Health Committee on Feb. 14th, 2018

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Again, I don't know if you know where I'm going. I'm not suggesting that it's more or less safe. I think it's generally accepted, at least with the state of knowledge now, that vaping is a significantly safer ingestion method of nicotine. I have a very sincere and objective desire to find out what the chemicals are. That's all I'm asking.

[Marc Kealey]

Is vegetable glycerin a chemical?

[Boris Giller]

Yes, it is.

Vegetable glycerin is a chemical, and propylene glycol is. Pharmaceutical grade nicotine is the same that goes into gums, patches, and inhalers. Then there are flavourings. Flavouring is not a single ingredient, but rather a category. Those are food flavourings and there could be a plethora. Somebody could put one strawberry flavour extract to produce the desired effect and somebody else could put a mixture of 12. It really varies.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Thanks.

In terms of flavours, you've probably sat through the last testimony. I think we're trying to get a handle on what the best way is to regulate flavours. If I understand correctly, this act schedules the flavours. There's some concern that by scheduling a limited number of flavours, we'll be chasing the industry as it keeps coming up with more and more flavours, then having to add them or not.

In terms of giving guidance to your industy so that you know what you can produce and what you can't, do you have any comment or thoughts on what would be an effective regulatory approach to flavouring, to make sure we're not marketing to children?

[Boris Giller]

Absolutely, and I believe that the ministry has struck a perfect balance in this piece of regulation, banning the marketing of flavours while leaving the ingredients alone. We think that names like bubble gum and cotton candy should not be allowed. Even licorice should be renamed something else, like anise.

While flavours may be attractive to children, they're necessary for adult smokers in order to transition. One hundred per cent of my customers are adults and the vast majority of them prefer flavours. The experience needs to be incrementally more pleasant and more convenient than smoking in order for ex-smokers to gravitate towards it as an alternative to smoking.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

I want to get your views on the promotion advertising. You probably heard this dichotomy: quite tight restrictions on advertising and promotion in places frequented by children but not in places that adults frequent. I'm going to use the example of the bar because we're talking about adults—18-year-olds and 19-year-olds and 20-year-olds populate our bars and nightclubs. Do you agree with the tenor of this committee that we should not be allowing lifestyle-oriented promotion and advertising directed at people in bars? This tries to get people who don't smoke to try ingesting nicotine through vaping, as opposed to using vaping for a smoking cessation product.

[Boris Giller]

Absolutely. Neither children nor non-smokers should be targeted by advertising. Lifestyle advertising should be restricted. The locations at which the ads are placed should be taken into account. If it's a billboard, it should have to be located at a minimum distance from schools.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

Dr. Eyolfson, you're up.

[Doug Eyolfson, Liberal, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Edwards, you made a comment that I thought was very good. You said that in regard to what's safe we should be asking doctors rather than lawyers. Being a doctor, I might be a little biased, but on that I would agree. First of all, you said—and I've heard this said before—that vaping is 95% less harmful than smoking. Where does that number come from? Does it come from a medical journal? Does it come from any peer-reviewed scientific research?

[Sherwin Edwards]

From what I understand, it's peer-reviewed scientific research done in 2016 by the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada, and they state that vaping is likely at least 95% less harmful or toxic than smoking a cigarette. Recently, on February 6, Public Health England did a review on the success and progress of their liberal, open-minded approach to vaping and harm reduction in their country.

[Doug Eyolfson, Liberal, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

If you could provide those references for us, that would be useful.

You talked about how this shouldn't be in the same bill as smoking. You said it's nothing like smoking and we should take vaping completely out of this legislation and put it somewhere else. The Canadian Medical Association Journal did two separate studies. One finds that among young people who try it for the first time the rate of vaping is slightly higher than the rate for cigarette smoking. Another one, from October 2017, is a large study showing that those who start vaping are significantly more likely to move on to smoking tobacco. In other words, young people are using it at the same or higher rates than tobacco, and they're much more likely to go to tobacco after they start vaping. How does this fit with your assertion that vaping has no part in this legislation?

[Sherwin Edwards]

First of all, vaping has not been legislated yet in Canada. The U.K. has 10 years on us, and we should be looking to the United Kingdom and their program template, which has proven to be successful. You stated your report was from October 2016, if I'm not mistaken.

[Doug Eyolfson, Liberal, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

It was from 2017.

[Sherwin Edwards]

Well, we just had a new review by Public Health England in a country that has actually applied the vaping regulations in a liberal and open-minded approach, and the evidence does not support the concern that e-cigarettes are a gateway to smoking among young people.

[Doug Eyolfson, Liberal, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

I understand that, but since we're drafting laws in Canada, should we not be relying on the evidence that is collected in Canada?

[Boris Giller]

If I may, you might be referring to a study by the author David Hammond, from the University of Waterloo.

[Doug Eyolfson, Liberal, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

Yes.

[Boris Giller]

Contrary to the headlines that were published, his own conclusion is that there is a correlation but not a causation. They cannot prove a causation. His leading hypothesis is that a kid who tries stuff, tries stuff. All the data to date shows a displacement of smoking by vaping, rather than a gateway effect.

The largest longitudinal study of 60,000 participants in England has shown a reverse effect. It completely dispelled that myth.

[Doug Eyolfson, Liberal, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

All right, thank you.

Again, would there not be confounding factors between two the countries? They are not the same society at all. Are there not ideologically confounding variables?

[Boris Giller]

There are similarities. We do have additional information from the University of Victoria supporting that hypothesis, and I would be happy to follow up with a written submission to that effect.

[Marc Kealey]

There are public health clinicians, like yourself, who support the theory that vaping is orders of magnitude safer. They may not put a percentage to it but say it's orders of magnitude safer.

[Doug Eyolfson, Liberal, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

All right, thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

The time's up.

Now team, we have a few minutes. We have about 12 or 13 minutes left.

I have one very short piece of committee business. Do you want to end now or do you want to ask another quick round of, say, three-minute questions?

[John Oliver, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

We can end now.

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.