HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 1091.125 2012-2014Murashige, Laura
From: De Gracia, Daniel P <Daniel.P.deGracia@doh.hawaii.gov>
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2014 4:26 PM
To: Council Testimony
Subject: Bill 302 Testimony, 12/17/2014 9:00 a.m. agenda
Attachments: Hawaii County Bill 302 Testimony 12-17-2014.pdf
To Whom It May Concern,
Attached to this e-mail in PDF format is the official testimony for the Department of Health (via Acting Director Keith
Yamamoto) for Bill 302's upcoming hearing on Wednesday, Dec. 17`h at 9:00 am. Feel free to contact me should you
have any questions or require anything else.
Very sincerely,
Danny de Gracia, ThD, D.Min, MA
Tobacco Prevention and Education Program
Hawaii State Department of Health
1250 Punchbowl Street #217
Honolulu, HI 96813
Tel: (808) 586-1432
Fax: (808) 586-8252
E-mail: Daniel.P.deGracia@doh.hawaii.gov
http://health.hawaii.gov/tobacco
,h -
Comm. N . 1L• 'ZX
Ref. To:
Ref. Date QFC 1 7 2014
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
DAVID Y. IGE
GOVERNOR OF HAWAII
t X. F.. y1
qP ' v%91�5;9 y
KEITH YAMAMOTO
ACTING DIRECTOR OF HEALTH
.o
STATE OF HAWAII
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
P.O. Box 3378 In reply, please refer to:
File:
HONOLULU, HAWAII 96801-3378
COUNTY OF HAWAII
BILL 302, RELATING TO AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 14 OF
THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE 1983 (2005 EDITION, AS AMENDED),
RELATING TO PROHIBITION OF SMOKING IN CERTAIN PLACES AND
THE USE OF ELECTRONIC SMOKING DEVICES
Testimony of Keith Yamamoto
Acting Director of Health
December 17, 2014
9:00 a.m.
Department's Position: The DOH strongly supports Hawaii County Bill 302 as referred to the
Council in Committee Report No. 1091 for Second Reading, which prohibits the use of
electronic smoking devices (ESDs) in public places and places of employment where smoking is
already illegal.
Fiscal Implications: None.
Purpose and Justification: This measure proposes to amend Chapter 14, Article 4 of the
Hawaii County Code to expand its clean air protections to include the prohibition of ESDs in
places where smoking is currently prohibited.
ESDs have become increasingly prevalent and widely available since their introduction to
the U.S. market in 2007. In spite of their largely unregulated status, over the last few years, a
greater understanding of the health hazards ESDs posed has come to light from medical and
health professionals around the world. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
recently announced an important "myth buster"I that ESD aerosol "is not harmless water vapor."
t Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Morbidity and Weekly Report, December 12, 2014, retrieved from http://www.cdc.&ov/nunwr
Bill 302
Page 2 of 3
1 ESDs produce an aerosol containing several carcinogens, such as formaldehyde, acetaldehyde,
2 lead, nickel, chromium 2'3'4 and other hazardous substances cited by the Agency for Toxic
3 Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) which are associated with a range of negative health
4 effects such as skin, eye, and respiratory irritation. Like secondhand smoke, ESD use in public
5 indoor areas passively exposes bystanders (especially children, pregnant women and other
6 nontobacco users) to harmful inhalation of these substances.
7 Though advertised as technologically advanced and "healthier alternatives" to cigarettes
8 that claim to promote cessation, researchers commissioned by the Japanese Ministry of Health
9 found in ESDs as many as ten times the level of cancer-causing agents found in regular tobacco.
1 o These devices also present a compelling introduction to the sensation of smoking by allowing
11 users, not only to mimic the tactile experience of smoking, but also actually appear to blow
12 smoke (which is referred to as vapor). As noted in the CDC's most recent Morbidity and
13 Mortality Weekly Report of December 12, "public [ESD] use might prolong smoking by
14 facilitating situational substitution of [ESDs] when smoking is not allowed, rather than complete
15 substitution."
16 For this reason, ESD companies and their mainly parent tobacco companies encourage
17 their use "anywhere," and promote their social acceptability. However, the use of ESDs in
18 existing smoke-free locations threatens to undermine compliance with smoking regulations,
19 creates disturbances which impede employee performance, confuses the public, and reverses the
2State of California Environmental Protection Agency Office of Environmental Health hazard Assessment Safe Drinking Water and Toxic
Enforcement Act of 1986. (2013). Chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity. Available at:
hap: oehha.ca. gov.,ropOs, )5 _list,: files, 1105single091313.pciJ
3German Cancer Research Center. (2013). Red Series Tobacco Prevention and Tobacco Control Volume 19: Electronic Cigarettes - An
Overview. Available at: +-inu.d1 .rl;-da%tahatikorrtrot/r:7fo�rn!Deaf'%'ublikahv,aerr'RoteReihe 13,110_19 ecigaretles an_ovenveirioclf
4Goniewicz, M. et al. (2013). Levels of selected carcinogens and toxicants in vapour from electronic cigarettes. Tob. Control. 1:1-8. Available at:
?+iu,rv. nchi.??l rn. nil?, gol,.jtuhntecl'-'3467656
5 AFP, (2014, November 27). Scientists Say E-Cigs Contain 10 Times As Many Cancer Chemicals As Cigarettes. Retrieved from
http://www.businessinsider.com/afp-e-cigarettes-contain-l0-times-amount-of-carcinogens japan -2014-11
Bill 302
Page 3 of 3
1 progress that has been made in establishing a social norm that smoking is not permitted in public
2 places or places of employment.
3 The FDA currently does not have the authority to regulate where ESDs are used; that is
4 the domain of state and local governments. New Jersey, North Dakota, and Utah have state laws
5 restricting electronic smoking device use in 100% smoke-free venues as well as 226
6 municipalities across the U.S. In January 2014, the DOH adopted its own internal policy
7 banning ESD use on all DOH properties and occupied premises. As of September 2014, the State
8 Department of Accounting and General Services (DAGS) further prohibits ESD use in and
9 around all state buildings under its jurisdiction.
to The DOH strongly supports this measure and encourages the County of Hawaii to make
11 use of this outstanding opportunity to lead the nation in regulating ESDs. The Family Smoking
12 Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009 gives states and local jurisdictions the power to
13 adopt or continue to enforce additional or more stringent regulations than the Federal
14 government concerning tobacco and ESDs. Prohibiting ESD use in enclosed or partially enclosed
15 places where smoking is prohibited will reduce the likelihood that employees and the public will
16 associate the use of such devices with healthful behavior, reduce the likelihood of nonuser
17 exposure to exhaled toxicants and carcinogens, reduce the likelihood of workplace disturbances,
18 enhance employee productivity, and help ensure compliance with existing smoking regulations.
19 Thank you for the opportunity to testify.
6 Public Law 111-31, retrieved from http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-1 I Ipubl3I/pdf/PLAW-11 Ipubl3l.pdf
Murashige, Laura
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
To All Council Members
Joyce Folena <planetpeaceis37@gmail.com>
Monday, December 15, 2014 4:35 PM
Council Testimony
Resolution 22-14 and Resolution 23-14
Please pass Resolution 22014 in order to overcome the previous decision concerning gmo's in The County of Hawaii.
Thank you. We do not ever want to be handling any mnore gmo production in our County of Hawaii.
Please pass Resolution 23-14 as it time to pay attention to our need for as much COMPOST AS WE CAN GET IN OUR
COUNTY OF HAWAII. Thank you.
Joyce Alberta Folena
and
Gregory Todd Smith
1