I would like to take exception with what I thought was a most irresponsible article that was published on the front page of the Tuesday, March 5 edition of the Red Deer Advocate.
The article provided a very slanted and inaccurate portrayal of e-cigarettes. These devices were invented for the express purpose of providing a nicotine delivery system.
If you don’t believe me, look up U.S. patent number 7,832,410.
The fact that there are various candy-flavoured oils, both containing nicotine and nicotine-free, only serves to act as an enticement to the under-25 crowd to try it. It is the same strategy the tobacco companies are using with candy-flavoured cigars, which the federal government is now moving to ban.
Like candy-flavoured tobacco, these devices only serve as a gateway to smoking. There have been no clinical trials to show if they are in any way effective as a cessation product and therefore cannot be claimed as such.
What better way to glamorize this device than to have two attractive young women on the front page breaking the smoke free bylaw by using them.
They are in fact “smoking” under the smoke free bylaw 3345/2005 definitions section 2(s) by using them in a public place.
Using the term ‘vaping’ does not alter the fact that they are breaking the law and to say “they can be used anywhere” is patently false. The use of these devices has the same restrictions as any other smoking materials.
I would suggest that the editorial and journalistic staff could benefit by reading the local bylaw and doing a bit more in-depth research on the subject before rushing to press with a story.
I would like to ask the editorial staff to print a retraction of that article and correct these untrue statements.
Editor’s note: Greg Scott, Red Deer’s Community Services director, told the Advocate that e-cigarettes do not fall within the definition of smoking under the city’s smoke free bylaw.