The European Commission has delayed action on tobacco and nicotine, but countries say it should consider a ban on flavored vapes.

Denmark is leading a charge for a European clampdown on vapes in a move the country says will protect children and young people from harm.

A total of 12 EU health ministers, led by Denmark’s Sophie Løhde, have backed a paper calling on the European Commission to propose new legislation, which could include banning flavored vapes and limiting nicotine content.

They also suggest that social media giants take “greater responsibility” for marketing and sales of vapes on their platforms.

The pressure on the Commission to act on vapes comes after the EU executive delayed its planned reform of tobacco and nicotine rules earlier this year.

The setback triggered a backlash from Belgium’s Health Minister Frank Vandenbroucke, who told the European Parliament’s health committee in January that industry lobbying was to blame for the Commission’s inaction.

  • Digitalprimate@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    25 days ago

    This bullshit just infuriations me. Nearly every country ALREADY HAS LAWS that prevent minors from buying vapes (and cigarettes, etc.) Just enforce the damn rules rather than turn two pack a day people back to two pack a day people and then have to pay for their cancer treatment.

    Jesus these fucks are dumb.

    • eatthecake@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      25 days ago

      They want people to smoke, that’s the only explanation. They make money from taxing it and save money when people die early.

    • JCreazy@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      25 days ago

      Enforcement costs money and time which it seems nobody has. A complete ban would be cheaper and easier. I don’t even know how you could enforce it. If someone buys a vape that is legal age and gives it to a kid, you can’t stop that. I don’t have an opinion either way as I quit smoking years ago.

      • RelativeArea0@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        25 days ago

        I agree with what you’ve said about enforcement and also as an ex smoker 🤝

        However, I don’t agree with total ban of stinkies and vapes, etc(as much as i also would like to) because it will cause a fuck ton of new problems, just look at US alcohol prohibition during 1920s and wow, that was wild (feel free to watch oversimplified video about it, i find it as a good reference material)

        • JCreazy@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          24 days ago

          Yes, I know about prohibition. It always gets brought up. It would be interesting to see how a ban on vapes/cigs today plays out how prohibition did back then. What lengths would people go to to get their nicotine fix? Or would most people just think it’s not worth the time and give it up? Would growing your own tobacco for personal use but a ban of commercial sale mean that only the very dedicated would smoke? I lot of interesting things to consider and thank about.

          • Jojo, Lady of the West@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            23 days ago

            I think a large and important difference is the ease of back-room manufacturer. Anyone with a boiler can can make some alcohol, but vapes are rather more complicated, no? Cigarettes and other straight up smoking products would still be around, though.

  • Norgur@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    25 days ago

    If we don’t enforce the already existing rules to a meaningful degree… what’s stopping people from ignoring the new ones?

  • dubyakay@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    22 days ago

    Tax that shit more. Higher taxation is proven to cause a decline in consumption rate. Along with the added benefit of increasing revenue that can be used for enforcement, prevention, rehabilitation and care.