Government last week summoned cigarette manufacturing companies to a meeting amid divisions in the industry concerning British American Tobacco (BAT) Zimbabwe s approach to the enforcement of a law governing the sale of cigarettes in the country.

Chris Muronzi

Sources told businessdigest this week representatives of all cigarette that manufacturing companies attended a meeting at the offices of the Ministry of Health last Friday chaired by Health secretary Gerald Gwinji to clarify the enforcement of Statutory Instrument 264 (2002).

SI 264 (2002) governs the sale and marketing of tobacco and tobacco related products. Among other things, it outlines the rules and regulations guiding the sale of cigarettes, packaging required and health warnings.

Top BAT, Savanna Tobacco, Fodya, GDT, and Olomide officials attended the meeting.

BAT MD Lovemore Manatsa however did not attend.

According to sources BAT s, bone of contention was the ZRP s enforcement of SI 264 (2002), which the company feels is wrong, a charge ZRP denied at the meeting.

BAT, according to the sources, queried what the officials viewed as wrongful application of the law on its imported Dunhill product, which does not bear Zimbabwean health warnings. Incidentally, all cigarette exports in South Africa are required by law to carry specifically South African health warnings.

BAT s Dunhill brand was last month taken off the shelves in major retail chains after it was found to be non compliant with SI 264 (2002).

The Dunhill packs and dispensers carry South African health warnings, which are considered to be illegal under the legal instrument.

BAT is using a South African health warning which reads Warning Smoking Can Kill You , among others that are used in the South African tobacco industry.

According to SI 264 (2002), cigarette manufacturers have to use the mandatory Zimbabwean health warning which reads Danger Smoking Is Harmful to Health.

BAT, according to sources, argued it was not necessary to have the Zimbabwean health warning, but an appropriate warning that serves the same purpose in with the statutory meeting.

However, a ZRP official at the meeting said the police would continue to enforce SI 264 (2002) without fear or favour, urging all players in the sector to comply or face prosecution.

BAT spokesperson Shingai Koti said BAT Zimbabwe commends the Ministry of Health and Child Welfare for its continued willingness to dialogue with all stakeholders on this matter. Our view is that BAT Zimbabwe products are fully compliant with the Public Health (Tobacco Control) Regulations, Statutory Instrument 264 of 2002. We continue to engage amicably with the relevant authorities, including the Zimbabwe Republic Police to this end, and have not determined or initiated any course of action.

BAT feels section 9 of SI 264 (2002) is not specific about the health warning imported brands must carry.

Section 9 of SI 264 2002 reads All imported tobacco products shall carry appropriate health messages in English.

According to sources, BAT officials at the meeting said they would seek legal recourse to challenge ZRP s interpretation of the law. But representatives of other manufacturing companies took issue with this stance, accusing BAT of reneging on previously agreed industry positions, a development they felt amounted to abuse of its dominant position in the market.

For instance, it was pointed out that BAT had had a hand in crafting the law in its current form, but never made any effort to comply with it, a source who attended the meeting said.

Gwinji, according to the sources, said his ministry was only responsible for promulgating the law and could not assume responsibility for its enforcement.

At the close of the meeting, BAT officials are said to have made enquiries about the progress on the implementation of the World Health Organisation Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), to which Gwinji said government was yet to accede to the framework.

Police spokesperson Charity Charamba had not responded to enquiries at the time of going to press.

Source Zimbabwe Independent Tweet

New cancer study says e-cigarettes are still bad for you

Go-fast boat – wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

We ve all seen it before an individual who obviously thinks they re super cool is hanging out in a bar, concert, or just casually sitting eating dinner. A puff of vapor shoots out of their mouth as onlookers briefly gawk at the spectacle, only to realize that this individual isn t smoking a real cigarette and is instead puffing away on an e cig.

Since Canada and most U.S. states, although New York has some e cig bans in place, don t have laws about smoking (or rather vaping) e cigarettes in public places, doing so seems to be a strange but mostly accepted activity.

But the next time your friend who s trying to quit smoking says e cigarettes aren t harmful to their health, remind them about this recently released study. While the science is complicated, according to these new findings, people exposed to e cig vapor suffer from similar negative effects to individuals who are smoking or are around normal cigarette smoke.

Scientists exposed human bronchial cells to e cigarette vapor and found that it altered the cells in almost the same way tobacco does. The saving grace for vapor smoking enthusiasts is it s still unclear if this cell alteration actually causes cancer. According to Nature, in the study e cigarettes, showed a similar pattern of gene expression, but the changes are not identical to the effects of smoking regular cigarettes.

They may be safer than tobacco , but our preliminary studies suggest that they may not be benign, said study author Avrum Spira, a genomics and lung cancer researcher at Boston University.

A recent study also indicated the liquid nicotine inside e cigs is poisonous and deadly if consumed directly, to the shock of hopefully no one. Apparently an e cigarette also exploded in a U.K. bar recently, setting a server on fire.

In the U.S., the country s Food and Drug Administration still isn t regulating e cigs even though the product has quickly evolved into a billion dollar industry. Health Canada has banned the sale of e cigarettes containing nicotine and it s also illegal to make any kind of health benefit claims about the product, although this certainly hasn t stopped convenience stores across the country from selling e cigarettes containing nicotine.

E cigarettes are also available on the internet through various legitimate and shady retailers, so even if they end up being more heavily regulated in terms of sale, people will still easily be able to get their hands on them.

The moral of the story here is, while smoking e cigarettes is harmful, it still hurts you less than smoking actual cigarettes. Also, many people claim e cigs a great cigarette cessation tool, although some studies refute this.

For the full study check out this link.

Follow me on Twitter Patrick ORourke.