Anti-Smoking Activists Want To Ban E-Cig Flavors Because Think Of The Children


The full-on assault on e-cigarettes from people supposedly motivated by public health has been nothing short of remarkable. That vaping is a much more healthy alternative to smoking, likely to improve more lives than the untold billions of public dollars spent on anti-smoking campaigns, is apparently lost on these people.

If it looks like smoking, than it must be banned. That’s the mantra which seems to inform their myopia.

Case in point, the folks in Valley City are considering new restrictions on e-cigarettes. They want to ban sales to minors and require that e-cigarette retailers get a local license (that last seems a little absurd). And, oh yeah, anti-smoking activists (funded by your tax dollars) would also like to ban e-cigarette flavors.

For the children:

Members of the City County Board of Health say they want an ordinance that would not allow flavored e-cigarettes, in liquid nicotine or any other form, to be sold to anyone in Valley City.

Tobacco prevention coordinator Vicki Roseneau says “flavors are aimed at enticing youth to buy” e-cigarettes.

Right. Because adults don’t enjoy flavors.

I’d point out that nobody makes this argument against alcohol, which comes in a vast array of flavors, but I don’t want to give these busybodies any ideas.

People who have a grip on reality – and, admittedly, this doesn’t include many engaged in the anti-tobacco crusades – understand that a certain number of Americans enjoy nicotine as a vice.¬†And these people will continue to enjoy that perfectly legal vice to matter what the government does.

So why can’t we just be happy that there now exists a delivery system for that nicotine which is inherently healthier than smoking or chewing tobacco?

It almost seems as though these zealots are motivated less by a true desire for public health than just a simple and unquenchable appetite for control.