Anti-Tobacco Group In Philippines Appealed To Duterte to Reconsider Vaping Ban

today in matters of fact president
rodrigo tardes announced that he would
ban the use and importation of vaping
products in the philippines saying
they're toxic the decision came after
the Department of Health Report in the
first case of vaping related illness in
the country but health secretary
Francisco look at a third later said
that the findings in the
sixteen-year-old patient were not yet
conclusive what should be the Philippine
government's policy and vapes and east
cigarettes joining us today is dr. Mary
Kelly been the executive director of the
action and smoking in health they also
have with us dr. Lorenzo Mota the
president of the group quit for a good
good morning ma'am good morning sir and
thank you for joining us first the the
announcement coming from the president
that was quite surprising last night he
said that he would want a ban on the use
and importation of vaping products is
this the is this a good decision on the
part of the president well for us health
advocates and majority of the health
groups we welcome the announcement of
the president particularly since now we
are really seeing the the negative
effects or the use of e-cigarettes but
for a doctor matter well honestly we
would respectfully appeal to the
president that I consider his decision
of trying to ban the e-cigarette because
it can have a contrast with dire
consequences on the health and economy
of the nation what do you mean by that
well without the viable alternative to
smoking which is now known as considered
the latest 95 percent less harmful than
tobacco cigarette ends then we are
depriving the 17 million Filipinos
smokers of this opportunity first let me
get get this straight your groups are
both against smoking yes I am our group
is pro health and therefore we are
against anything that can cause damage
to our health including smoking
including smoking and a cigarette
okay now his contention is that
based on studies 95 cigarette sir ends
or 95% less harmful what's the basis of
that and is that is that basing good
science yes this is actually a
pronouncement of UK public health
England Royal Cal is a position and no
no no no not Royal College of Physicians
I have done not that is the UK public
health England public health England is
different from the Royal College of
Physicians the Royal College of
Physicians is actually the group of
doctors in UK where as it is actually
like in the Philippines the counterpart
of that is the Philippine College of
Physicians where I belong to so that's
different the college public of England
is another group but it's another group
it is not government but appointed yeah
it is is it less harmful really well
that is what I do well there are three
groups that join together to consider
that at the really recognize that it is
95 percent less harmful than tobacco
cigarette so that one is public health
England Royal College opposition and the
Cancer Research UK
these are the three groups that yeah so
I'd like to actually make that I want to
argue with that number one the Royal are
the islands public of England who
actually gave the consensus that
consensus is statement that it that each
cigarettes is 90 to 95 percent
additional product they say that from
coming from a group of 12 experts 12
experts number one and then the twelve
experts they did not actually say what
is the criteria that they use to
describe to actually label them for and
for them to label them as
experts and then if you notice two of
the twelve experts are actually
affiliated with tobacco industry and
also with vaping organizations and
therefore if you look at it the
whatever-whatever was was the savings we
have whatever the findings are it can
actually be influenced by the
association of these two individuals
then secondly the report Nam that was
made by the College of England the
public the College of Public Health
England they were actually commissioned
by the tomorrow by the vaping companies
so if you look at it if they are
commissioned they were paid no so so
there's a debate when it comes to the
actual I beg to disagree due respect to
doctor I beg to disagree at that point
but I don't want to I don't want to
elaborate further on you said that the
president should reconsider that
announcement but what good would it
would it bring the Philippines if vaping
is not bad yes and what is your position
is in a bad or regulation regulation of
course so if you want the electronic
cigarette then you are denying as I have
already mentioned a while ago the
opportunity for this 17 million smokers
have a viable alternative which is very
much less harmful than tobacco see it's
still harmful it's still ample we are
not saying it's completely safe but
being 95% considerably less harmful dr.
Matta I think you have to hide anything
feeling away from the first and basic
principle in medicine and that is to do
no harm and when you say to do no harm
then that means that you want to ensure
that people will not be harmed in any
way so if you are going to give
alternatives it has to be an alternative
that is going to poles no harm but this
deep part is there really clear
scientific basis that
if not a cigarettes are helpful no there
is no hard evidence there is no clear
evidence the only thing that they can
show linen on my question is is there
hard evidence that vaping and cigarettes
are harmful that's clear it's clear it
is very clear that it is harmful as
shown now in the US what is happening in
the US and now in the Philippines we
also already have a case e-cigarette
associated lung injury okay yeah I agree
with the doctora that as a doctor my
main concern is to do no harm
yes but remember remember Christian
there are 17 million smokers in the
Philippines and the government smoking
cessation program has a success rate a
dismal success rate of only 4% in the
only 4% of the 1770s all stop smoking
yes say we are talking here of 90 17
millions sixteen point three million
Filipinos smokers that's it
statistically unable to quit so are we
just going to say to these people that
it's either you quit cold turkey or die
from smoking it how about if they are
your relatives your friends your family
so your position is to make give them
the option this this is a free country
that they can't use their the right to
choose which one they would like to have
as a product but least take them away
from the harmful effects of tobacco
cigarettes which is the number one or
the leading cause of preventable death
in diseases worldwide we are looking at
10 deaths per hour in our country and
that's equivalent to 240 deaths per day
or 80 say but it's not even proven that
that e-cigarettes are vaping products
actually are viable alternatives to
traditional smoking well in reality
theoretically it can actually help since
it makes use of nicotine so in
treatment we actually use nicotine
replacement therapy products okay and
the reason being that you want to
exchange the nicotine content in the
area regular cigarette with another
nicotine product but you want to ensure
that these nicotine replacement therapy
products know these agents will be able
you want to ensure that they the people
will be able to stop smoking but at the
same time not be exposed to the risk or
her dangers of the harmful effects so
the alternative is something that is
still posing a risk so there has been no
real research that has been done in
order to really see if the the the
so-called alternative is not just
effective but is safe to use
there is no no evidence we have
short-term studies unfortunately a long
time we don't have it yet because we
have to wait for 30 30 40 years to have
the short term study search well the
short term studies that the one studied
by the mercy of palates of London which
was released in February 17 2017 okay
that if you if you switch from
cigarettes cigarette smoking to a
cigarette in six months you will have
98% less metals in your body 98% less
carbonyls in our body ninety seven point
nine percent less all the chemicals said
how do you encourage people to switch to
vaping and a cigarettes
given the reported to being here but
that we have been hearing about the VP
related illnesses
yeah and also in the United States more
than a thousand cases reported a totally
Christian that's really our advocacy to
hasten actually the demise of this
deadly tobacco cigarette unfortunately
these are the setbacks that we are
encountering because
you know people are getting scare mum
gettings and so many things when when
they are presented media I have to be
offended by data munging because I am
NOT speaking about I am NOT talking
about what is being read in the media so
I'm not I'm not because how is that
scaremongering well they didn't really
actually specify the real cause of the
problem so it just comes out in the
headlines that this has caused lung
injury because of e cigarettes so it's a
generalized generalized agree agree
doctor a cigarette is part of the
culprit diva is the culprit but not the
main culprit because what if you your
say we're telling that they Seagal
device going to be the cause of the
problem it's it's actually their lease
it elicits a juice that is placed inside
the the e-cigarette it's just like it's
just like you cannot blame a syringe for
for the injected injection of heroin
Serene's is only the conduit
it's the syringe that is the that's why
your for regulation though we are we are
strongly for regulation and a strict
regulation about the content that is
there for example nicotine which of
course we know is addictive
well nicotine has been studied for four
decades well it is by itself it's
relatively benign is that true relative
moment and when you say it's relatively
benign there's still some danger in it
because it is highly addictive that
addictive substance but you would not
give you would give nicotine replacement
therapy see if you consider that and
they take another issue is that even
non-smokers or the youth are encouraged
to and to engage into a cigarette smoke
all the more that we need strict
regulation that's why we are advocating
the - because you're flooding the market
with the e-cigarette well part of the
regulation should be
the advertisement should be bad but I
think dr. Matta should actually tell his
his vaping companies know if he wants
regulation you have to tell your vaping
companies not to to probably drop the
lawsuit against the FDA who has after
the issued regulation on e-cigarettes
juice know for that matter I know you do
not much you have no no control over
that but you know you have to help us
with that particularly we don't have we
don't have we have the same common enemy
here smoking obsolescence of tobacco is
our main dr. Matta
I think our common enemy are products
that causes harm to our countrymen it
should not be limited only to smoking
because there are so many products that
can harm our caring man I agree I agree
with the doctora
driving a car is also harmful it can
cause it cause accidents but I think
driving is not any harmful compared to
well but then yeah well when you when
you drive dependency that you're going
there is still that risk and then what
the what is the harm reduction
principally in there you have to use
your seatbelts I love driving motorcycle
you have to use your helmets that it's
harm reduction in its essence just to
Anna do you see yourself in a browser
basically it's very difficult to
institute cold turkey because of the 4
percent success rate but it's said that
a good route in the meantime or that
won't work
meaning the the principle of smoking
well risk reduction if you know that
sRNA cessation and when you talk about
risk reduction or a harm reduction you
want to move the risk from having the
risk like the one from smoking to zero
risk but this one what is being offered
as harm reduction it's not moving the
risk from from positive risk to
zero risk it's not it is positive risk
and then somewhat middle but not zero so
that is not the basic principle of harm
reduction and when you talk about
alternative or a way by which you can
help people not get the harmful effects
of smoking then the best way is really
please stop you do not tell your
patients okay so this is what I'm going
to give you you'll stop but when I you
take the e cigarette butt with a
cigarette you might actually do have
this hopefully I think what other issue
a final question to dr. Mott I think the
issues the entry of big business the
idea that basically they want to expand
the market let's say in the Philippines
by creating they were creating this
product and introducing this ice a
supposedly alternative to as a supposed
alternative to smoking how do you
respond to that you see this all about
big business ultimately all the more
that we need regulation to do this to be
able to prevent youth uptake and give
people the variable alternative to
smoking in the way from the possible
severe implications of banning this we
already made mention about dr. Matta and
dr. limp in thank you very much for
joining us and fortunately we don't have
much time anymore thank you very much