The suggested ban of vaping in public places and work places in Wales clearly indicates that the Welsh Assembly is failing to listen to the opinions of its electorate, ignoring extensive scientific evidence and failing to act for the greater good of the population of Wales.
Of course you would expect a political party called Vapers In Power to have that view, so don’t listen to us, listen to the organisations generally known to have some of the most active and vocal opinions in the ‘war against tobacco’.
There is no evidence that smoking e-cigarettes in enclosed spaces poses a significant risk to other people, and on the basis of available evidence, the RCP anticipates that electronic cigarettes and related products could actually generate significant falls in the prevalence of smoking in the UK, prevent many deaths and episodes of serious illness, and help to reduce the social inequalities in health that tobacco-smoking currently exacerbates. Royal College of Physicians (1)
Currently there is insufficient evidence to introduce a ban on the use of e-cigarettes in enclosed public spaces or workspaces. Cancer Research UK (2)
Banning the use of electronic cigarettes in public places should be an evidence-based decision. We urge Assembly Members and Ministers looking at this proposal to call on experts and academics to present the latest research. Action on Smoking and Health – Wales (3)
ASH does not support legislation to ban the use of electronic cigarettes in enclosed public spaces. While the evidence that secondhand smoke causes harm to bystanders is irrefutable there is little evidence that vapour causes similar harm. Electronic cigarettes have been shown to help people quit smoking and there is no evidence to currently suggest that they act as a gateway to smoking for young people in the UK. Action on Smoking and Health (4)
Vapers In Power have a simple and strong message on this. Laws should be enacted for the protection of the population only where an activity can be shown to cause harm to bystanders. The science so far published has, despite a great deal of statistical subterfuge and spin, failed to make a case for a ban on this basis. (5,6).
In contrast there is a growing body of evidence that vaping is having a hugely positive effect on the smoking prevalence within the UK (7). This simple fact removes any satisfactory argument based on the precautionary principle.
Without a sound scientific basis the decision as to whether vaping should be permitted on any given premises should be left at the discretion of the owner of the property. Anything else is a vast distortion of what good governance should be about.