Browse
Search
BOH agenda 052516
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Board of Health
>
Agendas
>
2016
>
BOH agenda 052516
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/24/2018 12:12:14 PM
Creation date
4/24/2018 12:11:13 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
5/25/2016
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
57
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
bathroom of their choice, and also preempts municipalities from passing anti-discrimination laws that are <br />stronger than a state standard. <br />The specter of HB2 was raised last week by several opponents of the proposed e-cigarette ban. <br />“Local boards making ordinances that deal with private business … is something I’ve heard a lot about <br />recently,” said Jason Joyner, the lobbyist for the North Carolina Vaping Council. “I certainly would not like to <br />see draconian-level policies come back from Raleigh because of a good faith effort made in Orange County.” <br />Harm reduction <br />Currently, state law classifies e-cigarettes as a tobacco product, which means the devices are forbidden in <br />public schools, state and county buildings and vehicles and other state-run buildings, such as UNC athletic <br />facilities, where tobacco products are banned. <br />While state law bans smoking in restaurants and bars, now it’s up to counties to decide whether or not to <br />extend that ban to e-cigarettes. <br />More than 150 people had responded to a survey on whether or not to ban e-cigarettes in Orange County’s <br />eating and drinking establishments. According to Bridger, more than 81 percent of those respondents <br />supported the ban. <br />But Bridger said she’s sympathetic to people who have used e-cigarette to wean themselves from smoking <br />tobacco, a strategy known as harm reduction. <br />Many vapers have not weaned themselves from nicotine, which has negative health effects, but the harm- <br />reduction argument holds that at least they’re not breathing in cancer-causing products of combustion, such as <br />tar and soot, and are thus reducing negative health effects. <br />Most of those who testified in opposition to the proposed ban were vapers who have quit smoking. Several of <br />them choked back tears as they told of smoking-related health problems for themselves and family members <br />that have diminished now that they’re vaping. <br />“The day my mom died, I swore to her I’d quit. And now, two years later, I can say I’m smoke free,” said Amy <br />Stevens. “If you can’t smoke in restaurants and bars, it won’t devastate me, I’ll continue to vape. <br />“But if there is a place I can go and they say, ‘Yes, we have these four tables over here where we’ll allow you <br />to do it,’ that will be a place where I will go. That’s where I will take my husband on our date nights. It will <br />allow us to go out and stay away from the smokers.” <br />Stevens’ husband, Ben, among others, testified that vaping had “saved my life.” <br />Emerging science <br />The science around vaping, however, is unclear. One thing that is clear is there has been a more than 880 <br />percent increase in the number of North Carolina kids who have tried vaping since 2011. <br />But the U.S. has been slow to regulate the liquids used by vapers.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.