Defending the Indefensible

'New EU rules on nicotine strength not a problem for most vapers'  see

This is the headline from the latest press release from ASH, this author believes that this is not only disengenuous but that it is a political statement that attempts to mitigate the dogs breakfast that is TPD2, but more worryingly could be construed as an attempt to influence Vapers choice in the forthcoming EU Referendum #Brexit! 

ASH was formed in the early 1970's by the Royal College of Physicians, and amongst its many aims and roles it was designed to influence policy making in the UK and further afield jurisdictions. To this end it has enjoyed much success, and is widely held as a credible source of information BUT :- the long-term policy and aims seem to send very confused messages to observers and consumers alike. 
It is outside of the scope and inclination here to dissect the year on year position changes on THR policy since 2008 and, but suffice to say there have been many. Whilst small policy change can be expected as new research emerges, large fluctuations are undesirable. Alternative nicotine products require embracing, wherever they are sourced, with minimal regulatory control, do ASH consistently state this as an aim or objective? also read from 2008 
ASH directly influenced the UK Govt throughout 2011-12 to push the EU for an update of the TPD wrt SNUS and e-cigs. This was announced by Commissioner Borg in December 2012, with a draconian 2-4 mg/ml nicotine content maximum (e-cigs) and medicinal products only, with a continued SNUS ban. This was ASH policy! for confirmation read Lord Callanan's comments here  via Dick Puddlecote. 
Fast forward now to the present day, ASH are apologists for ridiculous arbitrary 20mg/ml nicotine restrictions, 10ml refill bottles and 2ml tanks, all based on errant nicotine poisoning  LD50 data.(disputed by leading scientists eg Mayer and Farsalinos)

20mg/ml nicotine limit will effect 9% of 2.8 million current users =252,000 (ASH data )
this of course ignores any future switchers or the needs for dual users possibly requiring a higher level. How can ASH trivialise these numbers? even if only one person reverts to tobacco cigarette smoking it would represent failure!

It has been suggested (erroneously via ASH) that to mitigate this, an NRT patch could be used in addition to using the max permitted e-liquid (18mg/ml for practical purposes by manufacturers!) this is nonsense :- costly, skin-rashes can result, folks don't want a treatment,- they are not ill!.....etc, and flies in the face of original limits imposed by EU (an admission it was bollocks in the first place!)  

ASH via Deborah Arnott took part and were signatories of the recent comprehensive RCP report, that pointedly made reference to the unintended consequences of the TPD, this press release seems to have ignored that message.

Finally, ASH bemoans the increasing amount of misperception in the general public with regards to THR products, I contend that its mixed messaging (whether intended or otherwise) has somewhat contributed to that and that consistency is required.

The present press release contains 'weaselly -meally mouthed wibble'( Lord Hunt ) and should be dismissed with the contempt it richly deserves .....think again ASH this is unacceptable bollocks, rewatch this ! 

*** thanks to @BV_dodderer for some of the sources here!