joining us today for part two on our first look at the Canadian government's newly released federal vaping regulations is Mark Keely from candy consulting the Canadian vaping associations power house public policy and government relations firm the new legislation known as bill s5 is currently winding its way through the Senate and one implemented it would legalize vaping products in Canada including those containing nicotine as long as no health claims are made mark thanks again for joining us picking up where we left off let's dive into some of the issues in regards to ejuice flavors it appears Health Canada has found a compromise it can live with by restricting how flavours in certain product categories flavor categories can be communicated through promotion and packaging in the marketplace what Health Canada is very clear on is curbing the appeal to young people and so anything that they can do to reduce the appeal they're gonna take advantage of in the regulation our point is that oftentimes what's appealing to a lot of people who don't want to smoke cigarettes anymore is that what makes them sick is the taste of tobacco but they you know they still want their nicotine yet they still want their nicotine fix in a safer alternative is to vape so it behooves the industry then to agree with the Government of Canada to say let's curb the appeal to young people and use different nomenclature so it all comes down to choosing the right names and using appropriate illustrations then we have been saying to Health Canada right from the start the elephant in the room is flavoring and nicotine when you do things like birthday cake or when you have flavours like birthday cake and when you have flavors like butterscotch or caramel those are the kinds of things that just that just drive Health Canada crazy and a rose by another name right this is what we're looking at now so what we've been saying quite clearly to Health Canada is on labeling on on the names of flavors will will be compliant on this issue Brent about nomenclature so just to be clear mark dough could still be cotton candy and birthday cake EGS flavors but manufacturers won't be able to use those names exactly exactly and the same goes down for any ejuice flavor that fall in one of the restricted categories as long as the flavor is not communicated by a name or illustration picture on label that's right that's correct okay I think I got it sticking with our example no birthday cake in the name or picture or drawing of a birthday cake on the label yep Earth Day cake flavor D juice is still allowed is this a win of course it's a win and we viewed it as a win right from the start you had the the industry actually infringing trademarks by using Werther's or by using Pokemon those are the kinds of things that were driving Health Canada crazy and frankly making us look like fools in in the industry across the country or frankly worldwide so you know putting this kind of regulation in place with the expressed intent of curbing appeal to young people and making sure that the nomenclature is is better and frankly is is a smarter way to go and puts us in a position to not only be compliant but to say you know you're right because we have said right from the start that we agree fundamentally with not only the Government of Canada but with every government across this country that we must limit the appeal to young people for vaping mark let's turn to another important area as you know we have a highly successful homegrown ejuice manufacturing sector in Canada and strong relationships with device manufacturers in China certainly both would be impacted by the new regulations looking at the language as it stands now and here's a sample vaping product manufacturers would have to provide the government information on ingredients product composition hazardous properties and emissions this all sounds perfectly reasonable to ensure vaping is safe however for existing vaping products and those in the pipeline the legislation would also require manufacturers to provide information covering research and development marketing data and health effects Marc do you not find this language concerning at all as it sounds suspiciously like some of the requirements the FDA set in the United States in regards to Studies on health effects and providing support data for pre market authorization on the issue of manufacturing and what you're saying I you know one of the big concerns I do have is that it could in the regulations that could lead one to believe that it would be a u.s. model if you're looking at the US model right now you have to apply to the FDA every time you want to introduce something new to the marketplace and you know in a deeper dive on the on the legislation of the regulations of S 5 don't necessarily weigh that out what Health Canada wants to know is what's in your liquid so it behooves you as an industry therefore to have these kinds of GMP good manufacturing practices in place at your facility including clean rooms and good processes and protocols and procedures to make sure that Health Canada if they ever asked or showed up at your place to inspect it could see what's in your what's in your eliquid e and that only makes good good business sense mark agreed good manufacturing practices makes good business sense but your answer doesn't address the concern that as it stands now there appears to be a path to an FDA type model embedded in the language of the legislation if we're going down the path of looking at this about what might happen as a consequence of that sure we have to put ourselves in the position to be extra vigilant we made this point very clear to the government if you put an old IRB's if you make it to ownerís then for all intents and purposes the the cost of doing your compliance is going to put this industry out of business the only people in our opinion that could do this would be large tobacco and and I don't think that the government wants that mark you said you must be extra vigilant is the industry getting enough access to government in order to do that our task in our role as CVA is to be the strongest advocates we can to make sure that the minister doesn't put herself in a position where she could be viewed as being oppressive to the industry we're not being told we can't meet at Health Canada they've been meeting with us with great regularity we can't be we're not being told we can't meet with the minister's office we're meeting with great regularity and we're meeting with governments across the country with great regularity so I think that effectiveness in of itself has put us in a position where we have at the end of the day look to you know being a heck of a lot smarter at a time when it's really complex to deal with a you know a linebacker who's six times your size meaning Health Canada and the Canadian Cancer Society who the Canadian Cancer Society I'm so glad you brought that up Marc when I read through the legislation it's hard to not see their fingerprints all over it throughout the language and shrines vaping as a health hazard and there's no mention a harm reduction anywhere there's even a clause that prohibits the comparison of the health effects arising from the use of a vaping product with those arising from the use of a tobacco product this seems to be to be a direct effort to prohibit the promotion of reputable research like the Royal College of Physicians report now public health England's finding that vaping is 95 percent safer than smoking my final question to you mark do you believe that at some level biased views against the harm reduction argument may have swayed some decision-making at Health Canada there are biased views on this that that could have clouded the decisions where where you wanted unbiased decisions or unbiased views there are they aren't there they believe that at some point based on the the biased views that they have and I'll be very clear on that that inhaling you know liquid nicotine and poly glycol and and vegetable oil can can actually hurt you to a degree that is similar to tobacco we dispute that and and the science is catching up with that and there are variant examples like you suggested whether it's the College of Physicians or its studies that have been done in in other countries in Europe in the United States so we dispute that but at the end of the day one of the issues that we have to address is the fact that Health Canada by its very nature will not make claims that this is safer or will not make claims that this has benefits to your health so we're ok with that but we're we're not okay is that we know based on what you said earlier on that when biased views or a lobby effort has perpetrated the agenda to make that happen then I think we owe an obligation to people who are saying that this has helped them health-wise that this has helped them get off combustible cigarettes and some feel a heck of a lot better there must be something good about that well that's it for this edition of reg watch before you head off please like us on Facebook and don't forget to follow us on Twitter for Regulator watch com I'm Brian Stafford


  1. Well I know one thing for sure. I have been a smoker for almost 40 years, 37 to be exact. I have wanted to quit smoking for some time, I tried everything under the sun to quit with no success, I would even sneak smokes while on the patch. I noticed a lot of younger people were vaping, I didn't pay much attention to it, thought it was some new fad or something. One day I noticed an older guy vaping and asked if he liked that and why he was vaping, he told me he was vaping because he was trying to quit smoking, he told me the juice had nicotine in it, he got my attention. I looked into vaping online, I saw the controversy right away. What gave credence to vaping was how the big players were working so hard to block it, why would they do this? So I decided to start vaping, I am now 22 days without a single cigarette, In last 37 years I have never been able to even come close to going that long without a smoke, starting to look promising. I think vaping could be the most successful tool to help hardcore smokers quit. I started at 12 mg of nicotine, I have since reduced that to 6 mg, and in time will reduce to 3 then 0 mg nicotine. Now I understand why the big players want to block this, it all makes sense now.

  2. Sounds like Canadian vapers have been bent over and shafted only difference they got some lube unlike the Americans. Not allowed to make health claims wtf happened to free speech

  3. Awesome, Brent! It's about time someone calls these people out about the weakness of their so called advocacy.

  4. Personally I have always disagreed with bright colourful childish cartoons drawings on the e – liquid bottles, I think they should be more simple clean and elegant , some already are and that's the ones I buy .

  5. its vegetable glycerine, not vegetable oil

  6. Is health Canada also going to put their foot down on the alcohol industry marketing flavours that appeal to youth? Yeah I thought not.

  7. Thank you, Brent and Marc!

  8. Seams like Health Canada may be going the right way

  9. DIY,DIY, DIY is the answer. instead of paying $60.00 for a 140 ml bottle, I average under $5.00 for products even tastier than retail. tweeked to my liking. Haven't bought ejuice since beginning of June. Great hobby and easy to do. Today is my first year free of cigarettes after 47 years of smoking. And surprisingly, I did it without Health Canada approval!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *