Chicago Bans Vaping in Public; Senators Want It Banned at Award Ceremonies—for the Children

Today, as
anticipated, the Chicago City Council
approved an ordinance that adds e-cigarettes to the city’s
Clean Indoor Air Act, meaning that vaping will be prohibited
everywhere smoking is. The vote was 45 to 4, a resounding
endorsement of a scientifically groundless, emotion-driven policy
that is likely to accomplish exactly the opposite of what its
backers say they are trying to do (i.e., reduce tobacco-related
disease). Mayor Rahm Emanuel implausibly portrayed the vaping ban,
which will discourage smokers from switching to a far less
dangerous method of consuming nicotine, as a victory against Big
Tobacco. NJOY, a leading e-cigarette manufacturer, was a closer to
the mark:

This vote lacks any scientific basis and reflects a clear
misunderstanding on the part of the City Council of the serious
unintended consequences to public health that their actions will
cause. Make no mistake: This will only benefit Big Tobacco, and is
a step backward in the fight against the tobacco epidemic. Today,
Big Tobacco has no greater ally than supporters of initiatives like
this one. With as many as 43 million smokers remaining in the
United States and over 420,000 of them expected to die prematurely
in the coming year, it is paramount that we not confuse an
increasingly effective solution that gives smokers an alternative
to toxic and deadly combustible tobacco cigarettes with the problem
of tobacco cigarette smoking. History and science will judge
harshly those who abandon science, undermine the public health and
prolong the tobacco epidemic.

Unable to mustrer any evidence that e-cigarette vapor poses a
hazard to bystanders, the ban’s supporters say they are trying to
protect children who might confuse e-cigarettes with the real thing
and conclude that smoking must be cool again. In the same vein,
four Democratic senators yesterday sent a letter to NBC and the
Hollywood Foreign Press Association
complaining about celebrities with e-cigarettes at this year’s
Golden Globe Awards. Sens. Dick Durbin (Ill.), Richard Blumenthal
(Conn.), Sherrod Brown (Ohio), and Edward Markey (Mass.)
worry that vaping, which appeals to people precisely because it
is less hazardous and annoying than smoking, will somehow
rehabilitate the latter habit:

We are troubled that these images glamorize smoking and serve as
celebrity endorsements that could encourage young fans to begin
smoking traditional cigarettes…

E-cigarettes marketed to appeal to kids in candy and fruit
flavors, like bubblegum and strawberry, are readily available to
youth in shopping malls and online. These products risk addicting
children to nicotine, which could be a pathway to cigarettes and
other tobacco products.

I suppose vaping “could be” a gateway to smoking, in the sense
that it is not logically impossible. But there is
no evidence that anything like this is happening. Furthermore,
Durbin et al.’s insistence that “candy and fruit flavors” must be
aimed at children is belied by the choices of actual adult
consumers who prefer those flavors. If the senators were paying
attention, they would notice all the young women exhaling fruity
plumes of vapor, many of whom would otherwise be smoking. In terms
of health risks, they are much better off for having made this
switch. Why should the interests of these actual adults be
sacrificed in the name of hypothetical children?