “is working with relevant departments to conduct research on electronic cigarette supervision and we plan to regulate electronic cigarettes through legislation.”
Sadly, Mao Qunan alluded to the infamous and inaccurate “gateway theory” saying that by reducing vaping rates, smoking rates would be consequently reduced. “We want to reduce the smoking rate and prevent young people from trying tobacco,” said Mao.
More Unfounded “Gateway Theory” Claims
Meanwhile, in response to a recent paper reporting once more that vaping may lead to smoking, public health experts are pointing out that it is “yet another one which provides no evidence that there is a gateway effect.”
The paper titled, “Evidence that an intervention weakens the relationship between adolescent electronic cigarette use and tobacco smoking: a 24-month prospective study,” concluded that “…e-cigarette use was robustly associated with measures of smoking over 24 months.”
Public Health expert Clive Bates explains why this study proved no such link and harm reduction advocate Carl V Phillips added that “it is yet another thought-free piece of public health garbage in which there is no hint of scientific thinking.”
Read Further: Medical Press
