Category: Flavors

Foundation to Probe Menthol Bans and Social Justice

Photo: Viachaslau Bondarau | Dreamstime.com
The Foundation for a Smoke-Free World has begun a series of surveys analyzing the behaviors of adult smokers in several countries before and after the EU menthol cigarette ban that came into force on May 20, 2020.
While there is solid science to suggest that a ban of menthol combustible cigarettes would ultimately improve public health, the foundation says it is crucial that legislation does not put already vulnerable communities in even greater danger.
The organization hopes that the findings from its survey will help inform other jurisdictions considering similar measures.
Last November, Massachusetts became the first U.S. state to ban the sale of menthol cigarettes. And in February of this year, the House of Representatives approved a bill to eliminate the sale of these cigarettes at the federal level.
Yet many researchers point out that the use of menthol cigarettes is disproportionately high among U.S. ethnic minority groups, especially African Americans. Democratic Congresswoman Yvette Clarke noted that nationwide menthol bans would have little effect on white smokers, while “black smokers could face even more sweeping harassment from law enforcement if the hint of menthol smoke can justify a stop.”
June 9, 2020
BAT Slammed for ‘Tattling’ on JTI Menthol Substitutes

Photo: simisi1 from Pixabay
Bob Blackman, chairman of the U.K. All Party Parliamentary Group on Smoking and Health, has criticized British American Tobacco (BAT) for leaking information about products made by Japan Tobacco International (JTI) following the ban on menthol cigarettes sold in the European Union, reports I News.
Blackman said he received a letter from BAT that claimed it had data showing that a new range of JTI cigarettes still contained menthol. “As I responded, their offer is completely inappropriate; their public duty is to share the evidence with the appropriate authorities without delay,” said Blackman.
A spokesman for BAT said the group had analyzed several JTI products and found them to contain menthol characteristics.
While admitting its new cigarettes contain menthol, JTI insisted they do not break the new laws.
“Some JTI cigarettes and rolling tobacco sold in the U.K. do still contain very low levels of menthol,” a spokesman for JTI said. “This is not prohibited under the law, provided that the use of such flavorings does not produce a clearly noticeable smell or taste other than one of tobacco—which they do not.”
Blackman said he had forwarded a copy of the letter to Public Health Minister Jo Churchill who responded that the issue was “being followed up” by her officials to investigate.
June 8, 2020
Tobacco Firms Accused of ‘Undermining’ EU Menthol Ban

Photo:Beverly Buckley from Pixabay
Ireland’s minister of health, Simon Harris, has urged the EU to crack down on tobacco industry actions that he believes are “undermining” the recently enacted ban on menthol cigarettes.
Across the EU, tobacco companies have been introducing products targeted at smokers who previously used menthol products.
Philip Morris International (PMI), for example, introduced Marlboro Bright, a brand that it described as a “menthol blend without methylation.” Japan Tobacco International (JTI) launched Silk Cut Choice Green.
JTI and Philip Morris both advertised their new brands to Irish retailers as replacements or substitutes for their old menthol cigarettes.
PMI believes Marlboro Bright complies with the ban because the cigarette doesn’t taste of menthol when smoked. It also criticized any Irish retailers that are still illegally selling its old menthol Marlboro Green brand.
Anti-smoking campaigners in Britain recently lambasted JTI for distributing information to retailers on how to “navigate” the ban in a publication titled “Making a Mint.”
Rival tobacco companies that have chosen not to introduce substitutes for menthol cigarettes also criticized the moves by JTI and PMI.
“We believe both the letter and spirit of the law is clear, and as such we are not launching any cigarette brands or accessories with menthol-type properties,” said Simon Carroll, the Ireland country manager for British American Tobacco, whose subsidiary there is PJ Carroll.

The menthol market was estimated to represent up to 18 percent, or about €252 million ($282.3 million), of the Irish tobacco market before the introduction of the EU ban on May 20.

June 3, 2020
Massachusetts Flavor Ban Takes Effect

Photo: Tobacco Reporter archive
The sale of flavored tobacco products, including menthol cigarettes, has become illegal in Massachusetts as of today.
Massachusetts became the first state to approve such a ban when Governor Charlie Baker signed the bill in November.
The law applies to the sale of all flavored tobacco products in Massachusetts retail stores and online.
Cigar bars, hookah lounges and other licensed venues can continue selling flavored tobacco as long as these products are consumed on-site.
Massachusetts’ decision to extend the ban to menthol flavors has been contentious in part because studies have shown menthol cigarettes are consumed disproportionately by minorities, which activists have warned could lead to disproportionate police enforcement in the black community.
June 1, 2020
FOREST Worries About Timing of Menthol Ban

Simon Clark, speaking at the 2019 TABEXPO conference in Amsterdam
Photo: Taco Tuinstra
Simon Clark, director of the smokers’ group Forest, says the upcoming ban on menthol cigarettes in the EU and the U.K. will hit consumers at the worst possible time.
“The Covid-19 pandemic is having a huge impact on people’s daily lives,” he said. “This is not the moment to prohibit a product many smokers enjoy and take comfort from. Given the current crisis, and the disruption and anxiety it is causing, the ban is going to hit consumers at the worst possible time.”
From May 20, 2020, it will be an offense for manufacturers to produce menthol cigarettes and for retailers to sell menthol cigarettes in the U.K. and throughout the European Union.
The ban also applies to hand-rolling tobacco with mentholated filters or papers if they are supplied together in the same product.
Clark worries that the menthol ban will catch many smokers unprepared. “We believe that a significant number of smokers are unaware of the forthcoming ban,” he said. “They will be shocked when they find that their favorite brands are no longer available via legitimate retailers. The government is understandably preoccupied with more serious issues, but imposing prohibition on so many consumers without a proper awareness campaign is inexcusable.”
May 5, 2020
Study: Removal of Juul Flavors Had Little Effect on Overall Sales

Photo: Juul
A recent study published by the American Cancer Society (ACS) in the American Journal of Public Health revealed that Juul’s removal of its flavored vapor products from retail stores in October 2018 had “little to no long-term effect on overall sales, with users quickly switching to other flavors or different brands that were still selling the ‘sweet’ flavors.”
The products that Juul pulled from stores in 2018 were e-cigarettes flavored as mango, fruit medley, cucumber and creme brulee.
The study used retail sales data from Nielsen. “Data from this ACS study also show how dramatically the introduction of Juul affected patterns of youth e-cigarette use and led to the highest levels of youth tobacco use in nearly 20 years,” said Robin Koval, president and CEO of Truth Initiative.
“Until November 2017, tobacco was still the most preferred e-cigarette flavor. The introduction of flavored, high nicotine, highly addictive products produced a huge growth in youth usage and consumption of flavored products.”
After Juul discontinued selling its flavored products in retail stores, sales of menthol-flavored/mint-flavored products doubled, with the tobacco-flavored products also experiencing a significant spike in popularity.
“The current national e-cigarette flavor guidance, adopted in January 2020, includes a large and dangerous loophole that keeps menthol and other youth-appealing e-cigarette flavors on the market,” Koval added. “It clearly favors the very industry that has ensnared a new generation to become tobacco users, the highest number in nearly 20 years.”
April 17, 2020
A Pointless Exercise

The EU’s upcoming ban on menthol cigarettes serves no purpose.
By George Gay
According to Hannah Devlin, science correspondent of The Guardian, astronomers are to sweep the entire sky for signs of extraterrestrial life for the first time, using 28 giant radio telescopes in an unprecedented hunt for alien civilizations (Feb. 15, 2020, page 3). Toward the end of her piece, Devlin quotes the theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking as having warned against attempting alien contact, suggesting the outcome for humans would not necessarily be good. But she quotes, too, Andrew Siemion, the director of the Berkeley Seti center, as saying that he thought such contact should be attempted, and adding that, “I think without a doubt, we would.”
I think both comments are right up to a point. It is unarguable that the outcome of such contact would not necessarily be good for humans, but history has taught us that, whatever the risk, scientists somewhere would not hold back from making the attempt. Scientific knowledge is no bar to stupidity.
I cannot think in terms of light years, so I find it impossible to imagine making contact with life forms in other galaxies. But I do find it instructive, often in what turns out to be a cautionary way, to consider what extraterrestrials might make of us earthlings if, because of their super-advanced technology, they could view us in real time through a telescope. What might they say to one another, I wonder? “Hey, come and look at these jerks! Their environment is going down the toilet, and what are they doing? They’re worrying about menthol cigarettes! These are supposed to be intelligent beings! Let’s not go there.”
I think that the EU is a great experiment in international cooperation, and I am sad—and if I were younger I would be angry—that the U.K. is leaving it, but ridiculous legislation such as its ban on the production and sale of menthol cigarettes sometimes makes it difficult for people such as me to defend the institution against its detractors. In the great scheme of things, what is the point of banning menthol cigarettes?

Advertisement
Background
Well, before I attempt to answer that question, a couple of notes about what the ban entails and how it came about. The production and sale of menthol cigarettes and cigarettes with capsule-containing filters are to be banned within the EU from May 20, 2020, as is the sale of roll-your-own (RYO) tobaccos sold with mentholated filter tips and/or papers. However, RYO tobacco and “accessories,” such as mentholated filter tips and papers, may all be sold separately.
This regulation has been a long time coming. Its origins go back to a December 2012 proposal by the European Commission to update the EU’s Tobacco Products Directive (TPD) and, a year later, to the EU Parliament’s support for stiffening the rules against tobacco and related products, and, de facto, against committed tobacco users. Early in 2014, the TPD2 was approved by the Parliament and adopted by the EU Council; and it entered into force in May of that year. Aspects of TPD2 were challenged, but it was declared valid by the European Court of Justice in May 2016. Most of the provisions of TPD2, including a ban on the sale of cigarettes with characterizing flavors except menthol, came into effect in May 2017, following a year’s sell-through period. There is no sell-through period in respect of menthol cigarettes.
Now, let’s return to the question above: what is the point of the ban? Well, according to some commentators, it is aimed at reducing smoking; but this must be hokum. Trying to reduce smoking by banning the sale of menthol cigarettes is like trying to reduce alcohol consumption by banning the sale of wine with characterizing flavors other than grape—such as peach wine.
Meanwhile, the EU put forward as part of its justification for the ban what the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had concluded in 2013: that menthol cigarettes pose a public health risk above that seen with nonmenthol cigarettes. It also quoted the FDA as saying that menthol use is likely associated with increased smoking initiation by youth and young adults; that menthol in cigarettes is likely associated with greater addiction; and that menthol smokers are less likely to successfully quit smoking than their nonmenthol-smoking counterparts.
Of course, the EU did not point out that the FDA was so concerned about menthol cigarettes in 2013 that it did nothing about them.
Reading the above, I was amused by the way the FDA, this self-styled bastion of rigorous science, apparently throws the word “likely” about as if it were confetti at a wedding. And I found myself not convinced by what seemed to me to be some muddled thinking. If the FDA thinks it’s necessary to say that it’s possible “to successfully [my emphasis] quit smoking,” rather than “to quit smoking,” I take it that it believes also that it is possible to unsuccessfully quit smoking. But whereas you might make an unsuccessful attempt to quit smoking, you cannot unsuccessfully quit smoking—not in this galaxy.
I have trouble also with the concept of “greater addiction.” The word “addiction” has become so malleable in the minds of a lot of people that it is now like mental chewing gum. No more than I can imagine a million light years, can I imagine how degrees of addiction would be measured in a scientifically rigorous manner.

Advertisement
Other risks
The EU aligns with the FDA also on smoking initiation among young people. One of the EU’s original justifications for the ban cited scientific studies that have shown that flavors such as menthol facilitate inhalation and may play a role in smoking initiation. I would have thought scientific studies that purport to show that something may be the case should be binned, but, having said that, I am ready to believe that it is possible that menthol does aid smoking uptake by the young. However, there are laws to prevent the sale of all types of cigarettes to these people, and it seems unbalanced to spoil the enjoyment only of adult smokers of menthol cigarettes because the authorities in the EU’s member states are failing to enforce laws that apply to all cigarettes, especially given the fragility of the scientific studies referred to above.
After all, the EU seems not to take issue with another product that has been linked with cancer and that young people consume—the younger ones at the behest of adults. In fact, according to the headline above another story that appeared in the same newspaper as Devlin’s report, the EU has been under attack for spending more than €200 million ($225.78 million) on the promotion of meat. As writer Daniel Boffey points out in his piece, “Scientists have provided evidence of a link between cancer and diets involving pork, beef and lamb products.”
And how those extraterrestrials must be laughing. Boffey points out too that the livestock sector is responsible for about 14.5 percent of human-derived greenhouse gas emissions. How can it be in the interests of young people for the EU to spend millions of euro promoting something that is linked with cancer and that is helping to flush the environment down the toilet? It is young people, not older adults, who are going to have to settle, at best, for a life squatting on the toilet’s event horizon.
But it isn’t really about the young, is it? How can we have the temerity to maintain, against all the evidence, that we want to protect young people? And I’m not talking only of governments here, I’m calling out ordinary people. One example. In my country, the U.K., voters have recently given a huge parliamentary majority to a party that, during the past 10 years, has overseen a big increase in child poverty and that will almost certainly cause more such poverty during the next five years—a party led by a person who many commentators say is unable or unwilling to account for how many children he has. Elsewhere, the abuse of children in the U.K. is accepted to the point that those in authority often look the other way, and it is even “celebrated” in one of our poetic forms, the limerick. I don’t know what became of the young chaplain from Kings, but some of the leaders of his church sit, by right, in our second chamber, the House of Lords; I presume, to provide us with spiritual guidance. This is way beyond irony.
I would not argue that the EU should concentrate on nothing but the environment. But it should certainly take off the table any nonessentials and put all available hands to the environment pump. The climate crisis is not a future event. It is already upon us.
By comparison, the menthol-cigarette ban is pure faff. I presume that it has been devised by people who haven’t moved against gooseberry and elderflower wine because most of them consume alcohol. They want to put a stop to a pleasure that they cannot understand. You can see this in the rules about roll-your-own tobacco. Allowing the sale of menthol papers and tips as separate items but not in conjunction with tobacco seems to be aimed at inconveniencing smokers. The EU’s bureaucrats should be put to work on critical projects. Announcing the European Green Deal is all well and good but, from what I read, making it work is going to be a huge challenge. The carbon scammers will already be jostling for position.

Advertisment
Accommodation
Inevitably, products have been appearing on the market aimed at helping menthol-cigarette smokers through the difficult time being ushered in by the May 20 ban. One, a menthol-infusion card that smokers can slip into a pack of regular cigarettes or fine-cut, is particularly clever, mimicking as it does the RYO accessory exemption, and thereby presumably staying well within the spirit and the letter of the law. Ironically, menthol smokers might end up preferring this system because they can tailor their preferred menthol level by adjusting the length of time they leave the cards in the pack. And of course, menthol smokers can help themselves after May 20 by putting regular cigarettes, together with some menthol crystals bought from their local pharmacies, into a sealed jar and leaving them there for a time based on their preferred menthol strength.
Despite the fact that I see the menthol cigarette ban as being unnecessary and unfair, discriminating against and collectively punishing a minority group of smokers, you have to accept that what is done is done and try to make the most of it. I suppose you have to hope that those menthol-cigarette smokers in the EU who do not want to take advantage of the new DIY methods react by quitting or switching to menthol vaping.
But it’s those extraterrestrials who will have the last laugh. They will hardly be able to contain themselves as more EU energy is expended on TPD3 while the environment tips over the event horizon to the strains of “Goodnight Irene.”
George Gay is Tobacco Reporter’s European editor, but his territory spans the globe. Based in London, George has covered the tobacco industry since 1982, initially for a U.K.-based publication and since 2004 for Tobacco Reporter. George’s understanding of industry issues, combined with his keen sense of observation and dry wit, have earned him a loyal following among Tobacco Reporter’s readers.

March 31, 2020
Taking Charge

To prevent a regulatory overreaction, the vapor industry needs to self-regulate its use and marketing of flavors.
The use of flavors in e-cigarettes is the hottest topic in this disruptive industry. Manufacturers’ use of flavorings in e-cigarettes has come under intense scrutiny and is a piece of ammunition often used by those looking to impose stringent regulation on the industry. As we enter 2020, it is perhaps an opportune time to look back at the tumultuous happenings of the past couple of years to examine where the flavor debate has taken us and what we might expect to see in the future.
The inclusion of flavors in e-cigarettes poses many challenges for the industry. Broadly speaking, these challenges fall into three categories: the toxicological impact, the effects on vaper behavior and nicotine delivery, and perhaps most importantly, the impact on population level use among different user cohorts. It is the latter that poses an existential threat to the e-cigarette industry and to its ability to provide a reduced harm alternative to deadly combustible cigarettes.
The potential toxicological impact of flavored e-cigarettes is a relatively simple issue to address. By utilizing robust product stewardship procedures assessing the inclusion of flavor ingredients, utilizing literature and computational approaches to ingredient assessment and utilizing rigorous testing of e-cigarette emissions, manufacturers can easily provide reassurance to consumers that their products are safe. The impact on vaper behavior is another relatively simple issue to consider, and we are now beginning to see scientific evidence showing that flavorings in e-cigarettes can cause differences in nicotine delivery, likely secondary to effects on human puffing behavior (topography).
The greatest challenge comes with assessing the population level impact of e‑cigarette flavors. It is often stated that flavored e-cigarettes are beneficial in assisting adult smokers who want to quit smoking. There is good evidence for this—for example, research carried out by the Centre for Substance Use Research in U.S. adult vapers concluded that those who have completely switched from smoking cigarettes to using e-cigarettes are increasingly likely to have initiated e-cigarette use with nontobacco flavors and to have transitioned from tobacco to nontobacco flavors over time.¹
More recent longitudinal data from the same group similarly demonstrated that the use of Juul “characterizing” flavors (e.g., mint and mango) was associated with greater odds of quitting combustible cigarette smoking. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) acknowledges the support that flavored e-cigarettes provide to smokers; in warning letters sent by the FDA in September 2018 to a number of U.S. manufacturers, the agency describes the “emerging evidence that some adults may potentially use certain flavored tobacco products to transition away from combusted tobacco use.”² Analyses of the FDA’s own Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health data have shown an association of nontobacco-flavored e-cigarette use with smoking cessation.³
The concern, though, is not this “off-ramp” for adults, a term used by the former FDA commissioner, Scott Gottlieb, to describe transitioning away from cigarette smoking, but the “on-ramp” for youth use of e-cigarettes and the potential for teens initiating nicotine use through flavored e-cigarettes.⁴ Action from the FDA on flavored e-cigarette use has arisen due to data from the U.S. National Youth Tobacco Survey (NYTS) showing an escalation of youth use of e-cigarettes, something the FDA terms an “epidemic.” While the use of such a term is perhaps an overstatement of the scale of the issue as recent analyses of NYTS data show very little frequent use of e-cigarettes by teens and particularly by those who have never used other nicotine-containing products,⁵ it is difficult to argue against the need for action against what is an escalating concern, regardless of its current scale.
The recent publication of further NYTS data fueled the crisis and has led to stronger calls for regulation of the industry and for the curbing of flavored e-cigarette availability. However, there are no easy solutions, perhaps evidenced by the ever-changing nature of the regulatory measures being discussed and recent data that suggests that even when some flavors are removed from store shelves and online marketplaces, switching to other flavors takes place. Even with the recent U.S. presidential intervention, we still do not have clear sight of what the future marketplace for flavored e-cigarettes will look like or as to what regulatory interventions will take place. And even in the absence of reactionary regulatory measures, the FDA will soon have greater discretion over which flavors are allowed to be sold in the U.S. through its premarket tobacco product application approval procedure.
Clearly, the industry needs to self-regulate since regulatory action, and especially knee-jerk regulatory action, often comes with unintended consequences that may do more harm than good. Many manufacturers have taken such proactive approaches, but there still remains on sale a vast number of e-cigarettes with flavor names and marketing materials that can be seen as targeted toward youth. If such marketing practices are not curbed by manufacturers themselves, regulators will perform this function for them—and with a potentially poor outcome.
It is worth noting that the impact of the U.S. flavor debate is being felt elsewhere. Some Canadian provinces, for example, have outlined their proposals to regulate flavored products. Importantly, we must remember that in the European Union, the Tobacco Products Directive (TPD2), a union-wide directive that regulates e-cigarettes, is due for revision soon. As in the U.S., it is expected that regulatory measures in TPD3 could involve restrictions on flavored e-cigarettes.
Undoubtedly, e-cigarettes have the potential to help reduce the global burden of death and disease caused by combustible tobacco smoking. Further, without doubt, they are a greater tool in helping smokers quit than licensed pharmaceutical products. However, improper regulatory measures may stifle the good that e-cigarettes are doing by limiting smokers’ access to the very products that are helping them quit. But perhaps with some sensible industry self-regulation, as a proactive measure to curb youth use and appease regulators, the widespread reductions in smoking prevalence caused by e-cigarettes will continue for the benefit of smokers and for global public health.

Ian Fearon
Ian Fearon is the director of whatIF? Consulting. He contributed this article on behalf of Broughton Nicotine Services .
January 17, 2020
Turkey Probes Tobacco Taste Changes After Plain Packaging
Saudi Arabia has told tobacco companies to disclose the ingredients in their products following consumer reports about perceived taste changes after the introduction of plain packaging earlier this year, reports The Saudi Gazette.
The Saudi Food and Drug Authority (SFDA) and the Ministry of Commerce are reportedly seeking details about tobacco materials such as leaf, rolling papers and filters. In addition, they want information about emission components and an explanation why flavors changed.
SFDA has sent samples from seven locally sold tobacco products to the Eurofins laboratory to determine whether there has been any change in the quality and flavor of tobacco used during the past two years.
SFDA and the ministry warned tobacco companies they would be punished if they are found to have manipulated their products.
December 13, 2019
Ban Signed into Law
Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker on Wednesday signed into law severe restrictions on the sale of flavored tobacco and vapor products, making his state the first to enact such stringent controls, reports National Public Radio.
Set to take effect on June 1, 2020, the law limits the sale of flavored nicotine vaping products, including menthol, “to licensed smoking bars where they may only be smoked on-site.”
The same restrictions apply to all other flavored tobacco products, including menthol cigarettes and flavored chewing tobacco.
The legislation also imposes a 75 percent excise tax on e-cigarettes.
“It’s pretty clear there isn’t going to be a federal policy on this anytime soon,” Baker said at the signing. “So in the absence of that, we had to act.”
Vapor businesses in Massachusetts have been protesting the restrictions since they were first proposed.
“The people that were applauding the governor the loudest were the criminals and gangs that already operated in the states illegal black market,” Jon Shaer, executive director of the New England Convenience Store & Energy Marketers Association, was quoted as saying.

November 28, 2019