Will e-cigarette advertising be allowed in Australia?
With the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) deciding not to place advertising restrictions on e-cigarettes, allowing them to be advertised across mainstream media, Miranda Ward looks at the situation in Australia.
At the end of last month, the FDA in the US introduced a handful of new rules it would enforce relating to e-cigarettes, notably deciding not to weigh in on advertising restriction, meaning that the e-cigarette industry, which currently is worth US$2 billion globally, will be able to continue to advertise on TV, radio, in print and on billboards as well as things like NASCAR sponsorships. But in Australia, the products are still banned from advertising on mainstream media.
Electronic, or e-cigarettes, are battery powered devices which heat a liquid in them to produce a vapour, simulating smoke. Some contain nicotine, whilst others do not. Whilst they are designed to help people stop smoking experts are divided as to the health benefits of them.
Could that Liberty ad be accused of passing off as Heineken?
Is the e-cigarette just for past smokers who still have the crave, or do they anticipate targeting virgin lungs? It looks like the latter with that ad. If the TGA isn’t across something our lungs ingest (if that’s the word), then it really shouldn’t be marketed or sold in the first place. There’s enough hypocrisy with tobacco as it is. I don’t think I’d be happy with someone puffing away at one of these while I’m pitching woo in a restaurant.
surely the most important marketing challenge ahead of e-cig agencies is the naked truth: that everyone who smokes e-cigarettes looks like a total spanner. stick to lollipops, quitters of australia.
The biggest challenge will be keeping the product legal.
WA, NSW and QLD have all developed legislation to ban the sale of e-cigs. One tobacconist in QLD was told by health officials recently to remove a non nicotine e-cig from sale. When asked why, she was told they could not be sold because they resembled a tobacco product.
Unfortunately there is much misinformation about e-cigarettes circulating in the media. Access to information such as evidence-based research is needed to support balanced public debate about electronic cigarettes and educate smokers about alternatives.
Recent studies such as this from the journal, Addiction ( http://www.addictionjournal.or.....ess-rates- ) states from a survey of approx 6000 people that those attempting to quit smoking without professional help are approximately 60% more likely to report succeeding if they use e-cigarettes than if they use willpower alone or over-the-counter nicotine replacement therapies.
Last month, 53 public health specialists wrote to the World Health Organisation about alternatives to smoking, such as e-cigarettes as a path to harm reduction. These public health specialists, many of whom are Australian, are appealing to WHO to adopt a positive and rational approach to products that provide very low-risk alternatives to smoking. The letter calls on WHO to recognise this approach, as tobacco harm reduction, and as it being an important part of the solution to smoking and great promise for public health, and not to see it as part of the problem. For those who are interested you can read the letter here http://nicotinepolicy.net/docu.....etChan.pdf
In Australia it will take years and millions of dollars for the TGA to agree for e-cigs to be sold as smoking cessation devices. The fact that governments are trying to ban them even though, as you say Simone, there is plenty of evidence to show that they can have a positive impact of public health.
It is interesting to note 2 of the 5 Australian signatories on the letter you mention are affiliated with the Cancer Council which is calling for the banning of these devices!
Let’s be realistic here. The future of the electronic cigarette industry will NOT be shaped by any concern for public health.
Tobacco taxes generate over $5 billion in government revenue every year. The smoking cessation drug industry is a multi-billion dollar behemoth.
Regulate e-cigs as tobacco products and Big Government win$ another source of tax revenue.
Regulate them as medicinal products and Big Pharma win$ an industry monopoly – the compliance costs of therapeutic regulation will force most e-cigarette businesses out of the market.
Either type of regulation will make e-cigarettes more expensive and difficult to obtain. Meaning many converted smokers will go back to smoking or not try to make the switch to a less harmful alternative in the first place.
Um…I heard an ad for an e cigarette last night..Kiss 1065 at 19.25 hrs..I think the horse may already have bolted..
why would a non nicotine/tar based product be illegal?
Is “smoking” the issue, or is it a health issue? I thought we were all encouraged (read taxed and marginalised into oblivion) to give up for our health and to save the goverment billions of health $$.
If these are no more unhealthy than driving a car, drinking a coke or eating a pie, why is there an issue?
Looks like a great opportunity for the advertising industry to rebuild, look out major sporting events, the gamblers are out… e-cigarettes are the future sponsors 🙂
If the govt is worried about our health, why don’t they ban cigarettes and alcohol as well? Oh, right, profit and tax…
….and who can spot the posts from the many PR people who are paid by the tobacco lobby to muddy the anti smoking waters?