San Francisco Becomes First Major U.S. City to Ban E-Cigarette Sales
San Francisco became the first major American city to ban e-cigarette sales following two unanimous votes by its Board of Supervisors.
This week, following a preliminary vote, the supervisors approved an ordinance barring the sale of e-cigarettes that have not been subject to a review by the Food and Drug Administration, NBC News reported. To date, the FDA has not ruled on any currently available e-cigarettes before they went to market, according to the The Washington Post.
The measure is expected to go into effect 30 days after being signed by San Francisco Mayor London Breed — who has publicly expressed support for the ban — and full implementation of the ordinance will take place six months after, CBS Sacramento reported. Retailers who violate the ordinance could face fines and jail time.
The ordinance, which does not prohibit people 21 and older from using e-cigarettes, was passed alongside a ban on the sale, manufacture and distribution of vaping devices on city property. That legislation specifically named e-cigarettes as being responsible for a "growing health epidemic of youth vaping."
The city had already passed a ban on the sale of e-cigarettes in places where traditional tobacco items were prohibited in 2014, NBC News reported.
"Middle school and high school students are becoming addicted to nicotine because of e-cigarettes, so we want to do everything we can to keep e-cigarettes out of the hands of young people until the FDA conducts the appropriate clinical trials and finds out how these should be marketed," the ordinance's co-author and main sponsor, city Supervisor Shamann Walton, told CBS MoneyWatch.
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the number of middle and high school students who use vapes jumped from 3.6 million to nearly 5 million between 2017 and 2018. Previously, teen smoking rates plummeted between 1997 and 2015, and until the rise of vapes, some experts had believed it would reach zero in a few decades.
Juul Labs, the leading e-cigarette manufacturer, is based in San Francisco and leases space from the city, but will not be forced out from that location by the ordinance. The company, which also bought an office building in the city on the same day as the supervisors' preliminary vote, criticized the ordinance by saying it will "create a thriving black market" for underage vape users and push adult users back to traditional cigarettes.
Though the aerosols used in e-cigarettes are believed to have fewer toxic chemicals, they do still contain highly addictive nicotine, which can hinder brain development and lead to diabetes, hypertension and other diseases. The total impact of e-cigarettes on health is still unknown, but recent studies have shown a link between their use and diseases like chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).
Last month, a federal judge sided with several public health groups in a lawsuit against the FDA, ruling that the agency must begin regulating e-cigarettes sooner than its planned 2021 target date. District Judge Paul Grimm of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland said that the FDA had shirked its legal responsibilities by delaying premarket reviews of e-cigarettes.
- 30+ Seizures After Vaping Have FDA Questioning a Link - EcoWatch ›
- Did the FDA Ban E-Cig Flavors? Here’s What to Know - EcoWatch ›
By Robin Scher
Beyond the questions surrounding the availability, effectiveness and safety of a vaccine, the COVID-19 pandemic has led us to question where our food is coming from and whether we will have enough.
- Can Urban Farms Prevent Hunger in 54 Million People in the U.S. ... ›
- New Report Finds Malnutrition World's Top Killer Amid Pandemic ... ›
- Oxfam Warns 12,000 Could Die Per Day From Hunger Due to ... ›
- Three Ways to Support a Healthy Food System During the COVID ... ›
- Trump USDA Resumes Effort to Cut Food Stamp Benefits - EcoWatch ›
- Pandemic Threatens Food Security for Many College Students ... ›
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
Tearing through the crowded streets of Philadelphia, an electric car and a gas-powered car sought to win a heated race. One that mimicked how cars are actually used. The cars had to stop at stoplights, wait for pedestrians to cross the street, and swerve in and out of the hundreds of horse-drawn buggies. That's right, horse-drawn buggies. Because this race took place in 1908. It wanted to settle once and for all which car was the superior urban vehicle. Although the gas-powered car was more powerful, the electric car was more versatile. As the cars passed over the finish line, the defeat was stunning. The 1908 Studebaker electric car won by 10 minutes. If in 1908, the electric car was clearly the better form of transportation, why don't we drive them now? Today, I'm going to answer that question by diving into the history of electric cars and what I discovered may surprise you.
As bitcoin's fortunes and prominence rise, so do concerns about its environmental impact.
- 15 Top Conservation Issues of 2021 Include Big Threats, Potential ... ›
- How Blockchain Could Boost Clean Energy - EcoWatch ›
By David Drake and Jeffrey York
The Research Brief is a short take about interesting academic work.
The Big Idea
People often point to plunging natural gas prices as the reason U.S. coal-fired power plants have been shutting down at a faster pace in recent years. However, new research shows two other forces had a much larger effect: federal regulation and a well-funded activist campaign that launched in 2011 with the goal of ending coal power.
- Major Milestone: More than 100,000 MW Worth of Coal-Fired Power ... ›
- Coal Will Not Bring Appalachia Back to Life, But Tech and ... ›
- Renewables Beat Coal in the U.S. for the First Time This April ... ›