What’s the fuss over e-cigarettes?

The ordinance regulating smoking in Davao City is on its 8th year already, and Dabawenyo smokers have long since become used to the rigors of the anti-smoking edict. On the whole, I am not unhappy with the situation, even though I am a smoker. I was brought up to observe courtesy, so ordinance or no, I respect the rights of non-smokers.

I also agree with that aspect of the city ordinance that shields minors from becoming exposed to this nasty habit. Basically, stores are prohibited from selling cigarettes if they are within a certain radius of any school.

Now, electronic cigarettes have come to the attention of the Davao City local government unit. The head of the Davao City Anti-Smoking Task Force, Dr. Domilyn Villareiz, has come out and declared that e-cigarettes are included in the ban on smoking. She has issued a warning “not to try us by smoking [e-cigarettes] in non-smoking areas because they are still included in the prohibition.”

Wow. Prohibition indeed. This smacks of absolutism, if you ask me. Can any government official categorically define a crime without due process? Can the executive branch act upon a law without the imprimatur of the legislative body?

Villareiz has characterized the use of e-cigarettes as the same as smoking regular cigarettes because of “the same arm and hand movement and the use of nicotine.” She’s kidding, right?? I can think of several common activities that make use of the same hand and arm movements that mimic smoking but don’t involve cigarettes!

And what about nicotine patches? By virtue of Villareiz’s statement, shouldn’t nicotine patches — which doctors legally prescribe to smokers who wish to quit — be banned as well?

e-cigarettes

When e-cigarettes are used, nicotine is ingested by the user, but there is no smoke. Only vapor, which is also the case when one breathes, by the way.

The problem here is the lack of a proper definition of smoking, as well as the lack of rationale-setting. What really is the purpose of the city ordinance in question? If it’s to protect non-smokers and minors, then I totally agree with it. But the way city officials are behaving, it seems to me that they’re trying to be some sort of a Big Brother.

What will they ban next, alcohol?

How far is government mandated to meddle with our lives? The Davao City LGU has been conducting itself as if it had absolute right to determine what is and what’s not good for us. (Whatever happened to self-determinism?)

Yes, it might be proven that e-cigarettes could be just as harmful as regular cigarettes. But if it were harmful, then that would be the smoker’s choice, wouldn’t it? In society, smokers — as well as drinkers, gamblers, what have you — are not considered pariah because they are also citizens; as long as they do not inflict harm on others, nothing’s at issue. To say that e-cigarettes should be banned because they are harmful to smokers is tantamount to a dictator’s statement. They might as well prohibit the use of nicotine patches and nicotine gum while they’re at it.

And while I’m at it, I’d like to rant some more about how the city is implementing the ordinance. I am all for having segregated smoking areas, no question about it. But to disallow eating and drinking (or even sitting down!) in them is totally absurd. What purpose does that serve but to inconvenience smokers — as if that would make smokers quit at all.

E-cigarettes, as far as I’m concerned, are a way to satisfy the urge of smoking without being a pain to others who don’t smoke. It might even be a way to help smokers wean themselves from the habit, much like nicotine patches. It’s not a way for people to circumvent the anti-smoking ordinance of Davao City.

The city has gained international recognition for its anti-smoking initiatives. I hope the LGU will consider this as a position of responsibility and not as justification for overstepping its boundaries.

[For those who're interested, here's a link to The Davao City Comprehensive Anti-Smoking Ordinance: MSWord document]

-no related posts found-