The Vape Bill does not protect the youth
By Senator Pia S. Cayetano
Sponsor, Sin Tax Reform Law of 2020 (RA 11467)
I urge the proponents of the Vape Bill to stop claiming that their measure is beneficial to the youth. That’s a blatant lie.
The proponents say that their bill “[solidifies] the provisions of RA 11467 and Executive Order 106” by strengthening the flavor ban on e-cigarettes. If that was the case, then they should have just kept the provision of the Sin Tax Law – which limits vape flavors to plain tobacco and plain menthol only.
Instead, they provided wording that allows hundreds and thousands of flavors to flood the market. How will they even regulate all these flavors? In the US, 55,000 flavors were rejected by the US FDA for failing to provide evidence that they protect public health. Kaya ba natin gawin yun dito? Eh tinanggal pa nga nila sa bill nila ang FDA bilang regulatory body sa e-cigarettes at flavors.
The youth would have been better protected if we retained the access to these harmful products at 21 years old but instead, they made it easier for the youth to access the same. The Sin Tax Reform Law of 2020 placed this at 21 years old, but the Vape Bill lowered it to 18 years old, so now even senior high school students can buy and use vapes. So where’s the ‘protection’ for the youth that the Vape Bill proponents claim? #
Leave a Reply