Last night I testified at a hearing of the Rhode Island Senate Finance Committee on a bill (S2844) that would allow the sale of flavored e-cigarettes in specialty vape shops that are only open to adults age 21+ and that conduct age verification (beyond checking an ID). The bill would also allocate 10% of the state revenue from such sales to be used for smoking cessation programs.
You can watch the hearing here (my testimony is at -24:30). You can find the written testimony that was submitted to the committee here.
Below is my testimony, followed by some observations about the hearing.
Testimony on S2844
I am Dr. Michael Siegel, a professor of public health and community medicine at Tufts University School of Medicine. 40 years ago – almost to this day – I, as a senior at Brown University, stood one floor above where we are today and testified before the Senate HEW committee in favor of a bill (S2643) to ban smoking in all workplaces in Rhode Island. We faced off against two Big Tobacco stalwarts – Kelly Sheridan (a tobacco institute lobbyist) and former Governor Dennis Roberts, a Big Tobacco sympathizer. We won, kicked Big Tobacco’s butts out of the state, and the legislature was on its way to becoming a national leader in the effort to make smoking history.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today, 40 years later, as a tobacco researcher who has dedicated my career to trying to save lives from smoking-related diseases.
You can imagine my shock when I drove down to Rhode Island today to find out that the state legislature has given Big Tobacco a huge victory. After all my work fighting to make smoking history in Rhode Island, the legislature has taken an enormous step backwards.
HOW? By putting a huge barrier in front of Rhode Island smokers who want to quit to save their lives. The legislature did this by banning the single most effective strategy to quit smoking: flavored vapes. What a favor to Big Tobacco! Allow all of their products to remain on the shelves in every gas station and convenience store while putting flavored e-cigarettes on the black market, only available to those who are willing to conspire to break state law.
This is why I stand in favor of legislation that would allow the sale of flavored e-cigarettes in stores that exclusively sell tobacco products and restrict access to individuals aged 21 and older. This is a commonsense policy that balances public health concerns with the reality of adult smokers' needs.
Let’s be clear: the state legislature’s current approach to banning nearly all electronic cigarettes, while continuing to allow the unrestricted sale of real tobacco cigarettes in convenience stores and gas stations, is not just inconsistent—it’s downright hypocritical. We are talking about a product—real cigarettes—that has killed millions of Americans and remains easily accessible to anyone who walks into a corner store. Meanwhile, flavored e-cigarettes, a far less harmful alternative for adult smokers, are pushed into the shadows, making it harder for people to make a healthier choice.
For many adults who rely on flavored e-cigarettes as a tool to quit, this ban is a direct threat to their progress. They are left with two choices: relapse back to smoking or turn to the black market.
We must recognize that banning flavored e-cigarettes doesn’t solve the problem—it merely drives it underground. Instead of pushing people toward less-regulated and more dangerous options, we should give them the ability to make a safer choice.
I urge you to support this legislation, not just for fairness but for public health. Let’s stop punishing adult smokers who are trying to make a positive change and give them a chance to stay away from cigarettes. Let’s restore Rhode Island as a national leader in smoking prevention, not smoking facilitation. Thank you.
The Rest of the Story
Some Observations about the Hearing
The primary opponents of this bill were the American Lung Association, American Heart Association, American Cancer Society, Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, Rhode Island Academy of Pediatrics, and the Rhode Island Department of Health. When I refer to the bill's "opponents" below, I am referring to these organizations.
1. I never thought that I would be on the other side of the issue from these organizations, with which I worked for many years.
It was extremely uncomfortable for me to be in a position where I was speaking on the opposing side of these organizations with which I worked for many years. In fact, when I was a lobbyist in Rhode Island (during my senior year at Brown University) promoting a ban on smoking in all workplaces, I worked closely with the Rhode Island chapters of the American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, and the American Lung Association, along with the Rhode Island Department of Health (where I was an intern). It was very strange and uncomfortable to now be on the opposite side, where I was supporting an effort to enhance smoking cessation while these groups were trying to block the most effect off-ramp for smoking cessation that currently exists.
Based on the National Health Interview Survey, approximately five million Americans have quit smoking completely using e-cigarettes. Among young adults, flavored e-cigarettes are the single most used method for assisted smoking cessation and the single most effective method for assisted smoking cessation. Why these groups would want to block this off-ramp for millions of smokers is beyond my comprehension. It makes no sense.
Ironically, these groups defeated their own testimony by repeatedly emphasizing to the Committee how easy it is for youth to access flavored vapes in Rhode Island. That is actually a strong argument in support of this bill because flavored vapes have been banned in Rhode Island for more than a year, If it is still easy for youth to access these products, then clearly the ban is not particularly effective. And if that's the case, then smokers are being harmed for no good reason. One of the bill opponents testified that they had spoken to a group of youths the night before and 11 out of 11 said that it's no problem for them to obtain flavored vapes. Essentially, the opponents admitted that the flavored e-cigarette ban is not very effective and that if youth really want to vape they'll find a way to access the product.
2. These groups no longer seem to be interested in making smoking history. They are throwing smokers under the bus to promote their organizational agenda of trying to end the recreational use of nicotine for any purpose.
The opposition groups continued to emphasize throughout the hearing that there needs to be off-ramps for smokers yet they are blocking the single most effective and highly used off-ramp for Rhode Island smokers. I submitted written testimony summarizing the evidence from clinical trials that pitted e-cigarettes against NRT or Chantix for smoking cessation. The results from all of these clinical trials are consistent: e-cigarettes are more effective than any "FDA-approved" medication for smoking cessation. Why would these groups -- who argue that providing off-ramps for smokers is essential -- want to keep the single most effective off-ramp off the market? None of the organizations that opposed this legislation was able to provide a compelling answer to that question. In fact, they simply ignored that question completely.
3. The hypocrisy of these groups is overwhelming.
All of these groups want to ban the sale of virtually all e-cigarettes but are perfectly OK with deadly cigarettes being readily available at every corner store, convenience store, and gas station throughout Rhode Island. The groups are not even asking to restrict the sale of cigarettes to tobacco-only stores that are only open to adults ages 21+. It makes no public health sense to make it literally impossible to legally purchase "fake" cigarettes that contain no tobacco but to make sure that deadly tobacco cigarettes are readily available around every corner.
I have long argued that all nicotine-containing products should only be available at vape/tobacco shops with age 21+ restrictions and age verification. Instead of forcing cigarettes to compete head-to-head with a much safer product, these groups are giving cigarette companies a huge advantage in the marketplace by banning the sale of their chief competition.
4. Despite 17 years of experience and conclusive research on the effectiveness of e-cigarettes for smoking cessation and the decreased risk of e-cigarettes compared to smoking, these groups are not willing to update their prior convictions, which they've held since 2009.
When electronic cigarettes came on the market in 2007, I thought they were just another Big Tobacco ploy to addict the next generation of youth by marketing a product as being safer than cigarettes when it really wasn't any safer. I thought this was another "light" cigarettes fiasco. My position was essentially the same as that of the opposition groups that spoke last night. However, when the research came out showing that e-cigarettes were not another "light" cigarette fiasco, when I learned that Big Tobacco had nothing to do with the introduction these products into the market (they were not in the act until 2011), and when I talked to hundreds of vapers who explained how nothing on the market was effective in helping them quit until they tried vaping, I changed my mind. My views change as the research evidence changes. These groups seem to be permanently stuck in 2009.
5. These opposition groups continue to paint the picture that Big Tobacco is preying on youth when the reality is that most youth are not using e-cigarettes made by tobacco companies.
I continually heard the mantra that it is Big Tobacco which is peddling e-cigarettes to minors and enticing them with flavors like cherry, gummy bear, and cotton candy. This has been the rhetoric of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids for years. It is wrong and it is damaging because this misunderstanding is preventing us from intervening effectively in the effort to reduce youth use of e-cigarettes. According to my analysis of data from the 2026 National Youth Tobacco Survey, only 12% of youth vapers are using brands manufactured by tobacco companies. An overwhelming 88% are using brands that are technically sold on the black market as they have not received a marketing authorization order from the FDA.
The reality is that even if the tobacco companies stopped selling all e-cigarettes today, it would hardly put a dent in the public health problem of youth vaping. The appropriate solution is not to ban e-cigarettes so that the only vapes that youth get their hands on are unregulated black market products. The appropriate solution is to actually regulate these products so that we can control their safety, ingredients, and marketing practices. The prohibition approach that these groups have promoted has essentially turned the e-cigarette market into a primarily illicit market. Ironically, the policies these groups have promoted has prevented the regulation of e-cigarettes and instead, ensured that the overwhelming majority of e-cigarettes on the market are unregulated.
6. Worst of all, these groups are apparently OK with using misinformation and deception to promote their position.
For example, the American Lung Association, American Heart Association, American Cancer Society, and Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids stated that: "Flavored tobacco products are reversing decades of progress in reducing tobacco use among youth and worsening the persistent disparities regarding addiction among communities of color." This is untrue. Flavored tobacco products are not reversing decades of progress in reducing tobacco use. Tobacco use among youth is the lowest it has been in decades and has declined even more rapidly since e-cigarettes have been on the market. In the 2026 National Youth Tobacco Survey, the prevalence of youth smoking was only 1.4%.
Moreover, e-cigarettes are not disproportionately addicting communities of color. The prevalence of daily vaping (an indication of likely addiction) among non-Hispanic White adolescents in 2026 was 1.8%, compared to 1.3% for non-Hispanic Black adolescents and 0.9% for Hispanic adolescents.
As another example, these organizations state: "There is overwhelming evidence that mint, menthol and other candy and fruit flavors are luring children and adolescents and fueling tobacco and nicotine addiction in the next generation." While these flavors could potentially be leading to nicotine addiction they are not leading to tobacco addiction. These products contain no tobacco so youth who are addicted to vapes are not experiencing tobacco addiction. Moreover, there is no evidence that e-cigarettes are a gateway to smoking (the opposite is true) so flavored vapes are not leading to tobacco addiction via that route either.
In addition, these groups state: "Among students who use electronic cigarettes, the vast majority (87.6%) use flavored products, including fruit, candy and mint. The tobacco industry knows these flavors appeal to youth and the data show that this sinister strategy works to attract and addict them." This statement is not just misleading, it is downright false. The tobacco industry is not marketing fruit, candy, or mint e-cigarette flavors. The only flavored e-cigarette products that they are marketing are menthol. I would ask these organizations to list all of the fruit, candy, and mint-flavored e-cigarettes being sold by tobacco companies. It would be a blank list.
The Rhode Island Department of Health also misled the Committee when it claimed that: "Most tobacco use, including vaping, starts and is established in adolescence." The problem with this statement is that vaping is not a form of tobacco use. There is no tobacco in the product. It is not fair to mislead the legislature like this.
While it is disappointing for me to see my colleagues in the tobacco control movement take positions that I believe are detrimental to the public's health, they certainly have the right to offer a different opinion. However, it is not acceptable for them to mislead the legislature or to misrepresent the facts in order to support their positions.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please feel free to comment here.