Misplaced Pages

Talk:Regulation of electronic cigarettes: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 10:42, 5 December 2017 editKimDabelsteinPetersen (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers19,610 edits →Denmark← Previous edit Latest revision as of 21:33, 25 October 2024 edit undoMason7512 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users6,950 editsNo edit summary 
(44 intermediate revisions by 19 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
⚫ {{Talk header}}
{{afd-merged-from|Electronic cigarettes in Australia|Electronic cigarettes in Australia|25 March 2019}}
{{Copied|from=Electronic cigarette|to=Regulation of electronic cigarettes}} {{Copied|from=Electronic cigarette|to=Regulation of electronic cigarettes}}
{{Copied|from=Regulation of electronic cigarettes|to=Electronic cigarette}} {{Copied|from=Regulation of electronic cigarettes|to=Electronic cigarette}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=List|
⚫ {{talk header}}
{{WikiProject Medicine |importance=Low}}
{{Ecig sanctions}}
{{WikiProject Health and fitness |importance=Low}}
{{WPBannerShell|1=
{{WikiProject Medicine |class=List |importance=Low}} {{WikiProject Pharmacology |importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Health and fitness |class=List |importance=Low}} {{WikiProject Law|importance=mid}}
{{WikiProject Pharmacology |class=List |importance=Mid}} {{WikiProject Lists |class=List |importance=Low}}
}} }}
{{User:MiszaBot/config {{User:MiszaBot/config
Line 12: Line 14:
|maxarchivesize = 250K |maxarchivesize = 250K
|counter = 1 |counter = 1
|minthreadsleft = 100 |minthreadsleft = 5
|algo = old(140d) |algo = old(180d)
|archive = Talk:Regulation of electronic cigarettes/Archive %(counter)d |archive = Talk:Regulation of electronic cigarettes/Archive %(counter)d
}} }}
{{Archives |bot=MiszaBot I |age=140 |units=days}}


== Multiple ban claims incorrect ==
== Arbitration committee discussion ==
This article makes multiple factually incorrect claims.


- It states that E-Cigarettes are banned in Bahrain, citing a Telegraph article about a Fatwa. But Fatwas are not legally binding (as is correctly stated in the Regulation section of Malaysia), and indeed there seem to be Vape Shops in Bahrain: https://www.vapeinbahrain.com
<small><em>(Notice cross posted to: ], ], ], ], ], ] & ]. Please focus any discussion on the ]</em></small><p>
There is an ] pending related to this family of topics. ] (]) 11:36, 31 July 2015 (UTC)


-It states that nicotine-containing e-cigarettes have been banned in Japan since 2010, which is simply untrue. The corresponding source also does not state anything of the sort, quite the contrary.
== Update Reference ==


-It states that vaping is legal in the Philippines, when Duterte has already announced a complete ban.
Hi.
I couldn't figure out how to edit a reference.
In the sentence "In Norway the sale and use of electronic cigarettes are legal, but nicotine cartridges can only be imported from other EEA member states (e.g. the UK) for private use.", the second link (27) doesn't work anymore.
The new link can be found at the bottom of this side: http://www.legemiddelverket.no/Import_og_salg/Import-og-grossistvirksomhet/Elektroniske_sigaretter/Sider/default.aspx
The new document link is: http://www.legemiddelverket.no/Import_og_salg/Import-og-grossistvirksomhet/Elektroniske_sigaretter/Documents/regulering-av-elektroniske-sigaretter-i-norge-notat-6-12-11.pdf
Please update the article.
⚫ Thanks <small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 21:38, 9 August 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:I updated the . ] (]) 22:04, 9 August 2015 (UTC)


- On the European map it lists Finland, Norway and Sweden as having a complete ban on the sale of nicotine-carrying liquids. This is also incorrect.
== Archiving ==


These are just a couple mistakes I have found as I scanned this article for my own research. There might be a lot more.
The archiving of this page has been far too sudden. Blanking the page is not normal on WP. Please ask on the talk page before doing this again, QG. Clearing out the page just encourages people to raise the same issues again and again. ] (]) 03:34, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
⚫ <small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 11:37, 12 December 2019 (UTC)</small>


I completely agree that the facts are wrong ] (]) 10:32, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
== Canada references ==


== Policy evaluation studies section ==
http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/rowan-warr-hunter-e-cigarettes-freedom-to-vape


{{ping|QuackGuru}}, regarding of the "Policy evaluation studies" section, I'm afraid I'm not following your reasoning. Could you explain what makes this content off-topic? -- ] (]) 18:31, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
The interpretation of the Canadian legal status of nicotine containing liquids reflected in this article is disputed. There have been no prosecutions, though the sale of nicotine containing liquids is widespread and open in retail and online locations. I'm digging for more substantial sources, but essentially, there is an exemption for nicotine for human inhalation use in amounts less than 4 mg per dose. ] (]) 18:54, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
:The . The content is about how taxes effect the use of electronic cigarettes and how restrictions effect prenatal smoking. That's about usage rather than specific facts about regulation.

:See "Studies that examine the impact...". See "Along the same line, another study found that e-cigarette...". See "Regarding indoor vaping regulations, one study found that it increased prenatal smoking by...". The text even states they are studies. Studies or primary sources are unreliable. ] (]) 14:49, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
What used to be Schedule F of the regulations is now:
::Studies that measure the impact of taxes on usage are incredibly relevant to the regulation of electronic cigarettes, because they are measuring what the effects of different policy choices are. While secondary sources would be preferred, primary sources for economic questions as long as they are characterized accurately, which it seems they are. I have restored this section. -- ] (]) 05:06, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/dhp-mps/alt_formats/pdf/prodpharma/pdl-ord/pdl_list_fin_ord-eng.pdf

see page 23 for nicotine. ] (]) 19:03, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
:It only mentions the standard types of ] like chewing-gum & inhalers. If it covered e-cigs I'm sure it would spell that out, & this would have been covered in other tertiary sources. ] (]) 19:28, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

::That's the point. No other references to nicotine in the act or its regulations. The list provided designates nicotine as a prescription drug "except: ... (d) in a form to be administered orally by means of an inhalation device delivering 4 milligrams or less of nicotine per dosage unit;". Perhaps identify the dispute: "Though Health Canada asserts that nicotine-containing e-fluid is illegal to sell, some vendors assert that the product is exempted by the regulations<ref>{{cite web|last1=Warr-Hunter|first1=Rowan|title=E-cigarettes — Freedom to vape|url=http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/rowan-warr-hunter-e-cigarettes-freedom-to-vape|website=National Post|publisher=National Post|accessdate=18 September 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=E-cigarette seller fights Health Canada order to stop|url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/e-cigarette-seller-fights-health-canada-order-to-stop-1.2488728|website=CBC News|publisher=CBC|accessdate=18 September 2015}}</ref>." ] (]) 20:53, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
{{Reflist}}
:::Those refs date to early 2014; they don't seem to have got far in the legal action. ] (]) 03:46, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
::::@Johnbod in response to the pdf. It says "inhalation device", it does not describe what kind of device. A e-cigarette is an inhalation device, it produces vapor for inhalation. One of the definitions of inhalation is "a preparation to be inhaled in the form of a vapor or spray".] 17:59, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
:::::I thought (and think) they meant the licensed "inhalator" NRT devices. But I suppose that's the issue. I can't really see that tank models have a "dosage unit". ] (]) 01:44, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

== new Zealand laws ==

the piece on New Zealand laws are utterly false, and the citation (citation 86) leads to a BBC article the refers only to UK laws with no reference to new zealand at all.
new zealand bans the sale of nicotine containing E-juice and nothing else, the vapes are legal in any and all form, and may be sold anywhere.
references to this are
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/67186317/E-cigarette-nicotine-ban-criticised
http://www.nzvapingalliance.co.nz/resources/
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11324232

i personally have no idea on how to edit an article, so hopefully someone can correct the article. <small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 09:45, 15 May 2016 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Table ==

The table that was recently added is too long to read which makes it more difficult to read the section. ] (]) 21:24, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

== Denmark ==

Text for Denmark is severely outdated, and should be rewritten (on the line of):
:Denmark follows the EU tobacco products directive: Max 10ml refill bottles, max 20mg/ml e-liquid, max 2ml tanks/cartridges. Legal age for purchase is 18. Smokefree laws do not apply. Vaping is prohibited in public transport, kindergartens and schools for youth below 18. No restrictions for non-nicotine e-liquids. E-liquids and vaporizer equipment are required to be notified with the Danish Safety Technology Authority via the EU-CEG system, before being allowed on the market, this goes for crossborder sales into Denmark as well.<ref name="ecigregler">{{cite web|url=http://e-cigaretregler.dk/en/|title=Necessary knowledge of electronic cigarettes|author=Danish Safety Technology Authority}}</ref>
--] 10:40, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
{{reflist}}

Latest revision as of 21:33, 25 October 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Regulation of electronic cigarettes article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 6 months 
Electronic cigarettes in Australia was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 25 March 2019 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Regulation of electronic cigarettes. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.
Text and/or other creative content from Electronic cigarette was copied or moved into Regulation of electronic cigarettes. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.
Text and/or other creative content from Regulation of electronic cigarettes was copied or moved into Electronic cigarette. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.
This article is rated List-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconMedicine Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconHealth and fitness Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Health and fitness, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of health and physical fitness related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Health and fitnessWikipedia:WikiProject Health and fitnessTemplate:WikiProject Health and fitnessHealth and fitness
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconPharmacology Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconLaw Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconLists Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Misplaced Pages. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Multiple ban claims incorrect

This article makes multiple factually incorrect claims.

- It states that E-Cigarettes are banned in Bahrain, citing a Telegraph article about a Fatwa. But Fatwas are not legally binding (as is correctly stated in the Regulation section of Malaysia), and indeed there seem to be Vape Shops in Bahrain: https://www.vapeinbahrain.com

-It states that nicotine-containing e-cigarettes have been banned in Japan since 2010, which is simply untrue. The corresponding source also does not state anything of the sort, quite the contrary.

-It states that vaping is legal in the Philippines, when Duterte has already announced a complete ban.

- On the European map it lists Finland, Norway and Sweden as having a complete ban on the sale of nicotine-carrying liquids. This is also incorrect.

These are just a couple mistakes I have found as I scanned this article for my own research. There might be a lot more. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.135.108.10 (talk) 11:37, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

I completely agree that the facts are wrong IffyMohammed (talk) 10:32, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Policy evaluation studies section

@QuackGuru:, regarding this removal of the "Policy evaluation studies" section, I'm afraid I'm not following your reasoning. Could you explain what makes this content off-topic? -- Beland (talk) 18:31, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

The sources are unreliable and mostly primary studies. The content is about how taxes effect the use of electronic cigarettes and how restrictions effect prenatal smoking. That's about usage rather than specific facts about regulation.
See "Studies that examine the impact...". See "Along the same line, another study found that e-cigarette...". See "Regarding indoor vaping regulations, one study found that it increased prenatal smoking by...". The text even states they are studies. Studies or primary sources are unreliable. QuackGuru (talk) 14:49, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
Studies that measure the impact of taxes on usage are incredibly relevant to the regulation of electronic cigarettes, because they are measuring what the effects of different policy choices are. While secondary sources would be preferred, primary sources for economic questions as long as they are characterized accurately, which it seems they are. I have restored this section. -- Beland (talk) 05:06, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
Categories: