Public authorities in Scotland ban e-cigarettes in public buildings

This escalation of banning e-cigarettes does look odd, doesn't it? They are even banned in some outdoor areas around public buildings.

The fear seems to be as expressed by a Glasgow health board spokesperson: 

NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde said: “The use of e-cigarettes in NHS grounds perpetuates the idea smoking is acceptable in public areas.”

But this approach seems very unscientific. E-cigarette use is not smoking. People are using e-cigarettes instead of smoking, either on a selective basis or completely. After being told more times than most of us have had hot dinners that there is nothing better for your health than stopping smoking, the device people are turning to in their thousands is now facing significant restrictions, and EU legislation still hovers over them.

The only thing that needs to be done is regulation. Tobacco is regulated, and all consumer products require some regulatory oversight to protect consumers. There is no call whatever for a ban.

Health authorities who ban e-cigarettes because they make users look like smokers should take a good hard look at themselves. Having derided tobacco companies for the alleged health records of smoking for over 30 years, it seems perverse to ban the use of a product that can eliminate the most hazardous elements of smoking, namely the absorption of tar and smoke. If smokers can use this product at less than the cost of smoking, they may not return to smoking.

Anti-smokers have little to be complacent about. Illicit tobacco is becoming more plentiful on our streets, and can remove any price advantage that the less harmful product has.

Scottish public authorities need to get a grip on themselves. They provide a valuable service but they are not (or should not be) empowered to pronounce what recreational products the public should find 'acceptable'; or to assert ownership of 'public areas'.

Netherlands and Scotland plough different furrows

A short Dutch report tells us that the smoking ban is a far more relaxed affair in Dutch bars, with ashtrays in over half of them (note, you can still get a drink in a non-smoking environment in the Netherlands if that's what you prefer).

In Scotland further bans are still being discussed. Sheila Duffy explains in her (comment-free) blog that ASH Scotland supports a public consultation on extending the smoking ban to private cars (smoking is already banned in work vehicles) – whereas the British Medical Association has called for an overall ban on smoking while driving.

It's unusual for ASH Scotland not to bid for the most extreme action going on smoking. Ms Duffy claims that household exposure is a more important problem ('likely to be a greater source of exposure for children'), but is 'not an area for legislation'. Does this mean that she takes issue with Dr Douglas Noble's conclusion (quoted here) that:

In cars, particle concentrations are 27 times higher than in a smoker’s home and 20 times higher than in a pub, in the days when you could smoke in public places.

Even if ASH Scotland has not advocated a total ban in cars, the idea will go before legislators. It's interesting to speculate whether, in responding to the public consultation it seeks, ASH Scotland would oppose a smoking ban in cars, or whether it would simply sit on the fence.

A report and summary of last year's study on smoking in cars by NHS Greater Glasgow (with a headline designed to sensationalise the issue) can be found here (same text here with comments). Also discussed here.

We won't know the legislative programme on smoking in Scotland until after the Scottish Parliament reconvenes in September. But it won't resemble the Dutch one.