Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"GLOBALink HQ" <hq@globalink.org> "Ross-Viles, Sarah" 9/3/2010 4:55:02 AM GLOBALink NIMI Index - Friday 3 September 2010

News & Information Monitoring Initiative - Index Friday 3 September 2010 Sonja Johnston
Advertising & Sponsorship Cambodia: Proposed sub-decree banning advertising of tobacco Cessation Addiction: Stopping Smoking Cessation Treatments Too Soon May Reduce Odds of Success for 45 Percent of Smokers UK: Researchers test theory that exercise can help smokers step up to challenge Health & Science Cancer Prev Res: Diabetes drug may keep lung cancer at bay
Reuters CBS News The Herald Khmer Weekly

Science Daily

Indonesia: Video: Smoking Baby Stops Smoking - But Can It Last? Chile: Sorry, no cigarettes or alcohol, trapped miners told

Canada.com Fox News

US: CA: Scientist's Firing After 36 Years Fuels 'PC' Debate at UCLA Industry & Products Philippines: Growing tobacco is a family affair for children in Ilocos Legislation & Politics Russians urged to smoke, drink more
AFP

GMA News

Philippines: Solons hit moves to impose 400% tax hike on cigarettes China: No smoking law comes into effect in south China's Guangzhou Scotland: 90% of Scots back tobacco sale laws
Yahoo

Manilla Bulletin Xinhua

Spain: Doctors call for tighter tobacco sales restrictions in Spain US: NY: On the reservation, resentment Secondhand Smoke China: Shanghai tobacco ban catches fire UK: Smokers barred from renting a home
People's Daily Online The Telegraph CBC News The Buffalo News

Typically Spanish

Canada: Vancouver park smoking ban takes effect Youth

JSID: Smoking, alcohol, pot rates found higher for Latino kids

Arizona Daily Star

This digest was brought to you by GLOBALink Lost password - Unsubscribe

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Stan Shatenstein" <shatenstein@globalink.org> mju@globalink.org 4/12/2010 6:40:12 PM GLOBALink MJU: 299th Edition: 13-April-2010

Medical Journal Update 299th Edition 13-April-2010 Dear readers, Please make PDF requests by sending journal and author name information (e.g. AJPH - Cook) to shatensteins@sympatico.ca. Please also include your own e-mail address in every request message. Click on links to access papers freely available to all, but feel free to ask for these if you have a problem opening the PDFs. Do not send back full abstracts or MJU editions, just the journal and author names and, if you can, the number of the edition in which they appear. Studies are listed below by alphabetical order of journal names. Stan Shatenstein

In this edition: Acta Ophthalmol - Grzybowski Tobacco optic neuropathy (TON) - the historical and present concept of the disease Acta Ophthalmol. 2010 Mar 16. [Epub ahead of print] Grzybowski A, Holder GE. Abstract Abstract. This article reviews the historical and current concepts of 'tobacco optic neuropathy' (TON) a rare disorder of optic nerve function related to the toxic effects of an unidentified constituent of tobacco. It is considered to be an entity distinct from that often described as 'tobacco-alcohol amblyopia', a disorder better described as a nutritional optic neuropathy. It is suggested that 'tobacco-alcohol amblyopia' is an inappropriate term, because the condition to which it refers is not an amblyopia, and there is little evidence to implicate a toxic effect of either tobacco or alcohol in the pathogenesis of that disorder. http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/123322839/abstrac...

Am J Drug Alc Abuse - Wu Differential racial/ethnic patterns in substance use initiation among young, low-income women Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse. 2010 Mar;36(2):123-9. Wu ZH, Temple JR, Shokar NK, Nguyen-Oghalai TU, Grady JJ. Abstract BACKGROUND: Accumulating research suggests that the gateway hypothesis of substance use may not apply equally across different race/ethnicity groups. OBJECTIVES: The current study examines racial and ethnic differences in patterns of initiation of licit and illicit substance use. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 696 low-income women between the ages of 18 and 31 who sought gynecological care between December, 2001 and May, 2003 in southeast Texas. RESULTS: Overall, White women fit the classic profile of drug use initiation patterns, with those initiating tobacco and beer/wine at earlier ages being more likely to use illicit drugs. Conversely, African-American and Hispanic women initiated tobacco and beer/wine at much later ages than White women, but they were as likely to use illicit drugs. CONCLUSIONS: To be optimally effective, prevention efforts may need to be tailored to fit the race/ethnicity of the audience. Further studies are suggested to investigate specific risk factors related to substance use initiation by 8_19_2011

Page 2 race/ethnicity. http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.3109/009529910037180...

AJE - Torp-Pedersen/Samet In-Utero Exposure to Smoking, Alcohol, Coffee, and Tea and Risk of Strabismus Am J Epidemiol. 2010 Mar 25. [Epub ahead of print] Torp-Pedersen T, Boyd HA, Poulsen G, Haargaard B, Wohlfahrt J, Holmes JM, Melbye M. Abstract In a prospective, population-based cohort study, the authors investigated the effect of in-utero exposure to maternal smoking and consumption of alcohol, coffee, and tea on the risk of strabismus. They reviewed medical records for children in the Danish National Birth Cohort identified through national registers as possibly having strabismus. Relative risk estimates were adjusted for year of birth, social class, maternal smoking, maternal age at birth, and maternal coffee and tea consumption. The authors identified 1,321 cases of strabismus in a cohort of 96,842 Danish children born between 1996 and 2003. Maternal smoking was associated with a significantly elevated risk of strabismus in the child, increasing with number of cigarettes smoked per day (<5 cigarettes/day: relative risk (RR) = 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.80, 1.14; 5-<10 cigarettes/day: RR = 1.38, 95% CI: 1.12, 1.70; >/=10 cigarettes/day: RR = 1.90, 95% CI: 1.57, 2.30). Nicotine replacement therapy was not associated with strabismus risk (RR = 1.22, 95% CI: 0.92, 1.61). Light maternal alcohol consumption was inversely associated with strabismus risk, whereas maternal coffee and tea drinking were not associated with strabismus risk. In conclusion, smoking during pregnancy is associated with an increased risk of strabismus in the offspring. Conversely, light alcohol consumption is associated with decreased risk. http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/kwq010v1 Also: Smoking Kills: The Revolutionary Life of Richard Doll http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/extract/171/7/848 Related AJE Obituary & IJE Book Review: Sir Richard Doll, 19122005 (2006) http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/164/1/95 Smoking Kills: The Revolutionary Life of Richard Doll. Conrad Keating. http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/extract/dyq009

Am J Ther - Babizhayev Telomere Length is a Biomarker of Cumulative Oxidative Stress, Biologic Age, and an Independent Predictor of Survival and Therapeutic Treatment Requirement Associated With Smoking Behavior Am J Ther. 2010 Mar 11. [Epub ahead of print] Babizhayev MA, Savelʼyeva EL, Moskvina SN, Yegorov YE. Abstract Globally, tobacco use is associated with 5 million deaths per annum and is regarded as one of the leading causes of premature death. Major chronic disorders associated with smoking include cardiovascular diseases, several types of cancer, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (lung problems). Cigarette smoking (CS) generates a cumulative oxidative stress, which may contribute to the pathogenesis of chronic diseases. Mainstream and side stream gas-phase smoke each have about the same concentration of reactive free radical species, about 1 x 10 radicals per cigarette (or 5 x 10 per puff). This effect is critical in understanding the biologic effects of smoke. Several lines of evidence suggest that cigarette smoke constituents can directly activate vascular reactive oxygen species production. In this work we present multiple evidence that CS provide the important risk factors in many age-related diseases, and is associated with increased cumulative and systemic oxidative stress and inflammation. The cited processes are marked by increased white blood cell (leucocytes, WBCs) turnover. The data suggest an alteration of the circulating WBCs by CS, resulting in increased adherence to endothelial cells. Telomeres are complex DNA-protein structures located at the end of eukaryotic 8_19_2011

Page 3 chromosomes. Telomere length shortens with biologic age in all replicating somatic cells. It has been shown that tobacco smoking enhances telomere shortening in circulating human WBCs. Telomere attrition (expressed in WBCs) can serve as a biomarker of the cumulative oxidative stress and inflammation induced by smoking and, consequently, show the pace of biologic aging. We originally propose that patented specific oral formulations of nonhydrolized carnosine and carcinine provide a powerful tool for targeted therapeutic inhibition of cumulative oxidative stress and inflammation and protection of telomere attrition associated with smoking. The longitudinal studies of the clinical population groups described in this study including elderly support the hypothesis that telomere length is a predictor of survival and therapeutic treatment requirement associated with smoking behavior. http://journals.lww.com/americantherapeutics/Abstract/publis...

Ann Behav Med - Bandiera Secondhand Smoke Policy and the Risk of Depression Ann Behav Med. 2010 Mar 31. [Epub ahead of print] Bandiera FC, Caban-Martinez AJ, Arheart KL, Davila EP, Fleming LE, Dietz NA, Lewis JE, Fabry D, Lee DJ. Abstract BACKGROUND: Banning smoking in work and public settings leads to immediate reductions in disease burden. However, no previous studies have looked specifically at the impact smoking bans may have on depression. METHODS: The 2006 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) uses a cross-sectional design representative of the noninstitutionalized civilian US population. Never smoker survey participants >/=18 years of age were selected from the BRFSS (n = 41,904) with their self-report of depressive symptoms in the last 2 weeks, as assessed by the Patient Health Questionnaire. Models with adjustment for survey design, sociodemographics, alcohol consumption, and work and home smoking policies were considered. RESULTS: Following covariate adjustment, the risk of major depression was significantly higher for those living where smoking was allowed anywhere in the home versus those living in homes with complete smoking bans and in those who indicated that smoking was permitted in their work areas versus those reporting complete workplace smoking bans. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from the present analysis support policies that ban smoking in all workplace settings. Interventions designed to eliminate smoking in the home are also needed. http://www.metapress.com/content/5x143u6t51ml7836/?p=83cf2a4...

Arch Gyn Ob - Aliyu Association between tobacco use in pregnancy and placenta-associated syndromes: a population-based study Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2010 Mar 31. [Epub ahead of print] Aliyu MH, Lynch O, Wilson RE, Alio AP, Kristensen S, Marty PJ, Whiteman VE, Salihu HM. Abstract INTRODUCTION: Cigarette smoking is an established risk factor for adverse perinatal outcomes. The purpose of this study is to examine the association between maternal smoking in pregnancy and the occurrence of placental-associated syndromes (PAS). METHODS: We analyzed data from a population-based retrospective cohort of singleton deliveries that occurred in the state of Missouri from 1989 through 2005 (N = 1,224,133). The main outcome was PAS, a composite outcome defined as the occurrence of placental abruption, placenta previa, preeclampsia, small for gestational age, preterm or stillbirth. We used logistic regression models to generate adjusted odd ratios and their 95 percent confidence intervals. Non-smoking gravidas served as the referent category. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of prenatal smoking was 19.6%. Cigarette smoking in pregnancy was associated with the composite outcome of placental syndromes (odds ratio, 95% confidence interval = 1.59, 1.57-1.60). This association showed a dose-response relationship, with the risk of PAS increasing with increased quantity of cigarettes smoked. Similar results were observed between smoking in pregnancy and independent risks for abruption, previa, SGA, stillbirth, and preterm delivery. CONCLUSION: Maternal smoking in pregnancy is a risk factor for the development of placenta-associated syndrome. Smoking cessation interventions in pregnancy should continue to be encouraged in all maternity care settings. http://www.springerlink.com/content/x584335250743wqk/

8_19_2011

Page 4 BMC Pub Health - Coleman/Siddiqi Do financial incentives for delivering health promotion counselling work? Analysis of smoking cessation activities stimulated by the quality and outcomes framework BMC Public Health. 2010 Mar 26;10(1):167. [Epub ahead of print] Coleman T. Abstract BACKGROUND: A substantial fraction of UK general practitioners' salaries is now intended to reflect the quality of care provided. This performance-related pay system has probably improved aspects of primary health care but, using the observational data available, disentangling the impacts of different types of targets set within this unique payment system is challenging. DISCUSSION: Financial incentives undoubtedly influence GPs' activities, however, those aimed at encouraging GPs' delivery of health promotion counselling may not always have the effects intended. There is strong, observational evidence that targets and incentives intended to increase smoking cessation counselling by GPs have merely increased their propensity to record this activity in patients' medical records. The limitations of using financial incentives to stimulate the delivery of counselling in primary care are discussed and a re-appraisal of their use within UK GPs' performance-related pay system is argued for. SUMMARY: The utility of targets employed by the system for UK General Practitioners' performance related pay may be inappropriate for encouraging the delivery of health promotion counselling interventions. An evaluation of these targets is essential before they are further developed or added to. http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/10/167 http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1471-2458-10-167.pd... Also: An intervention to stop smoking among patients suspected of TB - evaluation of an integrated approach http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/10/160 http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1471-2458-10-160.pd... Note: Full text PDFs freely available from links immediately above.

Clin Trials - Carpenter Motivating the unmotivated for health behavior change: a randomized trial of cessation induction for smokers Clin Trials. 2010 Mar 25. [Epub ahead of print] Carpenter MJ, Alberg AJ, Gray KM, Saladin ME. Abstract BACKGROUND: Many smokers remain unwilling or unable to make a quit attempt. For these smokers, novel strategies to induce quit attempts are necessary to achieve further reductions in smoking prevalence. PURPOSE: This article describes the design and methods of an ongoing nationwide telephone-based clinical trial for cessation induction, the principal aim of which is to test the hypothesis that samples of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), can induce quit attempts among smokers otherwise unmotivated to quit. METHODS: Smokers are recruited proactively through online channels. A 'behavioral filter' is used to identify and separate motivated versus unmotivated smokers, the latter of whom (N = 750) are formally entered into the clinical trial. Participants are randomized to one of two treatment conditions designed to promote self-efficacy and motivation to quit: (1) practice quit attempt (PQA) or (2) PQA plus NRT sampling. The primary outcome measure tested over a 6-month follow-up is the incidence of additional quit attempts as well as hypothesized mediators of treatment effects. RESULTS: This study details the challenges of identifying and treating smokers who are unmotivated to quit. Strengths include a novel treatment approach, tested among a group of proactively recruited smokers nationwide, with a unique method of identifying cessation-resistant smokers. LIMITATIONS: The omission of a true control group, testing the effect of the PQA itself, is an inherent limitation to the study design. Online recruitment presents additional study challenges, all of which are discussed in detail. CONCLUSIONS: The study has translational potential to guide both clinical and policy recommendations for cessation induction. Further, while the focus is on smoking, this trial may serve as an example to researchers and clinicians who focus on other health behaviors, and who themselves are challenged with motivating people who are unmotivated for change. http://ctj.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/1740774510361533...

8_19_2011

Page 5

Crit Care - Lucidarme Nicotine withdrawal and agitation in ventilated critically ill patients

Critical Care 2010, 14:R42 (9 April 2010) Lucidarme O, Seguin A, Daubin C, Ramakers M, Terzi N, Beck P, Charbonneau P, du Cheyron D Abstract Introduction Smoking is highly addictive, and nicotine abstinence is associated with withdrawal syndrome in hospitalized patients. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the impact of sudden nicotine abstinence on the development of agitation and delirium, and on morbidities and outcomes in critically ill patients who required respiratory support, either noninvasive ventilation or intubation, and mechanical ventilation. Methods We conducted a prospective, observational study in two intensive care units (ICUs). The 144 consecutive patients admitted to ICUs and requiring mechanical ventilation for >48 hours were included. Smoking status was assessed at ICU admission by using the Fagerstrom Test of Nicotine Dependence (FTND). Agitation, with the Sedation-Agitation Scale (SAS), and delirium, with the Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist (ICDSC), were tested twice daily during the ICU stay. Agitation and delirium were defined by SAS >4 and ICDSC >4, respectively. Nosocomial complications and outcomes were evaluated. Results Smokers (n = 44) were younger and more frequently male and were more likely to have a history of alcoholism and to have septic shock as the reason for ICU admission than were nonsmokers. The incidence of agitation, but not delirium, increased significantly in the smoker group (64% versus 32%; P = 0.0005). Nicotine abstinence was associated with higher incidences of self-removal of tubes and catheters, and with more interventions, including the need for supplemental sedatives, analgesics, neuroleptics, and physical restraints. Sedation-free days, ventilator-free days, length of stay, and mortality in ICUs did not differ between groups. Multivariate analysis identified active smoking (OR, 3.13; 95% CI, 1.456.74; P = 0.003) as an independent risk factor for agitation. Based on a subgroup of 56 patients, analysis of 28 pairs of patients (smokers and nonsmokers in a 1:1 ratio) matched for age, gender, and alcoholism status found similar results regarding the role of nicotine withdrawal in increasing the risk of agitation during an ICU stay. Conclusions Nicotine withdrawal was associated with agitation and higher morbidities in critically ill patients. These results suggest the need to look specifically at those patients with tobacco dependency by using the FTND in ICU settings. Identifying patients at risk of behavioral disorders may lead to earlier interventions in routine clinical practice. http://ccforum.com/content/14/2/R58 http://ccforum.com/content/pdf/cc8954.pdf Note: Full text PDF freely available from link immediately above.

J Atheroscler Thromb - Ishizaka Association between Gamma-Glutamyltransferase Levels and Insulin Resistance According to Alcohol Consumption and Number of Cigarettes Smoked J Atheroscler Thromb. 2010 Mar 13. [Epub ahead of print] Ishizaka N, Ishizaka Y, Toda EI, Yamakado M, Koike K, Nagai R. Abstract 8_19_2011

Page 6 Aim: Alcohol intake may increase serum gamma-glutamyltransferase (GGT) but reduce insulin resistance. We analyzed the association between GGT and a marker of insulin resistance, homeostasis model assessment for insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), according to the drinking and smoking status.Methods: After excluding former smokers and/or former drinkers, the data of 10,482 men who underwent general health screening were analyzed.Results: Alcohol consumption showed a graded association with GGT. In men with current alcohol consumption of >/=40 g per day, >/=20 cigarettes per day further increased GGT levels. Alcohol consumption showed a U-shaped association with HOMA-IR. In contrast, smoking 20-39 and >/=40 cig-arettes per day increased HOMA-IR as compared with never smokers. An interaction between alco-hol consumption and smoking was present for GGT (p<0.001) and HOMA-IR (p=0.059). GGT was not a significant negative predictive value for HOMA-IR regardless of the drinking or smoking status.Conclusions: Although alcohol intake showed a graded association with GGT and a U-shaped association with HOMA-IR, serum GGT can be utilized as a predictor of insulin resistance in current drinkers. http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jat/advpub/0/advpub_1003... http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jat/advpub/0/1003120203/... Note: Full text PDF freely available from link immediately above.

J Clin Epi - Johnson-Kozlow Adolescents validly report their exposure to secondhand smoke J Clin Epidemiol. 2010 Mar 24. [Epub ahead of print] Wahlgren DR, Hovell MF, Flores DM, Liles S, Hofstetter CR, Zellner J, Zakarian JM. Abstract OBJECTIVE: This study examined the validity of child-reported exposure to secondhand smoke (SHS) and investigated factors, such as child's age, which might affect accuracy of recall. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Participants were drawn from a nonprobability sample of 380 families who completed baseline assessment as part of a randomized trial of an SHS reduction intervention conducted in an urban setting in Southern California. Parents and children (aged 8-13 years) retrospectively reported child's exposure to SHS using timeline followback methodology; reports were compared with child's urine cotinine. RESULTS: Validity coefficients for parents and children were comparable (r=0.58 vs. r=0.53), but parents recalled three times more exposure than children (2.2 vs. 0.8 cigarettes per day; P<0.001). Regression models predicting cotinine indicated that including child in addition to parent reports resulted in better prediction than either alone. CONCLUSION: When there is a choice, parent reports are preferable over child reports because of decreased underreporting. However, child-reported SHS exposure had adequate validity (r>0.50) and might be appropriate in some situations. Researchers might consider collecting both parent and child reports because each made a unique contribution to the prediction of cotinine. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/08954356

J Comm Health - Lubetkin Exploring Primary Care Providers' Interest in Using Patient Navigators to Assist in the Delivery of Tobacco Cessation Treatment to Low Income, Ethnic/Racial Minority Patients J Community Health. 2010 Mar 25. [Epub ahead of print] Lubetkin EI, Lu WH, Krebs P, Yeung H, Ostroff JS. Abstract We examined attitudes and practices regarding tobacco cessation interventions of primary care physicians serving low income, minority patients living in urban areas with a high smoking prevalence. We also explored barriers and facilitators to physicians providing smoking cessation counseling to determine the need for and interest in deploying a tobaccofocused patient navigator at community-based primary care practice sites. A self-administered survey was mailed to providers serving Medicaid populations in New York City's Upper Manhattan and areas of the Bronx. Provider counseling practices were measured by assessing routine delivery (>/=80% of the time) of a brief tobacco cessation intervention (i.e., "5 A's"). Provider attitudes were assessed by a decisional balance scale comprising 10 positive (Pros) and 10 negative (Cons) perceptions of tobacco cessation counseling. Of 254 eligible providers, 105 responded (41%). Providers estimated 8_19_2011

Page 7 22% of their patients currently use tobacco and nearly half speak Spanish. A majority of providers routinely asked about tobacco use (92%) and advised users to quit (82%), whereas fewer assisted in developing a quit plan (32%) or arranged follow-up (21%). Compared to providers reporting <80% adherence to the "5 A's", providers reporting >/=80% adherence tended to have similar mean Pros and Cons scores for Ask, Advise, and Assess but higher Pros and lower Cons for Assist and Arrange. Sixty four percent of providers were interested in providing tobacco-related patient navigation services at their practices. Although most providers believe they can help patients quit smoking, they also recognize the potential benefit of having a patient navigator connect their patients with evidence-based cessation services in their community. http://www.springerlink.com/content/d107j751x64703pt/

MMWR - Debrot/Ribisl State Cigarette Excise Taxes --- United States, 2009

MMWR Weekly April 9, 2010 / 59(13);385-388 Increasing the price of cigarettes can reduce smoking substantially by discouraging initiation among youths and young adults, prompting quit attempts, and reducing average cigarette consumption among those who continue to smoke (1--3). Increasing cigarette excise taxes is one of the most effective tobacco control policies because it directly increases cigarette prices, thereby reducing cigarette use and smoking-related death and disease (1). All states and the District of Columbia (DC) impose an excise tax on cigarettes (1). Because many states increased their cigarette excise taxes in 2009, CDC conducted a survey of these tax increases. For this report, CDC reviewed data contained in a legislative database to identify cigarette excise tax legislation that was enacted during 2009 by the 50 states and DC. During that period, 15 states (including DC), increased their state excise tax on cigarettes, increasing the national mean from $1.18 per pack in 2008 to $1.34 per pack in 2009. However, none of the 15 states dedicated any of the new excise tax revenue by statute to tobacco control. Additionally, for the first time, two states (Connecticut and Rhode Island) had excise tax rates of at least $3.00 per pack. Additional increases in cigarette excise taxes, and dedication of all resulting revenues to tobacco control and prevention programs at levels recommended by CDC, could result in further reductions in smoking and associated morbidity and mortality (2,4). Cigarettes and other tobacco products are taxed by federal, state, and local governments in various ways, including excise taxes, which typically are levied per pack of 20 cigarettes (1). State cigarette excise tax rates are set by legislation, are contained in state statutes, and usually are collected before the point of sale (i.e., from manufacturers, wholesalers, or distributors), as denoted by a tax stamp. Forty-four states and DC also levy state sales taxes on the retail sale of cigarettes (5). State cigarette excise tax data for this report were obtained from CDC's State Tobacco Activities Tracking and Evaluation (STATE) system database, which contains tobacco-related epidemiologic and economic data and information on state tobacco-related legislation. Data are collected quarterly from an online legal research database of state laws, analyzed, coded, and transferred into the STATE system. The STATE system contains information on state laws on excise taxes for cigarettes in effect since the fourth quarter of 1995... http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5913a1.htm Also: State Cigarette Minimum Price Laws --- United States, 2009 http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5913a2.htm http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/PDF/wk/mm5913.pdf Note: Full text PDF of complete MMRW Weekly issue freely available from link immediately above.

Neurol - Simon Combined effects of smoking, anti-EBNA antibodies, and HLA-DRB1*1501 on multiple sclerosis risk Neurology 2010 Published online before print April 7, 2010 K. C. Simon ScD, I. A.F. van der Mei PhD, K. L. Munger ScD, A. Ponsonby MD, PhD, J. Dickinson PhD, T. Dwyer 8_19_2011

Page 8 MD, P. Sundström MD, PhD, and A. Ascherio MD, DrPH Abstract Objective: To examine the interplay between smoking, serum antibody titers to the Epstein-Barr virus nuclear antigens (anti-EBNA), and HLA-DR15 on multiple sclerosis (MS) risk. Methods: Individual and pooled analyses were conducted among 442 cases and 865 controls from 3 MS case-control studiesa nested case-control study in the Nurses' Health Study/Nurses' Health Study II, the Tasmanian MS Study, and a Swedish MS Study. Conditional logistic regression models were used to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs for the association between smoking, anti-EBNA titers, HLA-DR15, and MS risk. Study estimates were pooled using inverse variance weights to determine a combined effect and p value. Results: Among MS cases, anti-EBNA titers were significantly higher in ever smokers compared to never smokers. The increased risk of MS associated with high anti-EBNA Ab titers was stronger among ever smokers (OR = 3.9, 95% CI = 2.75.7) compared to never smokers (OR = 1.8, 95% CI = 1.42.3; p for interaction = 0.001). The increased risk of MS associated with a history of smoking was no longer evident after adjustment for anti-EBNA Ab titers. No modification or confounding by HLA-DR15 was observed. The increased risk of MS associated with ever smoking was only observed among those who had high anti-EBNA titers (OR = 1.7, 95% CI = 1.12.6). Conclusions: Smoking appears to enhance the association between high anti-EBNA titer and increased multiple sclerosis (MS) risk. The association between HLA-DR15 and MS risk is independent of smoking. Further work is necessary to elucidate possible biologic mechanisms to explain this finding. http://www.neurology.org/cgi/content/abstract/WNL.0b013e3181...

PLoS One - Land Medicaid coverage for tobacco dependence treatments in Massachusetts and associated decreases in smoking prevalence PLoS One. 2010 Mar 18;5(3):e9770. Land T, Warner D, Paskowsky M, Cammaerts A, Wetherell L, Kaufmann R, Zhang L, Malarcher A, Pechacek T, Keithly L. Abstract BACKGROUND: Approximately 50% of smokers die prematurely from tobacco-related diseases. In July 2006, the Massachusetts health care reform law mandated tobacco cessation coverage for the Massachusetts Medicaid population. The new benefit included behavioral counseling and all medications approved for tobacco cessation treatment by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Between July 1, 2006 and December 31, 2008, a total of 70,140 unique Massachusetts Medicaid subscribers used the newly available benefit, which is approximately 37% of all Massachusetts Medicaid smokers. Given the high utilization rate, the objective of this study is to determine if smoking prevalence decreased significantly after the initiation of tobacco cessation coverage. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Smoking prevalence was evaluated pre- to post-benefit using 1999 through 2008 data from the Massachusetts Behavioral Risk Factor Survey (BRFSS). The crude smoking rate decreased from 38.3% (95% C.I. 33.6%-42.9%) in the pre-benefit period compared to 28.3% (95% C.I.: 24.0%-32.7%) in the post-benefit period, representing a decline of 26 percent. A demographically adjusted smoking rate showed a similar decrease in the post-benefit period. Trend analyses reflected prevalence decreases that accrued over time. Specifically, a joinpoint analysis of smoking prevalence among Massachusetts Medicaid benefit-eligible members (age 18-64) from 1999 through 2008 found a decreasing trend that was coincident with the implementation of the benefit. Finally, a logistic regression that controlled for demographic factors also showed that the trend in smoking decreased significantly from July 1, 2006 to December 31, 2008. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that a tobacco cessation benefit that includes coverage for medications and behavioral treatments, has few barriers to access, and involves broad promotion can significantly reduce smoking prevalence. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2841201/?tool=pu... http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2841201/pdf/pone... Note: Full text PDF freely available from link immediately above.

Reg Tox Pharm - Ashley 8_19_2011

Page 9 Smoking intensity before and after introduction of the public place smoking ban in Scotland Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2010 Mar 25. [Epub ahead of print] Ashley M, Saunders P, Mullard G, Prasad K, Mariner D, Williamson J, Richter A. Group Research and Development, British American Tobacco (Investments) Ltd. Abstract A study was performed to determine whether cigarettes were smoked more intensely outside of public venues in Scotland, compared to indoors, after introduction of the public place smoking (PPS) ban. It was conducted in 3 waves: before the ban, immediately after and 6 months after introduction. The study included 322 regular smokers of 4 cigarette brand variants. Filter analysis measurements were used to estimate the human-smoked yields of tar and nicotine from cigarettes smoked predominantly inside (before the ban) or outside (after the ban) public venues. Self-reported cigarette consumption data were also collected. Numbers of cigarettes smoked indoors in public places fell dramatically after the ban. There was a corresponding rise in smoking incidence in outdoor public locations. The ban did not significantly affect the total number of cigarettes smoked by the subjects over the weekends investigated. Human-smoked yields of tar and nicotine decreased slightly after the introduction of the ban and some reductions were significant. Therefore, smoking outdoors at public venues, following the PPS ban, did not increase smoking intensity. Any changes in smoking behaviour that may have occurred had little effect on mainstream smoke exposure or cigarette consumption for those that continued to smoke. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/02732300 Note: Tobacco industry research.

Reg Tox Pharm - Côté Estimation of nicotine and tar yields from human-smoked cigarettes before and after the implementation of the cigarette ignition propensity regulations in Canada Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2010 Mar 18. [Epub ahead of print] Côté F, Létourneau C, Mullard G, Voisine R. Imperial Tobacco Canada Ltd. Abstract In 2005, Human-Smoked (HS) tar and nicotine yields from commercial Canadian cigarettes were determined using a part filter analysis method to obtain estimates representative of human smoking behavior. In 2006, new cigarette designs were introduced to ensure compliance with the Canadian Low Ignition Propensity (LIP) regulations. It was not known how the changes in product design would affect HS yields. To assess the impact of the cigarette design modifications on HS yields, a further group of Canadian smokers was recruited for smoking the modified version of 10 products previously assessed. No differences in estimated HS tar yields were found between products following product modification. The HS nicotine yield was different for one product. In general, HS yields were higher than ISO machine yields while Canadian intense machine yields were more representative of the maximum HS yields. The same product ranking order was obtained for HS yields and the two machine yields but differences between the mean HS yields and ISO yields were smaller as the product ISO yields increased. Higher HS yields were measured when products were smoked by male smokers. The methodology used in this study showed the wide range of HS yields obtained by smokers as well as a good degree of stability in average HS yields just before and after the introduction of LIP regulations. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/02732300 Note: Tobacco industry research.

Schizophr Res - Smith RC Letter to the Editor Varenicline treatment decreases DNMT1 mRNA expression in lymphocytes of schizophrenic patients who are cigarette smokers Schizophrenia Research 8_19_2011

Page 10 Article in Press, Corrected Proof Available online 23 March 2010. Robert C. Smith, Adrian Zhubi, Ekrem Maloku, Henry Sershen, Abel Lajtha, John M. Davis, Erminio Costa and Alessandro Guidotti Dear Editors, There is increasing interest in exploring epigenetic influences on drug addiction (Renthal and Nestler, 2008) and schizophrenia (Costa et al., 2007). Our group has reported that in cortical and basal ganglia GABAergic neurons of schizophrenic patients, the decrease of GAD67 and reelin expression is associated with the increased expression of DNA-methyltrasferase-1 (DNMT1), and over expression of DNMT1 mRNA is found in post mortem brain samples of schizophrenic patients compared to non-psychotic controls (Guidotti et al., 2005; Ruzicka et al., 2007; Veldic et al., 2007; Zhubi et al., 2009). We have recently reported that changes in the levels of DNMT1 expression can also be observed in peripheral blood lymphocytes (PBL) of schizophrenic patients (Zhubi et al., 2009)... http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/09209964

Sci Transl Med - Gustafson Airway PI3K Pathway Activation Is an Early and Reversible Event in Lung Cancer Development Sci Transl Med 7 April 2010: Vol. 2, Issue 26, p. 26ra25 Adam M. Gustafson, Raffaella Soldi, Christina Anderlind, Mary Beth Scholand, Jun Qian, Xiaohui Zhang, Kendal Cooper, Darren Walker, Annette McWilliams, Gang Liu, Eva Szabo, Jerome Brody, Pierre P. Massion, Marc E. Lenburg, Stephen Lam, Andrea H. Bild and Avrum Spira Abstract Although only a subset of smokers develop lung cancer, we cannot determine which smokers are at highest risk for cancer development, nor do we know the signaling pathways altered early in the process of tumorigenesis in these individuals. On the basis of the concept that cigarette smoke creates a molecular field of injury throughout the respiratory tract, this study explores oncogenic pathway deregulation in cytologically normal proximal airway epithelial cells of smokers at risk for lung cancer. We observed a significant increase in a genomic signature of phosphatidylinositol 3kinase (PI3K) pathway activation in the cytologically normal bronchial airway of smokers with lung cancer and smokers with dysplastic lesions, suggesting that PI3K is activated in the proximal airway before tumorigenesis. Further, PI3K activity is decreased in the airway of high-risk smokers who had significant regression of dysplasia after treatment with the chemopreventive agent myo-inositol, and myo-inositol inhibits the PI3K pathway in vitro. These results suggest that deregulation of the PI3K pathway in the bronchial airway epithelium of smokers is an early, measurable, and reversible event in the development of lung cancer and that genomic profiling of these relatively accessible airway cells may enable personalized approaches to chemoprevention and therapy. Our work further suggests that additional lung cancer chemoprevention trials either targeting the PI3K pathway or measuring airway PI3K activation as an intermediate endpoint are warranted. http://stm.sciencemag.org/content/2/26/26ra25.abstract

Surgeon - Sloan The effects of smoking on fracture healing Surgeon. 2010 Apr;8(2):111-116. Epub 2010 Feb 4. Sloan A, Hussain I, Maqsood M, Eremin O, El-Sheemy M. Abstract Tobacco smoking is the single most avoidable cause of premature death worldwide. In fracture healing, it has been found to be a contributory factor to delayed union, and smokers are significantly disadvantaged, as healing times are often prolonged. The orthopaedic surgeon is likely to be knowledgeable about the detrimental effects of smoking on healing 8_19_2011

Page 11 bones, as the problem has been known for some time. Smoking adversely affects bone mineral density, lumbar disc degeneration, the incidences of hip fractures and the dynamics of bone and wound healing. Clinical trials and demographic studies have been more widespread than biochemical analyses, and have reported poor prognosis for fracture patients who smoke. Scientific research has elucidated some of the negative impacts of tobacco use and investigations involving several animal models in cellular and humoral analyses have shown damage caused by various toxicological processes. Cessation of the habit perioperatively, therefore, is routinely advised to improve outcomes for patients. The current review describes some of the consequences of tobacco smoking in fracture healing. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/1479666X

Tob Control - Hackshaw/Saade/Schoj/Kennedy/Ho/de Fátima Reis Quit attempts in response to smoke-free legislation in England Tob Control 2010;19:160-164 Lucy Hackshaw, Andy McEwen, Robert West, Linda Bauld Abstract Objectives To determine whether England's smoke-free legislation, introduced on 1 July 2007, influenced intentions and attempts to stop smoking. Design and setting National household surveys conducted in England between January 2007 and December 2008. The sample was weighted to match census data on demographics and included 10 560 adults aged 16 or over who reported having smoked within the past year. Results A greater percentage of smokers reported making a quit attempt in July and August 2007 (8.6%, n=82) compared with July and August 2008 (5.7%, n=48) (Fisher's exact=0.022); there was no significant difference in the number of quit attempts made at other times in 2007 compared with 2008. In the 5 months following the introduction of the legislation 19% (n=75) of smokers making a quit attempt reported that they had done so in response to the legislation. There were no significant differences in these quit attempts with regard to gender, social grade or cigarette consumption; there was however a significant linear trend with increasing age (χ2=7.755, df=1, p<0.005). The prevalence of respondents planning to quit before the ban came into force decreased over time, while those who planned to quit when the ban came into force increased as the ban drew closer. Conclusion England's smoke-free legislation was associated with a significant temporary increase in the percentage of smokers attempting to stop, equivalent to over 300 000 additional smokers trying to quit. As a prompt to quitting the ban appears to have been equally effective across all social grades. http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/19/2/160.abstract Open Access Tob Control studies: Indoor secondhand tobacco smoke emission levels in six Lebanese cities http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/19/2/138.abstract http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/19/2/138.full.pdf The impact of a 100% smoke-free law on the health of hospitality workers from the city of Neuquén, Argentina http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/19/2/134.abstract http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/19/2/134.full.pdf Also: Understanding the impact of the Smoke-Free Ontario Act on hospitality establishments' outdoor environments: a survey of restaurants and bars http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/19/2/165.abstract Comprehensive smoke-free legislation and displacement of smoking into the homes of young children in Hong Kong http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/19/2/129.abstract First exploratory descriptive study on adherence to and compliance with the Portuguese smoke-free law in the leisurehospitality sector http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/19/2/171.2.extract 8_19_2011

Page 12

Tob Control - Henningfield/Bullen/Eissenberg/Panzano Effect of an electronic nicotine delivery device (e cigarette) on desire to smoke and withdrawal, user preferences and nicotine delivery: randomised cross-over trial Tob Control 2010;19:98-103 C Bullen, H McRobbie, S Thornley, M Glover, R Lin, M Laugesen Abstract Objectives To measure the short-term effects of an electronic nicotine delivery device (e cigarette, ENDD) on desire to smoke, withdrawal symptoms, acceptability, pharmacokinetic properties and adverse effects. Design Single blind randomised repeated measures cross-over trial of the Ruyan V8 ENDD. Setting University research centre in Auckland, New Zealand. Participants 40 adult dependent smokers of 10 or more cigarettes per day. Interventions Participants were randomised to use ENDDs containing 16 mg nicotine or 0 mg capsules, Nicorette nicotine inhalator or their usual cigarette on each of four study days 3 days apart, with overnight smoking abstinence before use of each product. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was change in desire to smoke, measured as area under the curve on an 11-point visual analogue scale before and at intervals over 1 h of use. Secondary outcomes included withdrawal symptoms, acceptability and adverse events. In nine participants, serum nicotine levels were also measured. Results Over 60 min, participants using 16 mg ENDD recorded 0.82 units less desire to smoke than the placebo ENDD (p=0.006). No difference in desire to smoke was found between 16 mg ENDD and inhalator. ENDDs were more pleasant to use than inhalator (p=0.016) and produced less irritation of mouth and throat (p<0.001). On average, the ENDD increased serum nicotine to a peak of 1.3 mg/ml in 19.6 min, the inhalator to 2.1 ng/ml in 32 min and cigarettes to 13.4 ng/ml in 14.3 min. Conclusions The 16 mg Ruyan V8 ENDD alleviated desire to smoke after overnight abstinence, was well tolerated and had a pharmacokinetic profile more like the Nicorette inhalator than a tobacco cigarette. Evaluation of the ENDD for longer-term safety, potential for long-term use and efficacy as a cessation aid is needed. Trial registration No.12607000587404, Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Register http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/19/2/98.abstract Related Tob Control Editorial & study: Electronic nicotine delivery systems: emerging science foundation for policy http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/19/2/89.extract Electronic nicotine delivery devices: ineffective nicotine delivery and craving suppression after acute administration http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/19/1/87.extract Also: Human electroencephalography and the tobacco industry: a review of internal documents http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/19/2/153.abstract

Tob Control - Mulvey/Moodie Commentary

A life-saving precedent: protecting public health policy against Big Tobacco Tob Control 2010;19:95-97 8_19_2011

Page 13 Kathy Mulvey A landmark achievement of the third Conference of the Parties to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) in Durban, South Africa, in November 2008, was the unanimous adoption of specific guidelines to safeguard public health policies against tobacco industry interference (full text available online: http://www.who.int/fctc/guidelines/article_5_3.pdf). The FCTC, in Article 5.3, obligates ratifying countries to act to protect [public health] policies from commercial and other vested interests of the tobacco industry in accordance with national law.1 The Article 5.3 implementation guidelines recognise in Guiding Principle #1 that, There is a fundamental and irreconcilable conflict between the tobacco industry's interests and public health policy interests.2 What's good for tobacco industry profitshooking kids, manipulating nicotine to keep people addicted, targeting the Global South for expansion of its deadly businessis by definition bad for public health... Conclusion PMI spokesperson Greg Prager condemned the decision to kick the tobacco industry out of the negotiations: It sets a dangerous precedent for the United Nations in what should be a democratic and transparent process.9 Prager is wrong: the unprecedented decision made by the FCTC parties was democratic, and the transparency of the INB process remains intact through NGO participation and press access. By taking action to safeguard the illicit trade protocol negotiations against the tobacco industry's fundamental and irreconcilable conflict of interest, the FCTC parties have indeed set a precedent, but it is one that will increase transparency, foster democracy and save lives. http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/19/2/95.extract Tob Control Ad Watch: Tobacco packaging as promotion http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/19/2/168.extract

Tob Control - Shahab/Aspropoulos Public support in England for a total ban on the sale of tobacco products Tob Control 2010;19:143-147 Lion Shahab, Robert West Abstract Background This study aimed to determine the level of support for a sales ban on tobacco in England to provide a benchmark against which any changes over time can be assessed. Methods 8735 people from England who participated in one of five monthly cross-sectional household surveys in 2008 were asked to indicate whether they would support the statement that the government should work towards banning the sale of tobacco completely within the next 10 years. In addition, sociodemographic and smoking characteristics were assessed. Results A substantial proportion of the total sample (44.5%; 95% CI 43.5% to 45.6%) would support a move towards a complete ban. While never smokers (OR 2.02; 95% CI 1.82 to 2.25) and ex-smokers (OR 1.41; 95% CI 1.21 to 1.65) were more likely to support this idea, even among current smokers, a third would favour moving towards a sales ban of tobacco products. Adjusting for other background characteristics, younger, female participants, those living in London and those from lower socioeconomic groups were most likely to support a ban. Among smokers, a higher cigarette consumption, smoking enjoyment and contentment with being a smoker were associated with opposition to a ban, while feeling uncomfortable being a smoker, wanting to be a non-smoker and being worried about future health consequences of smoking were associated with support for a ban. Conclusion Support for movement towards a ban on the sale of tobacco is higher than might be imagined. It is conceivable that as smoking prevalence falls further and smoking becomes more socially unacceptable, support might grow to a point where such a policy could become feasible. http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/19/2/143.abstract 8_19_2011

Page 14 Also: Can you please put it out? Predicting non-smokers' assertiveness intentions at work http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/19/2/148.abstract

WJG - Tai Cigarette smoking and alcohol drinking and esophageal cancer risk in Taiwanese women World J Gastroenterol. 2010 Mar 28;16(12):1518-21. Tai SY, Wu IC, Wu DC, Su HJ, Huang JL, Tsai HJ, Lu CY, Lee JM, Wu MT. Abstract AIM: To investigate the etiology of esophageal cancer among Taiwanese women. METHODS: This is a multi-center, hospital-based, case-control study. Case patients consisted of women who were newly diagnosed and pathology-proven to have esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) from three large medical centers (one from Northern and two from Southern Taiwan, respectively) between August 2000 and December 2008. Each ESCC patient was matched with 4 healthy women based on age (within 3 years) and hospital of origin, from the Department of Preventive Medicine in each hospital. A total of 51 case patients and 204 controls, all women, were studied. RESULTS: Frequencies of smokers and drinkers among ESCC patients were 19.6% and 21.6%, respectively, which were significantly higher than smokers (4.4%) and drinkers (4.4%) among controls (OR = 4.07, 95% CI: 1.36-12.16, P = 0.01; OR = 3.55, 95% CI: 1.03-12.27, P = 0.04). Women who drank an amount of alcohol more than 158 g per week had a 20.58-fold greater risk (95% CI: 1.72245.62, P = 0.02) of ESCC than those who never drank alcohol after adjusting for other covariates, although the sample size was small. CONCLUSION: Cigarette smoking and alcohol drinking, especially heavy drinking, are the major risks for developing ESCC in Taiwanese women. http://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/abstract/v16/i12/1518.htm http://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/pdf/v16/i12/1518.pdf Note: Full text PDF freely available from link immediately above.

======================= Stan Shatenstein Coordinator, GLOBALink NIMI News & Information Monitoring Initiative shatensteins@sympatico.ca GLOBALink NIMI & MJU http://member.globalink.org/nimi/us =======================

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Bennett, Alan D" <Alan.Bennett@fda.hhs.gov> "Undisclosed recipients" <Undisclosed recipients:;> 9/9/2010 1:19:34 PM FDA acts against 5 electronic cigarette distributors

Please distribute as you deem appropriate. Alan Alan Bennett | Food and Drug Administration Seattle District | 9780 SW Nimbus Avenue | Beaverton, OR 97008 | 503.671.9332 | alan.bennett@fda.hhs.gov

FDA PRESS RELEASE For Immediate Release: Sept. 9, 2010 Media Inquiries: Siobhan DeLancey, 301-796-4668, siobhan.delancey@fda.hhs.gov Consumer Inquiries: 888-INFO-FDA

FDA acts against 5 electronic cigarette distributors
Agency cites unsubstantiated claims, poor manufacturing practices The U.S. Food and Drug Administration today issued warning letters to five distributors for various violations of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) including unsubstantiated claims and poor manufacturing practices. Also today, in a letter to the Electronic Cigarette Association, FDA said the agency intends to regulate electronic cigarettes and related products in a manner consistent with its mission of protecting the public health. The letter outlines the regulatory pathway for marketing drug products in compliance with the FDCA. For a drug product to gain FDA approval, a company must demonstrate to the agency that the product is safe and effective for its intended use. The company must also demonstrate that manufacturing methods are adequate to preserve the strength, quality and purity of the product. "FDA invites electronic cigarette firms to work in cooperation with the agency toward the goal of assuring that electronic cigarettes sold in the United States are lawfully marketed," the letter to the association read. FDA has determined that the electronic cigarette products addressed in the warning letters to the distributors, and similar products, are subject to FDA regulation as drugs. Under the FDCA, a company cannot claim that its drug can treat or mitigate a disease, such as nicotine addiction, unless the drug's safety and effectiveness have been proven. Yet all five companies claim without FDA review of relevant evidence that the products help users quit smoking cigarettes. The companies receiving warning letters today are: E-CigaretteDirect LLC, Ruyan America Inc., Gamucci America (Smokey Bayou Inc.), E-Cig Technology Inc. and Johnson's Creek Enterprises LLC. Certain companies received warning letters for additional reasons. For example, E-Cig Technology markets drugs in unapproved liquid forms, such as tadalafil, an erectile dysfunction drug, and rimonabant, a weight loss drug that has
8_19_2011

Page 2

not been approved for use in the United States. These liquid pharmaceuticals are designed to refill cartridges used in e-cigarettes so that the drugs can be vaporized and inhaled. The FDA cited Johnson Creek Enterprises, which markets Smoke Juice, a liquid solution used to refill depleted cartridges in e-cigarettes, for several significant deficiencies in its manufacturing processes, including failure to establish quality control and testing procedures required under the FDCA. For more information: • Letter to Electronic Cigarette Association • Questions and Answers • FDA Analysis of E-Cigarettes • Center for Tobacco Products • Warning Letters: E-CigaretteDirect LLC Ruyan America Inc Gamucci America (Smokey Bayou Inc) E-Cig Technology Inc Johnson's Creek Enterprises LLC #

You are receiving this transmission from PR Newswire on behalf of the issuer of the information contained in this email. If you would like to stop receiving information of this nature via email for this issuer, click here, for auto-removal.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"GLOBALink HQ" <hq@globalink.org> "Ross-Viles, Sarah" 9/10/2010 4:21:59 AM GLOBALink NIMI Index - Friday 10 September 2010

News & Information Monitoring Initiative - Index Friday 10 September 2010 Sonja Johnston
Advertising & Sponsorship India: 700 BEST buses display pan masala ads: RTI
The Times of India The Times of India The New Zealand Herald

India: Mumbai: 10K Ganesh mandals vow to stub out tobacco ads New Zealand: House to debate banning tobacco displays in stores Health & Science Circ: Heart Health Rises With Education in Rich Nations

Bloomberg Businessweek

Human Reprod: Smoking damages men's sperm and also the numbers of germ and somatic cells in developing embryos Addiction: Conversation with Martin Jarvis
Addiction The Moscow Times St. Petersburg Times

EurekAler

Russia: Smokers Seeing the Warning Signs

US: FL: Largo commissioners rethink ban on hiring tobacco users Industry & Products US: NE: Smokers find tax loophole Lawsuits US: NY: Judge extends order barring taxes on Indian cigarettes US: MO: Giant jury pool considered for big-stakes St. Louis trial Legislation & Politics US: FDA cracks down on 5 makers of e-cigarettes Secondhand Smoke Scotland: ASH claims smoking ban survey is 'misleading' China: Fines of $7 in "tough" new China anti-smoking rules US: MO: Study: Venues with smoking have more nicotine in air
Yahoo Omaha World-Herald

The Buffalo News The Post-Dispatch

The Publican Reuters The Post-Dispatch

This digest was brought to you by GLOBALink Lost password - Unsubscribe

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Limtiaco, Frances \(DOH\)" <Frances.Limtiaco@DOH.WA.GOV> To: "Allison Cox" <ACox@tpchd.org> "Amy Ward-Benton Franklin" <amy@tobacco-free.net> "Annie Peterson" <apeterson@shd.snohomish.wa.gov> "Ronneberg, Brett" "Bruce Rytkonen" <brytkonen@tpchd.org> cpritchard@co.okanogan.wa.us darcee.anderson@cdhd.wa.gov "Dawn Jacobs" <djacobs@tpchd.org> "de la Pena, Norilyn" "Deb Drandoff" <deb.drandoff@esd112.org> "Edie Borgman" <edieb@co.adams.wa.us> "Pajimula, Fel" "Frank DiBiase" <fdibiase@tpchd.org> "George Hermosillo" <ghermosillo@tpchd.org> "Hanna Zarellijackson" <hzarellijackson@tpchd.org> "Joanie Christian" <jchristian@netchd.org> "Bennett, John" jtillman@shd.snohomish.wa.gov "Julie Scholer" <jscholer@spokanecounty.org> "Karen Palmer" <karenpa@co.adams.wa.us> "Kate Brueske" <kateb@co.adams.wa.us> "Keri Moore" <kmoore@shd.snohomish.wa.gov> "Krista Panerio" <kpanerio@spokanecounty.org> ljones@co.okanogan.wa.us "Sherard, Mark" "Mary Small" <mary.small@cdhd.wa.gov> mswami@tpchd.org "Leon-Guerrero, Michael" pwesselestes@shd.snohomish.wa.gov "Pat Calcote" <pcalcote@shd.snohomish.wa.gov> "Zemann, Paul" "Samantha Yeun" <syeun@tpchd.org> "Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Neal, Scott" "Sheryl Taylor" <Sheryl.taylor@esd112.org> "Susan Wellhausen" <swellhausen@netchd.org> tgiles@tpchd.org together@nwi.net togethermd@nwi.net "Zilar, Christopher" <CZilar@spokanecounty.org> "Alice Buckles" <abuckles@camashealth.com> "Angela Rios" <angela.rios@colvilletribes.com> "Dianne Mellon" <dianne.mellon@colvilletribes.com> "Ladonna Boyd" <lboyd@camashealth.com> "Pam Phillips" <pamela.phillips@colvilletribes.com> "Roxanne Michel" <roxanne.michel@colvilletribes.com> "Terry Evans" <evanstl@spokanetribe.com> "Zekkethal Vargas-Thomas" <zekkethal.vargas@colvilletribes.com>
8_19_2011

Page 2

Date: 9/20/2010 1:07:37 PM Subject: AOL E-Cigarette Article FYI. http://www.aolnews.com/health/article/your-kids-buy-e-cigs-do-you-know-whats-in-them/19633977? icid=main%7Cmain%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk3%7C171258 First in AOL series on e-cigarettes.

Frances Limtiaco, MPH Community Contracts Manager Washington State Department of Health Tobacco Prevention and Control Program Physical Address: 111 Israel Road SE P.O. Box 47848 Olympia, WA 98504-7848 Phone: (360) 236-3771; Cell: (360) 790-8727 Fax: (360) 236-3646 frances.limtiaco@doh.wa.gov website: www.doh.wa.gov/tobacco Public Health -- always working for a safer and healthier Washington

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Prof.John Banzhaf" <banzhaf@globalink.org> general@globalink.org 9/20/2010 7:41:11 AM E-Cigs Banned on US Flights

General Messages by Prof. John Banzhaf
Go to other forums | Rate this article | Reply to author | Reply to all

I'm very happy to be able to post the following information.

E-Cigarettes Banned on Domestic Flights Passengers Protected From Toxins, Carcinogens Despite frequent claims by e-cigarette [e-cig] sellers that their product can be used to self administer nicotine on airplanes where smoking is prohibited, all U.S. domestic airlines ban the use of these untested products which the Food and Drug Administration [FDA] has declared are illegal, reports public interest law professor John Banzhaf, Executive Director of Action on Smoking and Health (ASH), who led the campaign to ban their use in flight. http://www.aolnews.com/health/article/despite-ad-claims-you-... E-cigs give off a vapor which is a mixture of nicotine (a deadly and addictive drug which can contribute to fatal heart attacks), propylene glycol (a respiratory irritant used in antifreeze and known to cause respiratory tract infections), and other substances the FDA has labeled "carcinogenic" and "toxic." It appears t hat these same substances are then also exhaled where those around the user -- including the elderly, those with special sensitivities, as well as infants and toddlers -- are also forced to inhale them. Previously the FDA had warned that: e-cigs pose “acute health risks” which “cannot seriously be questioned” because they contain “toxic chemicals.” It also said that: * e-cigarette users suffer from a wide variety of potentially serious symptoms “including racing pulse, dizziness, slurred speech, mouth ulcers, heartburn, coughing, diarrhea, and sore throat” * “nicotine [one of the two major chemicals used in the product] in high doses can be dangerous and even fatal” * the toxic chemical diethylene glycol was found in the e-cigarettes which were tested * various mutagenic, carcinogenic, and genotoxic chemicals were also present in the products * the cartridges con taining the nicotine and other toxic chemicals, many of which come from China, are subject to “none of the manufacturing controls required for FDA-approved nicotine-delivery products” [like nicotine gum, patches, inhalers, sprays, etc.]. Subsequent to the FDA's warning, independent scientists have warned about additional potential dangers to users of e-cigs: www.newsrx.com/press-releases/11551.html The Air Force, and the Marine base at Quantico, have joined other jurisdictions in banning the use of e-cigarettes [e-cigs] at least in the workplace, citing the potential health dangers to users from toxic chemicals as set forth in a memo by the Air Force Surgeon General. He also noted a concern originally expressed by ASH that these "illegal" devices can also be used to surreptitiously administer drugs other than nicotine. ASH had previously reported ads for e-cigs which
8_19_2011

Page 2

administer Cialis and "potent" marijuana. www.cigarettesreviews.com/fda-may-ban-marijuana-ecigarettes As the Surgeon General's memo warned: "Commanders also need to be aware that the cartridges used in these devices are replaceable and could be used to discreetly deliver substances other than nicotine." New Jersey and Suffolk County, NY, have banned the use of e-cigs wherever smoking is prohibiting, and New York as well as several other states are considering similar bans. Many countries have also banned or severely restricted the sale of the product outright, as have several states. Banzhaf, who first forced airlines to provide no-smoking sections, and ultimately to ban smoking entirely, said that the health advantages these bans brought should not be subverted by an untested product which forced persons in the vicinity of the user to inhale nicotine, propylene glycol, and a host of other toxic, mutagenic, and genotoxic substances, and thereby serve as guinea pig s to see how serious the adverse health effects are. PROFESSOR JOHN F. BANZHAF III Professor of Public Interest Law at GWU, FAMRI Dr. William Cahan Distinguished Professor, FELLOW, World Technology Network, and Executive Director and Chief Counsel Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) America’s First Antismoking Organization 2013 H Street, NW Washington, DC 20006, USA (202) 659-4310 // (703) 527-8418 Internet: http://ash.org/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/AshOrg
Contact GLK | Netiquette | Report abuse | Unsubscribe
Prof. John Banzhaf has declared no competing interest. If you are new to GLOBALink, please make yourself familiar with GLOBALink Netiquette before posting. Please keep in mind that there is no place for engaging in hate speech on GLOBALink forums. GLOBALink membership is subject to suspension and expulsion if rules are violated.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> Date: 9/20/2010 10:45:26 AM Subject: FW: E-Cigs Banned on US Flights
This article doesn't seem to be the best-cited thing in the world (all the US airlines - together? at once?). But a good move if it's true.

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Prof.John Banzhaf [mailto:banzhaf@globalink.org] Sent: Monday, September 20, 2010 4:37 AM To: general@globalink.org Subject: E-Cigs Banned on US Flights

General Messages by Prof. John Banzhaf
Go to other forums | Rate this article | Reply to author | Reply to all

I'm very happy to be able to post the following information.

E-Cigarettes Banned on Domestic Flights Passengers Protected From Toxins, Carcinogens Despite frequent claims by e-cigarette [e-cig] sellers that their product can be used to self administer nicotine on airplanes where smoking is prohibited, all U.S. domestic airlines ban the use of these untested products which the Food and Drug Administration [FDA] has declared are illegal, reports public interest law professor John Banzhaf, Executive Director of Action on Smoking and Health (ASH), who led the campaign to ban their use in flight. http://www.aolnews.com/health/article/despite-ad-claims-you-... E-cigs give off a vapor which is a mixture of nicotine (a deadly and addictive drug which can contribute to fatal heart attacks), propylene glycol (a respiratory irritant used in antifreeze and known to cause respiratory tract infections), and other substances the FDA has labeled "carcinogenic" and "toxic." It appears t hat these same substances are then also exhaled where those around the user -- including the elderly, those with special sensitivities, as well as infants and toddlers -- are also forced to inhale them. Previously the FDA had warned that: e-cigs pose “acute health risks” which “cannot seriously be questioned” because they contain “toxic chemicals.” It also said that: * e-cigarette users suffer from a wide variety of potentially serious symptoms “including racing pulse, dizziness, slurred speech, mouth ulcers, heartburn, coughing, diarrhea, and sore throat”
8_19_2011

Page 2

* “nicotine [one of the two major chemicals used in the product] in high doses can be dangerous and even fatal” * the toxic chemical diethylene glycol was found in the e-cigarettes which were tested * various mutagenic, carcinogenic, and genotoxic chemicals were also present in the products * the cartridges con taining the nicotine and other toxic chemicals, many of which come from China, are subject to “none of the manufacturing controls required for FDA-approved nicotine-delivery products” [like nicotine gum, patches, inhalers, sprays, etc.]. Subsequent to the FDA's warning, independent scientists have warned about additional potential dangers to users of e-cigs: www.newsrx.com/press-releases/11551.html The Air Force, and the Marine base at Quantico, have joined other jurisdictions in banning the use of e-cigarettes [e-cigs] at least in the workplace, citing the potential health dangers to users from toxic chemicals as set forth in a memo by the Air Force Surgeon General. He also noted a concern originally expressed by ASH that these "illegal" devices can also be used to surreptitiously administer drugs other than nicotine. ASH had previously reported ads for e-cigs which administer Cialis and "potent" marijuana. www.cigarettesreviews.com/fda-may-ban-marijuana-ecigarettes As the Surgeon General's memo warned: "Commanders also need to be aware that the cartridges used in these devices are replaceable and could be used to discreetly deliver substances other than nicotine." New Jersey and Suffolk County, NY, have banned the use of e-cigs wherever smoking is prohibiting, and New York as well as several other states are considering similar bans. Many countries have also banned or severely restricted the sale of the product outright, as have several states. Banzhaf, who first forced airlines to provide no-smoking sections, and ultimately to ban smoking entirely, said that the health advantages these bans brought should not be subverted by an untested product which forced persons in the vicinity of the user to inhale nicotine, propylene glycol, and a host of other toxic, mutagenic, and genotoxic substances, and thereby serve as guinea pig s to see how serious the adverse health effects are. PROFESSOR JOHN F. BANZHAF III Professor of Public Interest Law at GWU, FAMRI Dr. William Cahan Distinguished Professor, FELLOW, World Technology Network, and Executive Director and Chief Counsel Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) America’s First Antismoking Organization 2013 H Street, NW Washington, DC 20006, USA (202) 659-4310 // (703) 527-8418 Internet: http://ash.org/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/AshOrg
Contact GLK | Netiquette | Report abuse | Unsubscribe
Prof. John Banzhaf has declared no competing interest. If you are new to GLOBALink, please make yourself familiar with GLOBALink Netiquette before posting. Please keep in mind that there is no place for engaging in hate speech on GLOBALink forums. GLOBALink membership is subject to suspension and expulsion if rules are violated.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ms.Spike Babaian" <babaian@globalink.org> general@globalink.org 9/21/2010 3:18:16 AM E-cigarettes allowed on most US flights

General Messages by Ms. Spike Babaian
Go to other forums | Rate this article | Reply to author | Reply to all

I will reply to the ASH press release here since it was posted here. Quote from PR below: "all U.S. domestic airlines ban the use of these untested products which the Food and Drug Administration [FDA] has declared are illegal" Fact: This statement has no basis in fact. Firstly, the FDA is not a judge, jury or officer of the law and cannot therefore declare a product illegal. A federal judge declared "This case appears to be yet another example of FDA's aggressive efforts to regulate recreational tobacco products as drugs or devices under the FDCA". No one with any authority to do so has declared the product illegal. The FDA has suggested it would like the product regulated as a drug delivery device and a Federal judge stated it does not seem to qualify as such and should be regulated as a smokeless tobacco product. I have personally had contact with customer service at 2 dozen or more airlines in the past 18 months and I have found that a handful have a policy that allows the crew to make the final determination on allowing use and most of the rest have no specific policy on e-cigarettes. I contacted the author of the AOL News article when it was posted and let him know that this and many of his other "facts" were incorrect. He apologized, but made no move to correct the misinformation. I would like to ask how one can call nicotine a deadly and addictive drug and then suggest that smokers use the nicotine patch and gum when those products contain nicotine - "a deadly and addictive drug"? Quote from PR below: "propylene glycol (a respiratory irritant used in antifreeze and known to cause respiratory tract infections)" Fact: Did you know that propylene glycol is used in medication for lung transplant patients because it prevents respiratory infections? (http://www.liebertonline.com/doi/abs/10.1089/jam.2007.0626) Quote from PR below: "ASH had previously reported ads for e-cigs which administer Cialis and "potent" marijuana". Fact: Paper and coca cola cans can deliver marijuana as well, shall we ban them also? List from PR below: "carcinogens", "toxins", "toxic chemicals","mutagenic" or "genotoxic" substances have supposedly been found in e-cigarettes. Fact: To be considered carcinogenic, a product must contain a level of nitrosamines which could ACTUALY cause cancer.
8_19_2011

Page 2

Quoted from PR below: "Many countries have also banned or severely restricted the sale of the product outright, as have several states." Fact: Not one single state has banned sale of e-cigarettes to adults in the USA.

----- Original message ----To: General Messages Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0200 Subject: Re: E-Cigs Banned on US Flights I'm very happy to be able to post the following information.

E-Cigarettes Banned on Domestic Flights Passengers Protected From Toxins, Carcinogens Despite frequent claims by e-cigarette [e-cig] sellers that their product can be used to self administer nicotine on airplanes where smoking is prohibited, all U.S. domestic airlines ban the use of these untested products which the Food and Drug Administration [FDA] has declared are illegal, reports public interest law professor John Banzhaf, Executive Director of Action on Smoking and Health (ASH), who led the campaign to ban their use in flight. http://www.aolnews.com/health/article/despite-ad-claims-you-... E-cigs give off a vapor which is a mixture of nicotine (a deadly and addictive drug which can contribute to fatal heart attacks), propylene glycol (a respiratory irritant used in antifreeze and known to cause respiratory tract infections), and other substances the FDA has labeled "carcinoge nic" and "toxic." It appears that these same substances are then also exhaled where those around the user -- including the elderly, those with special sensitivities, as well as infants and toddlers -- are also forced to inhale them. Previously the FDA had warned that: e-cigs pose “acute health risks” which “cannot seriously be questioned” because they contain “toxic chemicals.” It also said that: * e-cigarette users suffer from a wide variety of potentially serious symptoms “including racing pulse, dizziness, slurred speech, mouth ulcers, heartburn, coughing, diarrhea, and sore throat” * “nicotine [one of the two major chemicals used in the product] in high doses can be dangerous and even fatal” * the toxic chemical diethylene glycol was found in the e-cigarettes which were tested * various mutagenic, carcinogenic, and genotoxic chemicals were also present in the products * the cartridges containing the nicotine and other toxic chemicals, many of which come from China, are subject to “none of the manufacturing controls required for FDA-approved nicotinedelivery products” [like nicotine gum, patches, inhalers, sprays, etc.]. Subsequent to the FDA's warning, independent scientists have warned about additional potential dangers to users of e-cigs: www.newsrx.com/press-releases/11551.html The Air Force, and the Marine base at Quantico, have joined other jurisdictions in banning the use of e-cigarettes [e-cigs] at least in the workplace, citing the potential health dangers to users from toxic chemicals as set forth in a memo by the Air Force Surgeon General.
8_19_2011

Page 3

He also noted a concern originally expressed by ASH that these "illegal" devices can also be used to surreptitiously administer drugs other than nicotine. ASH had previously reported ads for e-cigs which administer Cialis and "pote nt" marijuana. www.cigarettesreviews.com/fda-may-ban-marijuana-e-cigarettes As the Surgeon General's memo warned: "Commanders also need to be aware that the cartridges used in these devices are replaceable and could be used to discreetly deliver substances other than nicotine." New Jersey and Suffolk County, NY, have banned the use of e-cigs wherever smoking is prohibiting, and New York as well as several other states are considering similar bans. Many countries have also banned or severely restricted the sale of the product outright, as have several states. Banzhaf, who first forced airlines to provide no-smoking sections, and ultimately to ban smoking entirely, said that the health advantages these bans brought should not be subverted by an untested product which forced persons in the vicinity of the user to inhale nicotine, propylene glycol, and a host of other toxic, mutagenic, and genotoxic substances, and thereby serve a s guinea pigs to see how serious the adverse health effects are. PROFESSOR JOHN F. BANZHAF III Professor of Public Interest Law at GWU, FAMRI Dr. William Cahan Distinguished Professor, FELLOW, World Technology Network, and Executive Director and Chief Counsel Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) America’s First Antismoking Organization 2013 H Street, NW Washington, DC 20006, USA (202) 659-4310 // (703) 527-8418 Internet: http://ash.org/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/AshOrg
Contact GLK | Netiquette | Report abuse | Unsubscribe
Ms. Spike Babaian has declared no competing interest. If you are new to GLOBALink, please make yourself familiar with GLOBALink Netiquette before posting. Please keep in mind that there is no place for engaging in hate speech on GLOBALink forums. GLOBALink membership is subject to suspension and expulsion if rules are violated.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> Date: 9/21/2010 5:31:14 PM Subject: FW: E-cigarettes allowed on most US flights
The rest of the story. Where is the truth???!!!

From: Ms.Spike Babaian [mailto:babaian@globalink.org] Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2010 12:16 AM To: general@globalink.org Subject: E-cigarettes allowed on most US flights

General Messages by Ms. Spike Babaian
Go to other forums | Rate this article | Reply to author | Reply to all

I will reply to the ASH press release here since it was posted here. Quote from PR below: "all U.S. domestic airlines ban the use of these untested products which the Food and Drug Administration [FDA] has declared are illegal" Fact: This statement has no basis in fact. Firstly, the FDA is not a judge, jury or officer of the law and cannot therefore declare a product illegal. A federal judge declared "This case appears to be yet another example of FDA's aggressive efforts to regulate recreational tobacco products as drugs or devices under the FDCA". No one with any authority to do so has declared the product illegal. The FDA has suggested it would like the product regulated as a drug delivery device and a Federal judge stated it does not seem to qualify as such and should be regulated as a smokeless tobacco product. I have personally had contact with customer service at 2 dozen or more airlines in the past 18 months and I have found that a handful have a policy that allows the crew to make the final determination on allowing use and most of the rest have no specific policy on e-cigarettes. I contacted the author of the AOL News article when it was posted and let him know that this and many of his other "facts" were incorrect. He apologized, but made no move to correct the misinformation. I would like to ask how one can call nicotine a deadly and addictive drug and then suggest that smokers use the nicotine patch and gum when those products contain nicotine - "a deadly and addictive drug"? Quote from PR below: "propylene glycol (a respiratory irritant used in antifreeze and known to cause respiratory tract infections)" Fact: Did you know that propylene glycol is used in medication for lung transplant patients because it prevents respiratory infections? (http://www.liebertonline.com/doi/abs/10.1089/jam.2007.0626) Quote from PR below: "ASH had previously reported ads for e-cigs which administer Cialis and "potent" marijuana".
8_19_2011

Page 2

Fact: Paper and coca cola cans can deliver marijuana as well, shall we ban them also? List from PR below: "carcinogens", "toxins", "toxic chemicals","mutagenic" or "genotoxic" substances have supposedly been found in e-cigarettes. Fact: To be considered carcinogenic, a product must contain a level of nitrosamines which could ACTUALY cause cancer. Quoted from PR below: "Many countries have also banned or severely restricted the sale of the product outright, as have several states." Fact: Not one single state has banned sale of e-cigarettes to adults in the USA.

----- Original message ----To: General Messages Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0200 Subject: Re: E-Cigs Banned on US Flights I'm very happy to be able to post the following information.

E-Cigarettes Banned on Domestic Flights Passengers Protected From Toxins, Carcinogens Despite frequent claims by e-cigarette [e-cig] sellers that their product can be used to self administer nicotine on airplanes where smoking is prohibited, all U.S. domestic airlines ban the use of these untested products which the Food and Drug Administration [FDA] has declared are illegal, reports public interest law professor John Banzhaf, Executive Director of Action on Smoking and Health (ASH), who led the campaign to ban their use in flight. http://www.aolnews.com/health/article/despite-ad-claims-you-... E-cigs give off a vapor which is a mixture of nicotine (a deadly and addictive drug which can contribute to fatal heart attacks), propylene glycol (a respiratory irritant used in antifreeze and known to cause respiratory tract infections), and other substances the FDA has labeled "carcinoge nic" and "toxic." It appears that these same substances are then also exhaled where those around the user -- including the elderly, those with special sensitivities, as well as infants and toddlers -- are also forced to inhale them. Previously the FDA had warned that: e-cigs pose “acute health risks” which “cannot seriously be questioned” because they contain “toxic chemicals.” It also said that: * e-cigarette users suffer from a wide variety of potentially serious symptoms “including racing pulse, dizziness, slurred speech, mouth ulcers, heartburn, coughing, diarrhea, and sore throat” * “nicotine [one of the two major chemicals used in the product] in high doses can be dangerous and even fatal” * the toxic chemical diethylene glycol was found in the e-cigarettes which were tested * various mutagenic, carcinogenic, and genotoxic chemicals were also present in the products * the cartridges containing the nicotine and other toxic chemicals, many of which come from China, are subject to “none of the manufacturing controls required for FDA-approved nicotine8_19_2011

Page 3

delivery products” [like nicotine gum, patches, inhalers, sprays, etc.]. Subsequent to the FDA's warning, independent scientists have warned about additional potential dangers to users of e-cigs: www.newsrx.com/press-releases/11551.html The Air Force, and the Marine base at Quantico, have joined other jurisdictions in banning the use of e-cigarettes [e-cigs] at least in the workplace, citing the potential health dangers to users from toxic chemicals as set forth in a memo by the Air Force Surgeon General. He also noted a concern originally expressed by ASH that these "illegal" devices can also be used to surreptitiously administer drugs other than nicotine. ASH had previously reported ads for e-cigs which administer Cialis and "pote nt" marijuana. www.cigarettesreviews.com/fda-may-ban-marijuana-e-cigarettes As the Surgeon General's memo warned: "Commanders also need to be aware that the cartridges used in these devices are replaceable and could be used to discreetly deliver substances other than nicotine." New Jersey and Suffolk County, NY, have banned the use of e-cigs wherever smoking is prohibiting, and New York as well as several other states are considering similar bans. Many countries have also banned or severely restricted the sale of the product outright, as have several states. Banzhaf, who first forced airlines to provide no-smoking sections, and ultimately to ban smoking entirely, said that the health advantages these bans brought should not be subverted by an untested product which forced persons in the vicinity of the user to inhale nicotine, propylene glycol, and a host of other toxic, mutagenic, and genotoxic substances, and thereby serve a s guinea pigs to see how serious the adverse health effects are. PROFESSOR JOHN F. BANZHAF III Professor of Public Interest Law at GWU, FAMRI Dr. William Cahan Distinguished Professor, FELLOW, World Technology Network, and Executive Director and Chief Counsel Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) America’s First Antismoking Organization 2013 H Street, NW Washington, DC 20006, USA (202) 659-4310 // (703) 527-8418 Internet: http://ash.org/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/AshOrg
Contact GLK | Netiquette | Report abuse | Unsubscribe
Ms. Spike Babaian has declared no competing interest. If you are new to GLOBALink, please make yourself familiar with GLOBALink Netiquette before posting. Please keep in mind that there is no place for engaging in hate speech on GLOBALink forums. GLOBALink membership is subject to suspension and expulsion if rules are violated.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Greto, Lindsey" <Lindsey.Greto@kingcounty.gov> Date: 9/21/2010 5:34:34 PM FW: FDA Decision to Regulate E-Cigarettes is Good for Consumers -- Legacy eNews - September Subject: 2010

Ah, Bedfellows. Wonder if Truth can get the Dew tour to change its sponsor - or just unload the sugar.

From: Cheryl G. Healton, DrPH [mailto:enews@americanlegacy.org] Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2010 8:04 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: FDA Decision to Regulate E-Cigarettes is Good for Consumers -- Legacy eNews - September 2010
Having trouble viewing this email? Click here

BLOG

SUBSCRIBE TO e-NEWS

FEEDBACK

CALENDAR OF EVENTS

September 2010

WHAT'S NEW?
President's Blog: Braving the Cancer Battle Smokers Gain Access to Counseling Resources to Quit Smoking through Medicare truth® Listed as Charity on SocialVibe.com New CDC MMWR on Youth Smoking

In This Issue:
U.S. FDA Decision to Regulate E-Cigarettes is Good for Consumers September Begins Hispanic Heritage Month Leaves are Falling, truth® is Rolling LGBTQ Study: Coming Out about Smoking Legacy Secondhand Smoke Ads Available Legacy Call for Papers Raise Funds for Legacy by Giving Through the Combined Federal Campaign

···

FOLLOW US

8_19_2011

···

Page 2

U.S. Food and Drug Administration Decision to Regulate Electronic Cigarettes Would be Good for Consumers
Legacy applauded the September 10, 2010 announcement that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) declared its intention to regulate electronic cigarettes. The FDA has also made public that it has acted against five of the electronic cigarette manufacturers, serving them with warning letters for violations of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) for "unsubstantiated claims and poor manufacturing practices." In 2009, Legacy called on the FDA to take electronic cigarettes off the market until it is satisfied that they are safe and effective, and until research establishes that these devices actually help smokers quit. The foundation is also concerned that ecigarettes could delay cessation attempts by providing smokers with a way to continue their smoking behaviors when they cannot smoke a cigarette. "No scientific support exists for the claims they are effective smoking cessation aids and the analysis conducted by the FDA found that e-cigarettes they tested contained detectable levels of toxic chemicals and known carcinogens," said Cheryl G. Healton, Legacy president and CEO. Since electronic cigarettes were first introduced to the market, Legacy has shared the FDA's concerns that they would appeal to teens and increase tobacco use and nicotine addiction. The products are available in an assortment of candy flavors like chocolate and strawberry that have been banned in regular tobacco cigarettes. Legacy continues to be concerned that these products are readily available to consumers online and in shopping malls without any evidence regarding their safety and efficacy. However, if in the future, electronic cigarettes are found to be an effective cessation aid, they should be available to consumers but not for use in public places or in forms such as candy that promote use by the nation's youth. Back to Top

Find out what Legacy is up to! Follow us on Twitter and Facebook.

···

8_19_2011

Page 3

Hispanic Heritage Month is the Time for Latinos to Quit Smoking
As we celebrate Hispanic culture this month, it is also an important time to think about the important health issues affecting the Hispanic community, including tobacco use and the tobacco-related diseases that stem from that use. Smoking takes a deadly toll on the nearly 5.1 million Hispanic adults who smoke in the United States - and their families. Heart disease killed just over 29,000 Hispanics in 2007, while 4,600 Latinos died of lung, trachea and bronchus cancers in the same year. Smoking is a major cause of heart disease and is overwhelmingly the most important cause of lung cancer. While Hispanic Americans smoke at a lower rate than most other racial and ethnic populations, finding supportive solutions to quitting is still important and much needed. Because of this, Legacy is committed to providing support to them by offering them culturally appropriate free resources to quit smoking through the national quit smoking campaign, EX®. EX provides free evidence-based tools to help smokers quit, including a free online quit plan as well as information that can help any smoker re-learn life without cigarettes. The website www.BecomeAnEX.org - is translated for Spanish speakers at http://ConvierteteenUnEx.com. In addition, public health advocates can use this time to help make a positive impact by educating Hispanic youth to never start smoking. Just over nineteen percent (19.2%) of high school Hispanics smoke and nearly half of adolescent smokers (48%) usually smoke menthol cigarettes. Menthol products, as we know, are highly appealing to young people and its use is on the rise. As Hispanic households across the United States spend the month celebrating the varied and rich culture of Latino heritage, take a moment to help this community carry a legacy of tradition and culture by living longer and healthier lives. Legacy Hispanics and Smoking Fact Sheet Legacy Statement: San Antonio -- with a Hispanic population of nearly 59 percent -- Joins the Fight against Secondsmoke Smoke with Clean Air Ordiance

Back to Top

···

8_19_2011

Page 4

Leaves are Falling, truth® is Rolling:

truth, the nation's largest smoking prevention campaign for youth, is on the road again continuing its 11th annual nationwide summer tour with stops throughout the fall months. For the months of September and October, a seven-member truth crew will travel to 11 states, stopping at musical and sporting events where teens gather and meeting teens one-onone through guerrilla marketing events. This year's edition of the tour began on June 25th in California and New York with two separate crews. The crews eventually made more than 60 stops in more than 25 states, hitting a few new cities along the way, including Knoxville, Tenn.; Athens, Ga.; Oklahoma City, OK; and St. Augustine, Fla. Events featured on the fall tour will include:

AST Dew Tour - an action sports tour, featuring the top action sports athletes in the world competing for the highly coveted Dew Cup in skateboarding, BMX and freestyle motocross. America Haunts - three Halloween-themed events, two in the Dallas-Fort Worth area and one in Chicago. This marks the first time truth has worked with America Haunts, a collective of the most successful and renowned haunted houses and attractions in the country. Honda Civic Tour - an annual concert tour sponsored by the Honda Motor Company. This year's headlining band is Paramore, a rock band known for its contributions to the Twilight soundtrack. Tony Hawk Presents Birdhouse World Tour - an action sports tour featuring top skateboarders. truth will also make impromptu appearances at teenoriented events and venues such as festivals, skate parks, community centers and more in cities like San Francisco, CA, St. Petersburg, Fla. and Los Angeles, among others.

Read more about the tour. Back to Top

···

8_19_2011

Page 5

Coming Out about Smoking
Young adults in the LBGTQ community use smoking with their LGBTQ peers as a vehicle to bond over the stresses of discrimination according to a new report. The August 24, 2010 report - funded by Legacy and released by the National Youth Advocacy Coalition (NYAC) -- explores the reasons why sexual minority youth smoke and suggests strategies for prevention. "Coming Out about Smoking: A Report from the National LGBTQ Young Adult Tobacco Project" also found that many sexual minority young adults see smoking as an important social activity, but most sexual minority young adults prefer to date nonsmokers. Additionally, LGBTQ young adult smokers tend to not smoke heavily, with many wanting to quit. In order to address LGBTQ tobacco use, the report recommends inclusion of LGBTQ questions in government data collection, increased funding for LGBTQ youth and tobacco programming and increased opportunities for LGBTQ youth to discuss tobacco use and lead awareness campaigns in their communities, "Coming Out About Smoking" utilizes information from focus groups and a survey of nearly 1,000 sexual minority young adults. The survey was written to address the gaps in research on tobacco use in the LGBTQ community. The full report is available online here. Back to Top

··· Legacy Secondhand Smoke Ads Available
At the end of September, Legacy will post new secondhand smoke radio and print ads to the U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention Media Campaign Resource Center (MCRC). The multi-cultural ads focus on the impact of secondhand smoke on bar and restaurant workers. They call for smokers to go outside to smoke in order to protect workers in these establishments. Organizations interested in using these ads can contact the MCRC in late September or Jeff Costantino directly at jcostantino@legacyforhealth.org. Back to Top

···

8_19_2011

Page 6

Legacy Call for Papers
Legacy is co-sponsoring a supplement theme issue of the Health Promotion Practice Journal and is looking for papers for the issue. Submissions are being considered for papers on strategies to sustain and institutionalize policies and practices that have changed tobacco-related attitudes and behaviors in the United States. The special journal supplement will provide a platform for tobacco-control professionals with a range of experience to provide valuable insights that can be applied in the practice of tobacco control. The creation of this theme issue is collaboration between Legacy, the Tobacco Technical Assistance Consortium and Society for Public Health Education (SOPHE). The deadline is September 30, 2010. Click here for more information and to submit a paper. Back to Top

··· Raise Funds for Legacy by Giving Through the Combined Federal Campaign
This year, Legacy is a national charity for the Combined Federal Campaign (CFC) that kicks off in September in hundreds of locations across the country. The CFC is the largest annual workplace charity campaign which raises funds for charity through the generous support of Federal civilian, postal and military donors. All donations made are important and will help in Legacy's mission to build a world where young people reject tobacco and anyone can quit. The campaign seasons runs from September 1-December 15, 2010. Thank you for considering Legacy as your charity of choice for the 2010 CFC! Legacy is Charity #19203

Legacy is Charity #19203 Back to Top

···

8_19_2011

Page 7
Forward email Email Marketing by This email was sent to sarah.ross-viles@kingcounty.gov by enews@americanlegacy.org. Update Profile/Email Address | Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe™ | Privacy Policy. Legacy | 1724 Massachusetts Avenue, NW | Washington | DC | 20036

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"GLOBALink HQ" <hq@globalink.org> "Ross-Viles, Sarah" 9/22/2010 4:20:52 AM GLOBALink NIMI Index - Wednesday 22 September 2010

News & Information Monitoring Initiative - Index Wednesday 22 September 2010 Sonja Johnston
Cessation US: Making the Most of Medicare's New Benefit to Quit Smoking
The Huffington Post Newswise

Neurosurg: Deep Brain Stimulation for OCD Leads to Smoking Cessation and Weight Loss Health & Science US: E-Cigs: Popular With Kids, but What's in Them? Industry & Products BAT Kenya wants law reviewed
Capital FM VietNamNet Bridge Kyiv Post AOL News

Vietnam: Vinataba faces fine for tax violations

Ukraine requests World Trade Organization to settle tobacco dispute with Armenia Lawsuits US: ME: The Most Credible People On Earth? Cigarette Makers Legislation & Politics Indonesia: Officials Called Over Vanishing Tobacco Warning
Jakarta Globe Mmegi ABC News Forbes

Botswana: Workshop Identifies Hindrances To Tobacco Control Australia: WA: New smoking laws drain on resources say councils Secondhand Smoke Ireland: Pubs' plea to ease smoking ban in Republic of Ireland Smuggling Ireland: Over 100 calls to Revenue on tobacco smuggling UK: Summit on illegal tobacco trade Canada: A different kind of 'grow op'
BBC News National Post National Post

Belfast Telegraph

Irish Examiner

Canada: 'There's nothing we've done that's illegal' Youth

India: Number of teenagers picking up smoking on the rise, say doctors

DNA

This digest was brought to you by GLOBALink Lost password - Unsubscribe

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject: Attachments:

"Hamilton, Joy" "Pearson, Anne" <Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov> 9/23/2010 5:09:34 PM FW: CPPW tobacco prevention priorities 9 22 srvjmh.doc CPPW tobacco prevention priorities 9 22 srvjmh.doc

Emma pointed out that this document doesn’t call out e-cigs. Should we add it? >______________________________________________ >From: Hamilton, Joy >Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2010 1:41 PM >To: Pearson, Anne >Subject: CPPW tobacco prevention priorities 9 22 srvjmh.doc > >

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> 9/23/2010 5:10:30 PM RE: CPPW tobacco prevention priorities 9 22 srvjmh.doc

We can add "new nicotine products like e-cigs" to youth access potentially. I am not dying for it. Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

>_____________________________________________ >From: Hamilton, Joy >Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2010 2:10 PM >To: Pearson, Anne >Cc: Ross-Viles, Sarah >Subject: FW: CPPW tobacco prevention priorities 9 22 srvjmh.doc > >Emma pointed out that this document doesn’t call out e-cigs. Should we add it? > >______________________________________________ >From: Hamilton, Joy >Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2010 1:41 PM >To: Pearson, Anne >Subject: CPPW tobacco prevention priorities 9 22 srvjmh.doc > > << File: CPPW tobacco prevention priorities 9 22 srvjmh.doc >>

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Hamilton, Joy" To: "Sadow-Hasenberg, Nicole" <Nicole.Sadow-Hasenberg@kingcounty.gov> "Ross-Viles, Sarah" <Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov> "Pearson, Anne" <Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov> "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> Date: 9/23/2010 8:50:04 PM Subject: CPPW tobacco prevention priorities 9 23.doc Attachments: CPPW tobacco prevention priorities 9 23.doc

Team, Here's the latest draft of the Tobacco Policy priorities. In light of a few calls today, our strategies around preemption and flavored products may be changing. Nicole, I know that you want this to go in the packet for the coalition and the deadline is noon tomorrow. I think that it is really close in terms of content but I want to be really careful about how we talk about these politically sensitive issues. Scott can you give this a look and give Nicole the green light? I think that the section on youth access still needs some work. Unfortunately, Sarah, Anne and I will be out of the office tomorrow. Also -- and maybe more key -- after today's new direction, we don't call out e-cigarettes in here anywhere yet. Do we want to add them now?

Scott-- for you reference, this document has evolved a fair amount. Here is where the youth access piece was earlier today: The tobacco industry knows that young people are more likely to start using tobacco and the majority of people who use tobacco become addicted when they are young. Big tobacco uses strategies like flavored products to get youth to start smoking. Flavored tobacco products have the appeal of candy and mask tobacco’s harshness. Like cigarettes, they contain nicotine which is the addictive component of tobacco.. To prevent youth from starting to use tobacco products we plan to: * Restrict the sale of flavored tobacco products that lure youth into becoming addicted * Decrease access to tobacco products near places where youth like schools and parks * Increase knowledge of dangers of tobacco by requiring health messages at point of sale

Thanks, Joy

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Sadow-Hasenberg, Nicole" To: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" <Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov> "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> "Pearson, Anne" <Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov> "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> Date: 9/24/2010 12:45:35 PM Subject: RE: CPPW tobacco prevention priorities 9 23.doc I think we can beef up the goals again. -----Original Message----From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 9:44 AM To: Hamilton, Joy; Sadow-Hasenberg, Nicole; Pearson, Anne; Neal, Scott Subject: RE: CPPW tobacco prevention priorities 9 23.doc I actually made a few more tweaks to this. Mostly shifting away from saying "smoker." Scott - can you add the once pice of data from teh sheet in your cube and also make sure this aligns with phone call from yesterday? Thanks, Sarah

-----Original Message----From: Hamilton, Joy Sent: Thu 9/23/2010 5:50 PM To: Sadow-Hasenberg, Nicole; Ross-Viles, Sarah; Pearson, Anne; Neal, Scott Subject: CPPW tobacco prevention priorities 9 23.doc

<> Team, Here's the latest draft of the Tobacco Policy priorities. In light of a few calls today, our strategies around preemption and flavored products may be changing. Nicole, I know that you want this to go in the packet for the coalition and the deadline is noon tomorrow. I think that it is really close in terms of content but I want to be really careful about how we talk about these politically sensitive issues. Scott can you give this a look and give Nicole the green light? I think that the section on youth access still needs some work. Unfortunately, Sarah, Anne and I will be out of the office tomorrow. Also -- and maybe more key -- after today's new direction, we don't call out e-cigarettes in here anywhere yet. Do we want to add them now?

Scott-- for you reference, this document has evolved a fair amount. Here is where the youth access piece was earlier today: The tobacco industry knows that young people are more likely to start using tobacco and the majority of people who use tobacco become addicted when they are young. Big tobacco uses strategies like flavored products to get youth to start smoking. Flavored tobacco products have the appeal of candy and mask tobacco's harshness. Like cigarettes, they contain nicotine which is the addictive component of tobacco..
8_19_2011

Page 2

To prevent youth from starting to use tobacco products we plan to: * Restrict the sale of flavored tobacco products that lure youth into becoming addicted * Decrease access to tobacco products near places where youth like schools and parks * Increase knowledge of dangers of tobacco by requiring health messages at point of sale

Thanks, Joy

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Hamilton, Joy" "Sadow-Hasenberg, Nicole" "Pearson, Anne" "Neal, Scott" Date: 9/24/2010 12:45:12 PM Subject: RE: CPPW tobacco prevention priorities 9 23.doc Attachments: CPPW tob prior.srv.9.24.doc I actually made a few more tweaks to this. Mostly shifting away from saying "smoker." Scott - can you add the once pice of data from teh sheet in your cube and also make sure this aligns with phone call from yesterday? Thanks, Sarah

-----Original Message----From: Hamilton, Joy Sent: Thu 9/23/2010 5:50 PM To: Sadow-Hasenberg, Nicole; Ross-Viles, Sarah; Pearson, Anne; Neal, Scott Subject: CPPW tobacco prevention priorities 9 23.doc

<> Team, Here's the latest draft of the Tobacco Policy priorities. In light of a few calls today, our strategies around preemption and flavored products may be changing. Nicole, I know that you want this to go in the packet for the coalition and the deadline is noon tomorrow. I think that it is really close in terms of content but I want to be really careful about how we talk about these politically sensitive issues. Scott can you give this a look and give Nicole the green light? I think that the section on youth access still needs some work. Unfortunately, Sarah, Anne and I will be out of the office tomorrow. Also -- and maybe more key -- after today's new direction, we don't call out e-cigarettes in here anywhere yet. Do we want to add them now?

Scott-- for you reference, this document has evolved a fair amount. Here is where the youth access piece was earlier today: The tobacco industry knows that young people are more likely to start using tobacco and the majority of people who use tobacco become addicted when they are young. Big tobacco uses strategies like flavored products to get youth to start smoking. Flavored tobacco products have the appeal of candy and mask tobacco's harshness. Like cigarettes, they contain nicotine which is the addictive component of tobacco.. To prevent youth from starting to use tobacco products we plan to: * Restrict the sale of flavored tobacco products that lure youth into becoming addicted * Decrease access to tobacco products near places where youth like schools and parks * Increase knowledge of dangers of tobacco by requiring health messages at point of sale

8_19_2011

Page 2

Thanks, Joy

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Limtiaco, Frances \(DOH\)" <Frances.Limtiaco@DOH.WA.GOV> To: "Allison Cox" <ACox@tpchd.org> "Amy Ward-Benton Franklin" <amy@tobacco-free.net> "Annie Peterson" <apeterson@shd.snohomish.wa.gov> "Ronneberg, Brett" "Bruce Rytkonen" <brytkonen@tpchd.org> cpritchard@co.okanogan.wa.us darcee.anderson@cdhd.wa.gov "Dawn Jacobs" <djacobs@tpchd.org> "de la Pena, Norilyn" "Deb Drandoff" <deb.drandoff@esd112.org> "Edie Borgman" <edieb@co.adams.wa.us> "Pajimula, Fel" "Frank DiBiase" <fdibiase@tpchd.org> "George Hermosillo" <ghermosillo@tpchd.org> "Hanna Zarellijackson" <hzarellijackson@tpchd.org> "Joanie Christian" <jchristian@netchd.org> "Bennett, John" jtillman@shd.snohomish.wa.gov "Julie Scholer" <jscholer@spokanecounty.org> "Karen Palmer" <karenpa@co.adams.wa.us> "Kate Brueske" <kateb@co.adams.wa.us> "Keri Moore" <kmoore@shd.snohomish.wa.gov> "Krista Panerio" <kpanerio@spokanecounty.org> ljones@co.okanogan.wa.us "Sherard, Mark" "Mary Small" <mary.small@cdhd.wa.gov> mswami@tpchd.org "Leon-Guerrero, Michael" pwesselestes@shd.snohomish.wa.gov "Pat Calcote" <pcalcote@shd.snohomish.wa.gov> "Zemann, Paul" "Samantha Yeun" <syeun@tpchd.org> "Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Neal, Scott" "Sheryl Taylor" <Sheryl.taylor@esd112.org> "Susan Wellhausen" <swellhausen@netchd.org> tgiles@tpchd.org together@nwi.net togethermd@nwi.net "Zilar, Christopher" <CZilar@spokanecounty.org> "Astrid Newell" <ANewell@co.whatcom.wa.us> Carol.Hawk@unitedgeneral.org "Carrie McLachlan" <carriem@co.island.wa.us> HWiersma@whatcomcounty.us "Jessica Minder" <J.Minder@co.island.wa.us> "Johnston, Allison" <Allison.Johnston@unitedgeneral.org> "Kissee, James \(DOH\)" <James.Kissee@DOH.WA.GOV> "Saunders, Rachel B \(DOH\)" <Rachel.Saunders@DOH.WA.GOV>
8_19_2011

Page 2

"Zipperer, Chris \(DOH\)" <Chris.Zipperer@DOH.WA.GOV> "Amber Talburt \(E-mail\)" <Amber.Talburt@cancer.org> "Alice Buckles" <abuckles@camashealth.com> "Angela Rios" <angela.rios@colvilletribes.com> "Bridget Desautel" <bridget.abrahamson@colvilletribes.com> "Dianne Mellon" <dianne.mellon@colvilletribes.com> "Ladonna Boyd" <lboyd@camashealth.com> "Terry Evans" <evanstl@spokanetribe.com> "Zekkethal Vargas-Thomas" <zekkethal.vargas@colvilletribes.com> dianetigerlily@hotmail.com Date: 9/24/2010 6:37:00 PM Subject: Spokane BoH E-Cigarettes Resolution Passed!
We learned from the Spokane Regional Health District Tobacco Prevention and Control Program that the Board of Health passed a resolution to support and encourage restricting the sale and distribution of electronic ciagrettes to minors as well as the use of electronic cigarettes by minors. The resolution was passed during yesterday’s Board of Health meeting. If you would like details about the resolution and process, please contact Christopher Zilar, Julie Scholer, or Krista Panerio with the Spokane TPCP.

Czilar@spokanecounty.org Jscholer@spokanecounty.org Kpanerio@spokanecounty.org This is great news! Congratulations to the Spokane TPC program staff and colleagues!

Frances Limtiaco, MPH Healthy Communities Consultant Tobacco Prevention and Control Contract Manager Washington State Department of Health Chronic Disease Prevention Unit Physical Address: 111 Israel Road SE P.O. Box 47848 Olympia, WA 98504-7848 Phone: (360) 236-3771; Cell: (360) 790-8727 Fax: (360) 236-3646 frances.limtiaco@doh.wa.gov website: www.doh.wa.gov/tobacco
Public Health -- always working for a safer and healthier Washington

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Neal, Scott" "Wood, Maria" <Maria.Wood@kingcounty.gov> 9/24/2010 7:23:56 PM FW: Spokane BoH E-Cigarettes Resolution Passed!

FYI...Spokane BOH just passed a resolution on e-cigs. I'm still trying to get in touch with Christopher on the latest developments that we've been working through here regarding local BOH work in December. Scott

From: Limtiaco, Frances (DOH) [mailto:Frances.Limtiaco@DOH.WA.GOV] Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 3:34 PM To: Allison Cox; Amy Ward-Benton Franklin; Annie Peterson; Ronneberg, Brett; Bruce Rytkonen; cpritchard@co.okanogan.wa.us; darcee.anderson@cdhd.wa.gov; Dawn Jacobs; de la Pena, Norilyn; Deb Drandoff; Edie Borgman; Pajimula, Fel; Frank DiBiase; George Hermosillo; Hanna Zarellijackson; Joanie Christian; Bennett, John; jtillman@shd.snohomish.wa.gov; Julie Scholer; Karen Palmer; Kate Brueske; Keri Moore; Krista Panerio; ljones@co.okanogan.wa.us; Sherard, Mark; Mary Small; mswami@tpchd.org; Leon-Guerrero, Michael; pwesselestes@shd.snohomish.wa.gov; Pat Calcote; Zemann, Paul; Samantha Yeun; Ross-Viles, Sarah; Neal, Scott; Sheryl Taylor; Susan Wellhausen; tgiles@tpchd.org; together@nwi.net; togethermd@nwi.net; Zilar, Christopher; Astrid Newell; Carol.Hawk@unitedgeneral.org; Carrie McLachlan; HWiersma@whatcomcounty.us; Jessica Minder; Johnston, Allison; Kissee, James (DOH); Saunders, Rachel B (DOH); Zipperer, Chris (DOH); Amber Talburt (E-mail); Alice Buckles; Angela Rios; Bridget Desautel; Dianne Mellon; Ladonna Boyd; Terry Evans; Zekkethal Vargas-Thomas; dianetigerlily@hotmail.com Cc: Haymond, Michele (DOH); Huyck, Carla (DOH) Subject: Spokane BoH E-Cigarettes Resolution Passed! We learned from the Spokane Regional Health District Tobacco Prevention and Control Program that the Board of Health passed a resolution to support and encourage restricting the sale and distribution of electronic ciagrettes to minors as well as the use of electronic cigarettes by minors. The resolution was passed during yesterday’s Board of Health meeting. If you would like details about the resolution and process, please contact Christopher Zilar, Julie Scholer, or Krista Panerio with the Spokane TPCP.

Czilar@spokanecounty.org Jscholer@spokanecounty.org Kpanerio@spokanecounty.org This is great news! Congratulations to the Spokane TPC program staff and colleagues!

Frances Limtiaco, MPH Healthy Communities Consultant Tobacco Prevention and Control Contract Manager Washington State Department of Health Chronic Disease Prevention Unit Physical Address: 111 Israel Road SE P.O. Box 47848 Olympia, WA 98504-7848 Phone: (360) 236-3771; Cell: (360) 790-8727 Fax: (360) 236-3646 frances.limtiaco@doh.wa.gov website: www.doh.wa.gov/tobacco
Public Health -- always working for a safer and healthier Washington

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject: Thanks, Joy!

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> 9/30/2010 3:13:49 PM RE: CPPW tobacco prevention priorities 9 23.doc

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211 -----Original Message----From: Hamilton, Joy Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 12:13 PM To: Sadow-Hasenberg, Nicole; Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: RE: CPPW tobacco prevention priorities 9 23.doc Nicole, We'll wrap this document up today. The edits you just sent were on an older version and there have been changes made since then (the version with the date 9.29 was most current). I'll compare the two documents and get this figured out. I thought you were making formatting changes to have this match HEAL. We can have one of our support staff take care of that. Can you send the HEAL document? Thanks, Joy -----Original Message----From: Sadow-Hasenberg, Nicole Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 11:39 AM To: Sadow-Hasenberg, Nicole; Neal, Scott; Ross-Viles, Sarah; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: CPPW tobacco prevention priorities 9 23.doc P.S. - Can you please be more specific in the problem statement about inequities. It's so broad I don't think it's useful. Still keep it to one sentence though. Thanks. -----Original Message----From: Sadow-Hasenberg, Nicole Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 11:33 AM To: Neal, Scott; Ross-Viles, Sarah; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: CPPW tobacco prevention priorities 9 23.doc Can you look this over one more time and we'll call it done? Can you please get back to me in the next hour? It's my "day off" and I need to leave soon. -----Original Message----8_19_2011

Page 2

From: Neal, Scott Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 1:58 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Hamilton, Joy; Sadow-Hasenberg, Nicole; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: CPPW tobacco prevention priorities 9 23.doc I made a couple of minor edits and included the current number (10th graders-2008 HYS). Scott -----Original Message----From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 9:44 AM To: Hamilton, Joy; Sadow-Hasenberg, Nicole; Pearson, Anne; Neal, Scott Subject: RE: CPPW tobacco prevention priorities 9 23.doc I actually made a few more tweaks to this. Mostly shifting away from saying "smoker." Scott - can you add the once pice of data from teh sheet in your cube and also make sure this aligns with phone call from yesterday? Thanks, Sarah

-----Original Message----From: Hamilton, Joy Sent: Thu 9/23/2010 5:50 PM To: Sadow-Hasenberg, Nicole; Ross-Viles, Sarah; Pearson, Anne; Neal, Scott Subject: CPPW tobacco prevention priorities 9 23.doc

<> Team, Here's the latest draft of the Tobacco Policy priorities. In light of a few calls today, our strategies around preemption and flavored products may be changing. Nicole, I know that you want this to go in the packet for the coalition and the deadline is noon tomorrow. I think that it is really close in terms of content but I want to be really careful about how we talk about these politically sensitive issues. Scott can you give this a look and give Nicole the green light? I think that the section on youth access still needs some work. Unfortunately, Sarah, Anne and I will be out of the office tomorrow. Also -- and maybe more key -- after today's new direction, we don't call out e-cigarettes in here anywhere yet. Do we want to add them now?

Scott-- for you reference, this document has evolved a fair amount. Here is where the youth access piece was earlier today: The tobacco industry knows that young people are more likely to start using tobacco and the majority of people who use tobacco become addicted when they are young. Big tobacco uses strategies like flavored products to get youth to start smoking. Flavored tobacco products have the appeal of candy and mask tobacco's harshness. Like cigarettes, they contain nicotine which is the addictive component of tobacco.. To prevent youth from starting to use tobacco products we plan to:
8_19_2011

Page 3

* Restrict the sale of flavored tobacco products that lure youth into becoming addicted * Decrease access to tobacco products near places where youth like schools and parks * Increase knowledge of dangers of tobacco by requiring health messages at point of sale

Thanks, Joy

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject: Hi Beth,

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Hines, Elizabeth \(CDC/ONDIEH/NCCDPHP\)" <bua5@cdc.gov> 10/5/2010 8:32:50 PM CAP Updates

Here are King Tobacco CAP updates, barely in advance of our call. Again, I am just listing things that are off track (or, ahead of track in some cases). 4. Quitline, Milestone 3 - We have finalized a scope of work, though Free & Clear is negotiating with our contracts on elements of the boilerplate. Close to agreement. Contract will start Nov 1 when ads start. 6. Smoke-free Housing, Milestone 7 - Ahead of schedule, Seattle Housing Authority is moving ahead to put smokefree policies in place in new buildings, including the Tamarack, an 86 unit building funded in part with ARRA dollars. 7 and 10: Flavor Ban and Point of Sale, Milestone 5 and on: Partners in preemption strategy have asked that we not move with local policy that will risk a lawsuit until after the legislative session, as a lawsuit would stall the legislature's contemplation of related regulation. The BOH will likely look at these policies in June, and is contemplating e-cig regs for December. 8. Preemption, Milestone 3 - ALA had to do a separate contract from ACS, waiting for them to finalize scope. 11. Tobacco Free Schools - on track. Heads-up for next quarter - Milestone 7 will be started in Quarter 4, but likely extended throughout the school year (through Quarters 5 and 6). We've encountered some difficulty finding a good ATS program and for sustainability purposes, want to be sure it's a good one before having schools implement it. 16. College Dissemination Pilot - Millstone 4, ahead of schedule as UW Med Center is reaching out to campus in going all smoke-free together. South Campus is interested, working to interest North Campus as well. 21. Early Learning- Milestone 7 is incorrect. Change to Quarters 5 and 7 and remove it from Quarter 4. Talk to you tomorrow, Sarah Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Hamilton, Joy" To: "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> "Pajimula, Fel" <Fel.Pajimula@kingcounty.gov> "Hatzenbuehler, Eric" <Eric.Hatzenbuehler@kingcounty.gov> "Bennett, John" <John.Bennett@kingcounty.gov> Date: 10/6/2010 6:13:32 PM Subject: FW: E-cigarettes Attachments: DRAFT How States Can Handle E-Cigarettes 3-30-10.doc States with E-Cig Restrictions.doc Team, Anne got some great resources from TFK about e-cigs. Check it out. Joy

From: Pearson, Anne Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 2:53 PM To: Hamilton, Joy Subject: FW: E-cigarettes yay. this is so helpful.

From: Eric Lindblom [mailto:elindblom@TobaccoFreeKids.org] Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 2:50 PM To: Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: E-cigarettes Our position is to ban any and all non-FDA-approved nicotine delivery products that are not tobacco products. See attached draft guidance sheet. It also has some possible text to use to include some nicotine-delivery device use under smoke-free laws. [As always, comments welcome.] As for which jurisdictions have done what re e-cigarettes, attached is the best list we have (might not be comprehensive). – Eric

From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 5:43 PM To: Eric Lindblom Subject: E-cigarettes Hi Eric, I hope you're well. Our tobacco program is thinking about putting together an -ecigarette proposal for our December board of health meeting (minimum age restrictions, prohibiting use in public places, etc.) and is wondering whether TFK might have a comprehensive list of those localities that have adopted similar measures. Any chance you have something along those lines? Thanks! Anne Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 8_19_2011

Page 2 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Hamilton, Joy" To: "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> "Pajimula, Fel" <Fel.Pajimula@kingcounty.gov> "Hatzenbuehler, Eric" <Eric.Hatzenbuehler@kingcounty.gov> "Bennett, John" <John.Bennett@kingcounty.gov> Date: 10/6/2010 6:13:32 PM Subject: FW: E-cigarettes Attachments: DRAFT How States Can Handle E-Cigarettes 3-30-10.doc States with E-Cig Restrictions.doc Team, Anne got some great resources from TFK about e-cigs. Check it out. Joy

From: Pearson, Anne Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 2:53 PM To: Hamilton, Joy Subject: FW: E-cigarettes yay. this is so helpful.

From: Eric Lindblom [mailto:elindblom@TobaccoFreeKids.org] Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 2:50 PM To: Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: E-cigarettes Our position is to ban any and all non-FDA-approved nicotine delivery products that are not tobacco products. See attached draft guidance sheet. It also has some possible text to use to include some nicotine-delivery device use under smoke-free laws. [As always, comments welcome.] As for which jurisdictions have done what re e-cigarettes, attached is the best list we have (might not be comprehensive). – Eric

From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 5:43 PM To: Eric Lindblom Subject: E-cigarettes Hi Eric, I hope you're well. Our tobacco program is thinking about putting together an -ecigarette proposal for our December board of health meeting (minimum age restrictions, prohibiting use in public places, etc.) and is wondering whether TFK might have a comprehensive list of those localities that have adopted similar measures. Any chance you have something along those lines? Thanks! Anne Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 8_19_2011

Page 2 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Hamilton, Joy" To: "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> "Pajimula, Fel" <Fel.Pajimula@kingcounty.gov> "Hatzenbuehler, Eric" <Eric.Hatzenbuehler@kingcounty.gov> "Bennett, John" <John.Bennett@kingcounty.gov> Date: 10/6/2010 6:13:32 PM Subject: FW: E-cigarettes Attachments: DRAFT How States Can Handle E-Cigarettes 3-30-10.doc States with E-Cig Restrictions.doc Team, Anne got some great resources from TFK about e-cigs. Check it out. Joy

From: Pearson, Anne Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 2:53 PM To: Hamilton, Joy Subject: FW: E-cigarettes yay. this is so helpful.

From: Eric Lindblom [mailto:elindblom@TobaccoFreeKids.org] Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 2:50 PM To: Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: E-cigarettes Our position is to ban any and all non-FDA-approved nicotine delivery products that are not tobacco products. See attached draft guidance sheet. It also has some possible text to use to include some nicotine-delivery device use under smoke-free laws. [As always, comments welcome.] As for which jurisdictions have done what re e-cigarettes, attached is the best list we have (might not be comprehensive). – Eric

From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 5:43 PM To: Eric Lindblom Subject: E-cigarettes Hi Eric, I hope you're well. Our tobacco program is thinking about putting together an -ecigarette proposal for our December board of health meeting (minimum age restrictions, prohibiting use in public places, etc.) and is wondering whether TFK might have a comprehensive list of those localities that have adopted similar measures. Any chance you have something along those lines? Thanks! Anne Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 8_19_2011

Page 2 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Muhm, Jennifer" <Jennifer.Muhm@kingcounty.gov> "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> "Apa, James" <James.Apa@kingcounty.gov> "Huus, Kathie" <Kathie.Huus@kingcounty.gov> "Wood, Maria" <Maria.Wood@kingcounty.gov> "Valenzuela, Matias" <Matias.Valenzuela@kingcounty.gov> "Karasz, Hilary" <Hilary.Karasz@kingcounty.gov> Date: 10/14/2010 3:16:36 PM Subject: RE: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed I second Scott in thinking the "Certain products" language is not a hazard. Two technical points Tobacco is still the number one leading cause of death in KC according to our APDE team. Don't know if there were considerations for HEAL in calling it "One of" The Op-ed references a Surgeon General's report from "earlier this year." The Surgeon General's report on Involuntary Exposure to Secondhand Smoke was issued in 2006. The closest I can find to something that would be to a new report would be a Call to Action on Healthy Homes in 2009, but that paper is mainly about one's personal home and does not have the sentence referred to (it is in the 2006 report). Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211 -----Original Message----From: Muhm, Jennifer Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 11:43 AM To: Neal, Scott; Apa, James; Huus, Kathie; Wood, Maria; Valenzuela, Matias; Karasz, Hilary; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Russillo, Chrissy Subject: RE: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed

Thanks, Scott. You have worked with the partners in this capacity longer than I have, so I will defer to your judgment on the language. I went back and read the email chain and it is local papers only, so it should be fine. Jenn -----Original Message----From: Neal, Scott Sent: Thu 10/14/2010 11:38 AM To: Muhm, Jennifer; Apa, James; Huus, Kathie; Wood, Maria; Valenzuela, Matias; Karasz, Hilary; Ross-Viles, Sarah
8_19_2011

Page 2

Cc: Russillo, Chrissy Subject: RE: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed I think it was planned for the local neighborhood papers...but am not 100% sure. My take on this part of the op-ed was that I thought it was vague enough to say "certain products" ..there isn't even anything in there about flavored products. I'm not sure we should specifically say E-cigarettes since we haven't even met with the Tobacco Policy Committtee yet and I didn't feel like this jeopardized anything that might happen at the state. Just my two cents. :) Scott -----Original Message----From: Muhm, Jennifer Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 11:32 AM To: Apa, James; Huus, Kathie; Wood, Maria; Valenzuela, Matias; Karasz, Hilary; Neal, Scott; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Russillo, Chrissy Subject: RE: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed

I also had a chance to review and have several questions: 1. Where are they planning to run this? 2. Is it possible to frame the "certain tobacco products" in terms of e-cigarettes specifically, so as not to provide such a strong tip to industry regarding other tobacco products? 3. Is Patterson's office aware of the larger strategy, beyond BOH? 4. Just a comment--most op-eds are about 600 words or 650 max...this is 760 words, so it seems a bit long...again, gets me back to my first question, because if it's in a local paper in her district, it's not as big a deal. Jenn -----Original Message----From: Apa, James Sent: Thu 10/14/2010 11:14 AM To: Muhm, Jennifer; Huus, Kathie; Wood, Maria; Valenzuela, Matias; Karasz, Hilary; Neal, Scott; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Russillo, Chrissy Subject: RE: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed Thanks, Maria and all. Scott and Sara should be aware of this as well, so I'm forwarding to them as an FYI. For the URL at the end of the piece, they can use the shortcut: www.kingcounty.gov/health/tobacco -James -----Original Message----From: Muhm, Jennifer
8_19_2011

Page 3

Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 11:00 AM To: Huus, Kathie; Wood, Maria; Apa, James; Valenzuela, Matias; Karasz, Hilary Cc: Russillo, Chrissy Subject: RE: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed Yes, exactly. Remote email access has been down for the last hour and a half, but just back up. Maria, I will take a look at this and get back to you by noon. Jenn

-----Original Message----From: Huus, Kathie Sent: Thu 10/14/2010 10:49 AM To: Wood, Maria; Apa, James; Valenzuela, Matias; Karasz, Hilary Cc: Russillo, Chrissy; Muhm, Jennifer Subject: RE: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed Given the number things in the pipeline and on our priority list for op eds, we need to make sure our colleagues understand that this is being done by the CM not by us via the CM, so no one thinks we are not consulting about the emphasis and timing of this. k ________________________________ From: Wood, Maria Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 8:31 AM To: Apa, James; Valenzuela, Matias; Karasz, Hilary Cc: Russillo, Chrissy; Huus, Kathie; Muhm, Jennifer Subject: FW: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed

FYI - CM Patterson has been planning to run this op ed for a couple of months, and now it is finalized and ready to go. Her staffer graciously allowed PH to review the content for accuracy and consistency with PH's tobacco policy approach. Let me know if you have any comments or concerns. Thanks, Maria

________________________________ From: Kolczynski, Angela Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 4:39 PM To: Wood, Maria Cc: Soo Hoo, Wendy; Neal, Scott Subject: RE: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed

Ok, thank you both for your comments! And to Scott for researching the smoking rates between counties. If Julia
8_19_2011

Page 4

has any other significant changes I will re-route one more time.

By the way, we expect this to run sometime the week of the 18th, or to 25th in the Renton, Kent, Tukwila reporters and Highline Times.

Angela

________________________________ From: Kolczynski, Angela Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 4:32 PM To: Wood, Maria; Neal, Scott Cc: Soo Hoo, Wendy Subject: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed Hi there Finally have a draft of that tobacco op-ed that Councilmember Patterson will be submitting to the community newspapers in her district for the month of October. Would love your feedback, and appreciate you taking the time to look this over before we send out. Want to be especially careful in the last couple paragraphs where we are talking about sale/availability regulations.

Our deadline to have this to editors is this Friday, October 15, so if you can get me any comments/edits before then that would be great.

Thank you very much! Angela ________________________________ [K1]

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Pearson, Anne" <Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov> "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> "Bennett, John" <John.Bennett@kingcounty.gov> "Pajimula, Fel" <Fel.Pajimula@kingcounty.gov> Date: 10/14/2010 4:25:34 PM Subject: RE: E-cigarette proposal.doc Attachments: E-cigarette proposal.srv.doc Hi Anne, Love this one-pager process, and this one in particular. I will kick off the comments and edits. Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

>_____________________________________________ >From: Pearson, Anne >Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 11:37 AM >To: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Neal, Scott; Bennett, John; Pajimula, Fel >Subject: E-cigarette proposal.doc > >H everyone, >Attached is a quick draft of a document we could circulate internally and provide to the board of health tobacco subcommittee members. >As you'll see, there are some places we still need to fill in -- especially the section on e-cigs in King County. We also need to finalize our thinking about harm reduction. I continue to explore the viability of banning only in-person sales and not internet sales to see if that is a potential compromise. > >In the meantime, feel free to add, comment, edit away. > >Anne > > > > > > > > << File: E-cigarette proposal.doc >>

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Oberg, Donna" <Donna.Oberg@kingcounty.gov> 10/14/2010 7:31:26 PM RE: NEWSALERT: Tobacco Use Prevention and Control-October 2010

I have seen the topics, but am not sure they were from NABLOH. I will sign up for alerts. Thanks, Donna.

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Oberg, Donna Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 4:31 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: FW: NEWSALERT: Tobacco Use Prevention and Control-October 2010

have you already seen this? From: National Association of Local Boards of Health [mailto:nalboh@nalboh.org] Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 8:21 AM To: Oberg, Donna Subject: NEWSALERT: Tobacco Use Prevention and Control-October 2010
Having trouble viewing this email? Click here

8_19_2011

Page 2

In This Issue New Resources Available Tobacco Headlines Using EvidenceBased Methods NALBOH News and Events

Tobacco Use Prevention and Control NEWSALERT
October 2010 New Resources Available The Tobacco Technical Assistance Consortium (TTAC) releases newly designed website. New study shows that smoking bans are effective at reducing severe asthma attacks among children. A new study from Penn State estimates that for every $1 a state invests in tobacco cessation, it will see a $1.26 return on the investment. The American Lung Association releases new website detailing tobacco cessation benefits across the nation. CDC releases two Vital Signs reports: Current Cigarette Smoking Among Adults Aged \u8805 ? 18 Years: United States, 2009 Nonsmokers' Exposure to Secondhand Smoke: United States, 1999--2008 Tobacco Headlines Local/State Smoke-Free News Indiana Association of Local Boards of Health (InALBOH) hosted an informational meeting for all boards in the state to hear about state and national tobacco control issues. Walpole, MA Board of Health to vote on banning tobacco sales in pharmacies on October 12. King County, WA Board of Health approves resolution encouraging smoke-free multi-unit housing. Utah County, UT Board of Health adopts policy prohibiting hookah bars within county. Gardner, MA Board of Health presented with a draft health regulation that would ban local hookah bars. Bullitt County, KY Board of Health holds public forums on a smoking ban. New York City attempts to ban outdoor smoking. Marion, OH plans to ban tobacco use among city employees
8_19_2011

Page 3

while they are on the clock. National Tobacco News GlaxoSmithKlein asks the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to ban "dissolvable" tobacco products. CDC Director, Dr. Thomas Frieden, announces smoking as one of the nation's six "winnable" public health battles. The FDA sends out warning letters to five manufacturers of ecigarettes declaring them in violation of the law. Using Evidence-Based Methods: Monthly Tip Did you know? The Guide to Community Preventive Services currently finds provider education as an ineffective method to increase tobacco cessation? Learn more about the studies supporting this claim. NALBOH News and Events NALBOH offers a free 20-minute archived webinar presented by the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) entitled, Working with Your Legislators on Tobacco Control Issues. "Like" NALBOH on Facebook! New specials being exclusively offered online this month. NALBOH introduces a new monthly online poll hosted on our website's home page. Please click to answer our short (1-2 minute) survey. Results will be posted on the NALBOH website. NALBOH has released its newest series of documents entitled, Public Health Snapshots By State. By January, 2011 every state's public health snapshot will be available. Plans are already being made for NALBOH's 2011 Annual Conference in Coeur d'Alene, ID, September 7-9. Learn more about this fantastic location.

Need More Information?

8_19_2011

Page 4

Tricia Valasek, MPH Project Director-Tobacco Use Prevention and Control National Association of Local Boards of Health 1840 East Gypsy Lane Road Bowling Green, OH 43402 Phone: (419) 353-7714 Fax: (419) 352-6278 Email: tricia@nalboh.org
© Copyright 2010, National Association of Local Boards of Health
Forward email Email Marketing by This email was sent to donna.oberg@kingcounty.gov by nalboh@nalboh.org. Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe™ | Privacy Policy.

National Association of Local Boards of Health | 1840 East Gypsy Lane Road | Bowling Green | OH | 43402

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject: Nice. Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> 10/14/2010 3:17:55 PM RE: Smoking in theaters

>_____________________________________________ >From: Neal, Scott >Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 12:07 PM >To: Ross-Viles, Sarah >Subject: FW: Smoking in theaters > >FYI…just for fun I thought you'd like to see this. :) > >I'm working with Gary so he can connect with Jane on this and we'll probably have to get this "approved" by DF and possibly the exec. too > >______________________________________________ >From: Pearson, Anne >Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 9:54 AM >To: Johnson, Gareth; Neal, Scott >Subject: Smoking in theaters > >Scott and Gary, > >Scott asked me to look into the question of whether it would be a violation of the state smoke-free air law for a theater to permit the smoking of tobacco or herbal products in a theatrical production. I believe that it would, and that the theater owners could not successfully argue that enforcement of the state law under such circumstances would abridge their right to free expression. > >As you know, the Washington state smoking in public places law broadly prohibits smoking, which is defined as the “carrying or smoking of any kind of lighted pipe, cigar, cigarette, or any other lighted smoking equipment.” Washington’s law is one of only 3 or 4 state laws that restrict the smoking of any lit product, regardless of whether it contains tobacco. > >Last year, the Colorado State Supreme Court concluded that its smoke-free air law, which also prohibits the smoking of any lit product, did not violate theaters’ right to freedom of expression as guaranteed under either the federal or Colorado state constitution. In short, it concluded that the law was a permissible content-neutral restriction on the time, place and manner of conduct, and that it was justified by a legitimate government interest in protecting people from exposure to secondhand smoke. > >Although the Colorado decision is not binding in Washington, it may serve as a good predictor of how a court might
8_19_2011

Page 2

rule here. > >One thing to note is that theater owners will have a stronger claim if they have no adequate alternative channel for expression (i.e. they have absolutely no way to depict a character smoking.) Under our current law, I believe it would not be unlawful for an actor to smoke an e-cigarette as it is not a lighted product. Should we consider restricting the use of e-cigarettes in public, we might want to discuss the possibility of an exemption for theatrical productions. > >Let me know if you have any questions, >Anne >

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject: Attachments:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" sarah.rossviles@gmail.com 10/15/2010 8:04:02 PM CAP Work Summary of CPPW policy targets and goals_v2.xls SeaKing.Tob.CAP.9.13.xlsx

Hi Beth, Here are King Tobacco CAP updates, barely in advance of our call. Again, I am just listing things that are off track (or, ahead of track in some cases). 4. Quitline, Milestone 3 - We have finalized a scope of work, though Free & Clear is negotiating with our contracts on elements of the boilerplate. Close to agreement. Contract will start Nov 1 when ads start. 6. Smoke-free Housing, Milestone 7 - Ahead of schedule, Seattle Housing Authority is moving ahead to put smokefree policies in place in new buildings, including the Tamarack, an 86 unit building funded in part with ARRA dollars. 7 and 10: Flavor Ban and Point of Sale, Milestone 5 and on: Partners in preemption strategy have asked that we not move with local policy that will risk a lawsuit until after the legislative session, as a lawsuit would stall the legislature's contemplation of related regulation. The BOH will likely look at these policies in June, and is contemplating e-cig regs for December. 8. Preemption, Milestone 3 - ALA had to do a separate contract from ACS, waiting for them to finalize scope. 11. Tobacco Free Schools - on track. Heads-up for next quarter - Milestone 7 will be started in Quarter 4, but likely extended throughout the school year (through Quarters 5 and 6). We've encountered some difficulty finding a good ATS program and for sustainability purposes, want to be sure it's a good one before having schools implement it. 16. College Dissemination Pilot - Millstone 4, ahead of schedule as UW Med Center is reaching out to campus in going all smoke-free together. South Campus is interested, working to interest North Campus as well. 21. Early Learning- Milestone 7 is incorrect. Change to Quarters 5 and 7 and remove it from Quarter 4. Talk to you tomorrow, Sarah

>______________________________________________ >From: Wysen, Kirsten >Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 10:32 AM >To: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Kellogg, Ryan; Hitchcock, Laura >Subject: FW: Legislative Issue Selection_v2.ppt> > >This spreadsheet is so useful, Laura. Thanks for sending it, and sorry if it got lost in my inbox earlier. > >This is the type of product that is a major value-add for CPPW. For example, you can see at a glance in the HEAL tab that lots of policy action will happen at the city council level (lots of pink boxes) and I would say we don't have
8_19_2011

Page 2

an explicity city council policy strategy developed--so we've been in a reactive mode so far. The Leadership Team could help with this, and probably others too. > >CPPW is chartering two new workgroups, a smaller "strategy" one and re-purposing the CPPW policy ops to develop timelines and strategy plans for several topics. It will be good to have you in the future CPPW Policy Ops meetings. > >Also, thanks for withstanding the 9 am meeting with good grace! >--Kirsten > >______________________________________________ >From: Hitchcock, Laura >Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 12:45 PM >To: Wysen, Kirsten >Subject: RE: Legislative Issue Selection_v2.ppt > >Here you go. Note there are two tabs. Can I grab the hard copy of the workplan? > >Laura Hitchcock, JD >Policy Research & Development Specialist >Assessment, Policy Development & Evaluation Unit >Public Health - Seattle & King County >CNK-PH-1300 >401 Fifth Avenue, Ste 1300 >Seattle, WA 98104-1823 >ph: (206) 263-8760 >cell: (206) 276-6637 >fax: (206) 296-0166 > >_____________________________________________ >From: Wysen, Kirsten >Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 12:18 PM >To: Hitchcock, Laura >Subject: RE: Legislative Issue Selection_v2.ppt > >Hi Laura, >Your PPT looks good to me. Jennifer also had a work plan last Spring that laid out the process she went through, she or I could get you that. I only have hardcopy. > >Last, can you resend the CPPW priorities by jurisdictional body table you did? I'm not finding it in my email. > >Thank you! >Kirsten > >_____________________________________________ >From: Hitchcock, Laura >Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 10:27 AM >To: Wysen, Kirsten >Subject: Legislative Issue Selection_v2.ppt > > << File: Legislative Issue Selection_v2.ppt >>
8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Wood, Maria" <Maria.Wood@kingcounty.gov> "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> Date: 10/15/2010 1:47:11 PM Subject: RE: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed Certainly being accurate about the Surgeon General's report seems a worthwhile and factual correction. "One of" may have been an editorial choice. What's the best way to loop back to Angela?

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211 -----Original Message----From: Wood, Maria Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 10:05 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Neal, Scott Subject: RE: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed Does this warrant circling back to Angela with additional feedback? I don’t think it is too late -----Original Message----From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 12:17 PM To: Muhm, Jennifer; Neal, Scott; Apa, James; Huus, Kathie; Wood, Maria; Valenzuela, Matias; Karasz, Hilary Cc: Russillo, Chrissy Subject: RE: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed I second Scott in thinking the "Certain products" language is not a hazard. Two technical points Tobacco is still the number one leading cause of death in KC according to our APDE team. Don't know if there were considerations for HEAL in calling it "One of" The Op-ed references a Surgeon General's report from "earlier this year." The Surgeon General's report on Involuntary Exposure to Secondhand Smoke was issued in 2006. The closest I can find to something that would be to a new report would be a Call to Action on Healthy Homes in 2009, but that paper is mainly about one's personal home and does not have the sentence referred to (it is in the 2006 report). Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue
8_19_2011

Page 2

Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211 -----Original Message----From: Muhm, Jennifer Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 11:43 AM To: Neal, Scott; Apa, James; Huus, Kathie; Wood, Maria; Valenzuela, Matias; Karasz, Hilary; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Russillo, Chrissy Subject: RE: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed

Thanks, Scott. You have worked with the partners in this capacity longer than I have, so I will defer to your judgment on the language. I went back and read the email chain and it is local papers only, so it should be fine. Jenn -----Original Message----From: Neal, Scott Sent: Thu 10/14/2010 11:38 AM To: Muhm, Jennifer; Apa, James; Huus, Kathie; Wood, Maria; Valenzuela, Matias; Karasz, Hilary; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Russillo, Chrissy Subject: RE: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed I think it was planned for the local neighborhood papers...but am not 100% sure. My take on this part of the op-ed was that I thought it was vague enough to say "certain products" ..there isn't even anything in there about flavored products. I'm not sure we should specifically say E-cigarettes since we haven't even met with the Tobacco Policy Committtee yet and I didn't feel like this jeopardized anything that might happen at the state. Just my two cents. :) Scott -----Original Message----From: Muhm, Jennifer Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 11:32 AM To: Apa, James; Huus, Kathie; Wood, Maria; Valenzuela, Matias; Karasz, Hilary; Neal, Scott; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Russillo, Chrissy Subject: RE: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed

I also had a chance to review and have several questions: 1. Where are they planning to run this? 2. Is it possible to frame the "certain tobacco products" in terms of e-cigarettes specifically, so as not to provide such a strong tip to industry regarding other tobacco products? 3. Is Patterson's office aware of the larger strategy, beyond BOH?
8_19_2011

Page 3

4. Just a comment--most op-eds are about 600 words or 650 max...this is 760 words, so it seems a bit long...again, gets me back to my first question, because if it's in a local paper in her district, it's not as big a deal. Jenn -----Original Message----From: Apa, James Sent: Thu 10/14/2010 11:14 AM To: Muhm, Jennifer; Huus, Kathie; Wood, Maria; Valenzuela, Matias; Karasz, Hilary; Neal, Scott; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Russillo, Chrissy Subject: RE: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed Thanks, Maria and all. Scott and Sara should be aware of this as well, so I'm forwarding to them as an FYI. For the URL at the end of the piece, they can use the shortcut: www.kingcounty.gov/health/tobacco -James -----Original Message----From: Muhm, Jennifer Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 11:00 AM To: Huus, Kathie; Wood, Maria; Apa, James; Valenzuela, Matias; Karasz, Hilary Cc: Russillo, Chrissy Subject: RE: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed Yes, exactly. Remote email access has been down for the last hour and a half, but just back up. Maria, I will take a look at this and get back to you by noon. Jenn

-----Original Message----From: Huus, Kathie Sent: Thu 10/14/2010 10:49 AM To: Wood, Maria; Apa, James; Valenzuela, Matias; Karasz, Hilary Cc: Russillo, Chrissy; Muhm, Jennifer Subject: RE: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed Given the number things in the pipeline and on our priority list for op eds, we need to make sure our colleagues understand that this is being done by the CM not by us via the CM, so no one thinks we are not consulting about the emphasis and timing of this. k ________________________________ From: Wood, Maria Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 8:31 AM To: Apa, James; Valenzuela, Matias; Karasz, Hilary Cc: Russillo, Chrissy; Huus, Kathie; Muhm, Jennifer Subject: FW: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed

8_19_2011

Page 4

FYI - CM Patterson has been planning to run this op ed for a couple of months, and now it is finalized and ready to go. Her staffer graciously allowed PH to review the content for accuracy and consistency with PH's tobacco policy approach. Let me know if you have any comments or concerns. Thanks, Maria

________________________________ From: Kolczynski, Angela Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 4:39 PM To: Wood, Maria Cc: Soo Hoo, Wendy; Neal, Scott Subject: RE: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed

Ok, thank you both for your comments! And to Scott for researching the smoking rates between counties. If Julia has any other significant changes I will re-route one more time.

By the way, we expect this to run sometime the week of the 18th, or to 25th in the Renton, Kent, Tukwila reporters and Highline Times.

Angela

________________________________ From: Kolczynski, Angela Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 4:32 PM To: Wood, Maria; Neal, Scott Cc: Soo Hoo, Wendy Subject: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed Hi there Finally have a draft of that tobacco op-ed that Councilmember Patterson will be submitting to the community newspapers in her district for the month of October. Would love your feedback, and appreciate you taking the time to look this over before we send out. Want to be especially careful in the last couple paragraphs where we are talking about sale/availability regulations.

Our deadline to have this to editors is this Friday, October 15, so if you can get me any comments/edits before then
8_19_2011

Page 5

that would be great.

Thank you very much! Angela ________________________________ [K1]

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Wood, Maria" <Maria.Wood@kingcounty.gov> "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> Date: 10/15/2010 4:35:36 PM Subject: Re: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed Sounds good! Feel free to trim up my language as I was thinking internal not external when I wrote those points. Thanks! ----- Original Message ----From: Wood, Maria To: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Neal, Scott Sent: Fri Oct 15 12:40:55 2010 Subject: RE: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed I can forward along and cc you in case Angela has follow up questions. Does that work for you? -----Original Message----From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 10:47 AM To: Wood, Maria; Neal, Scott Subject: RE: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed Certainly being accurate about the Surgeon General's report seems a worthwhile and factual correction. "One of" may have been an editorial choice. What's the best way to loop back to Angela?

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211 -----Original Message----From: Wood, Maria Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 10:05 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Neal, Scott Subject: RE: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed Does this warrant circling back to Angela with additional feedback? I don’t think it is too late -----Original Message----From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 12:17 PM To: Muhm, Jennifer; Neal, Scott; Apa, James; Huus, Kathie; Wood, Maria; Valenzuela, Matias; Karasz, Hilary Cc: Russillo, Chrissy Subject: RE: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed I second Scott in thinking the "Certain products" language is not a hazard.
8_19_2011

Page 2

Two technical points Tobacco is still the number one leading cause of death in KC according to our APDE team. Don't know if there were considerations for HEAL in calling it "One of" The Op-ed references a Surgeon General's report from "earlier this year." The Surgeon General's report on Involuntary Exposure to Secondhand Smoke was issued in 2006. The closest I can find to something that would be to a new report would be a Call to Action on Healthy Homes in 2009, but that paper is mainly about one's personal home and does not have the sentence referred to (it is in the 2006 report). Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211 -----Original Message----From: Muhm, Jennifer Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 11:43 AM To: Neal, Scott; Apa, James; Huus, Kathie; Wood, Maria; Valenzuela, Matias; Karasz, Hilary; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Russillo, Chrissy Subject: RE: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed

Thanks, Scott. You have worked with the partners in this capacity longer than I have, so I will defer to your judgment on the language. I went back and read the email chain and it is local papers only, so it should be fine. Jenn -----Original Message----From: Neal, Scott Sent: Thu 10/14/2010 11:38 AM To: Muhm, Jennifer; Apa, James; Huus, Kathie; Wood, Maria; Valenzuela, Matias; Karasz, Hilary; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Russillo, Chrissy Subject: RE: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed I think it was planned for the local neighborhood papers...but am not 100% sure. My take on this part of the op-ed was that I thought it was vague enough to say "certain products" ..there isn't even anything in there about flavored products. I'm not sure we should specifically say E-cigarettes since we haven't even met with the Tobacco Policy Committtee yet and I didn't feel like this jeopardized anything that might happen at the state. Just my two cents. :) Scott
8_19_2011

Page 3

-----Original Message----From: Muhm, Jennifer Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 11:32 AM To: Apa, James; Huus, Kathie; Wood, Maria; Valenzuela, Matias; Karasz, Hilary; Neal, Scott; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Russillo, Chrissy Subject: RE: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed

I also had a chance to review and have several questions: 1. Where are they planning to run this? 2. Is it possible to frame the "certain tobacco products" in terms of e-cigarettes specifically, so as not to provide such a strong tip to industry regarding other tobacco products? 3. Is Patterson's office aware of the larger strategy, beyond BOH? 4. Just a comment--most op-eds are about 600 words or 650 max...this is 760 words, so it seems a bit long...again, gets me back to my first question, because if it's in a local paper in her district, it's not as big a deal. Jenn -----Original Message----From: Apa, James Sent: Thu 10/14/2010 11:14 AM To: Muhm, Jennifer; Huus, Kathie; Wood, Maria; Valenzuela, Matias; Karasz, Hilary; Neal, Scott; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Russillo, Chrissy Subject: RE: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed Thanks, Maria and all. Scott and Sara should be aware of this as well, so I'm forwarding to them as an FYI. For the URL at the end of the piece, they can use the shortcut: www.kingcounty.gov/health/tobacco -James -----Original Message----From: Muhm, Jennifer Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 11:00 AM To: Huus, Kathie; Wood, Maria; Apa, James; Valenzuela, Matias; Karasz, Hilary Cc: Russillo, Chrissy Subject: RE: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed Yes, exactly. Remote email access has been down for the last hour and a half, but just back up. Maria, I will take a look at this and get back to you by noon. Jenn

-----Original Message----From: Huus, Kathie Sent: Thu 10/14/2010 10:49 AM
8_19_2011

Page 4

To: Wood, Maria; Apa, James; Valenzuela, Matias; Karasz, Hilary Cc: Russillo, Chrissy; Muhm, Jennifer Subject: RE: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed Given the number things in the pipeline and on our priority list for op eds, we need to make sure our colleagues understand that this is being done by the CM not by us via the CM, so no one thinks we are not consulting about the emphasis and timing of this. k ________________________________ From: Wood, Maria Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 8:31 AM To: Apa, James; Valenzuela, Matias; Karasz, Hilary Cc: Russillo, Chrissy; Huus, Kathie; Muhm, Jennifer Subject: FW: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed

FYI - CM Patterson has been planning to run this op ed for a couple of months, and now it is finalized and ready to go. Her staffer graciously allowed PH to review the content for accuracy and consistency with PH's tobacco policy approach. Let me know if you have any comments or concerns. Thanks, Maria

________________________________ From: Kolczynski, Angela Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 4:39 PM To: Wood, Maria Cc: Soo Hoo, Wendy; Neal, Scott Subject: RE: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed

Ok, thank you both for your comments! And to Scott for researching the smoking rates between counties. If Julia has any other significant changes I will re-route one more time.

By the way, we expect this to run sometime the week of the 18th, or to 25th in the Renton, Kent, Tukwila reporters and Highline Times.

Angela

________________________________
8_19_2011

Page 5

From: Kolczynski, Angela Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 4:32 PM To: Wood, Maria; Neal, Scott Cc: Soo Hoo, Wendy Subject: CM Patterson Tobacco op-ed Hi there Finally have a draft of that tobacco op-ed that Councilmember Patterson will be submitting to the community newspapers in her district for the month of October. Would love your feedback, and appreciate you taking the time to look this over before we send out. Want to be especially careful in the last couple paragraphs where we are talking about sale/availability regulations.

Our deadline to have this to editors is this Friday, October 15, so if you can get me any comments/edits before then that would be great.

Thank you very much! Angela ________________________________ [K1]

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ryan, Molly" To: "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> "Ross-Viles, Sarah" <Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov> Date: 10/15/2010 1:04:00 PM Subject: FW: Thanks for meeting with us
The "non-existent" statistics about smoking rates at Seattle U are below.

Molly Ryan, MPH Tobacco Prevention Program Public Health - Seattle & King County Ph: (206) 263-8241 Fax: (206) 296-0177

From: O'Connor, Maura [mailto:oconnorm@seattleu.edu] Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2010 10:33 AM To: Greto, Lindsey Cc: Ryan, Molly Subject: RE: Thanks for meeting with us

Hi Lindsey & Molly,

I told Molly I would look into the SU contact for the Campus Health Action on Tobacco Study (CHAT) through Fred Hutchinso Jennifer Hymer Intervention Specialist (206) 667-7480 jhymer@fhcrc.org Beti Thompson, PhD Principal Investigator, CHAT study (206) 667-4673
bthompso@fhcrc.org

I don’t have the SU pre and post study data for this survey in electronic format but I do have a hard copy which you are welcome to the questions they asked. Many are about thoughts about going to a smoke free campus. Also the data (collect in 2006) reports 1 this data in electronic format but again you can review my hard copy. I believe Jennifer has moved onto another project and has a d was summarized and present in 2006.

As far as the smoking data from the National College Health Assessment (NCHA) survey for 2007, please see SU results below in ncha.org/reports_ACHA-NCHAII.html ). As Deb said our 2009 data was not considered significant due to poor response but we are

8_19_2011

Page 2 E. Alcohol, Tobacco, and Other Drug Use Thirty day prevalence - reported substance Cigarette (Question #9) National male 07 62.4 17.0 10.4 5.1 5.1 SU male 07 64.1 19.8 7.6 6.3 2.1 National female 07 64.9 17.9 8.8 4.0 4.4

Never used Used, but not in the last 30 days Used 1-9 days Used 10-29 days Used all 30 days Marijuana (Question #9)

SU fema 63. 22. 8.8 2.6 2.3

Never used Used, but not in the last 30 days Used 1-9 days Used 10-29 days Used all 30 days

National male 07 61.0 19.1 11.3 5.8 2.8

SU male 07 63.8 17.9 14.9 2.6 0.9

National female 07 65.5 20.1 10.3 3.1 1.0

SU fema 62. 24. 11. 1.7 0.6

Once I get the draft from you I will run it by my boss who will present to Father Steve. Thanks, Maura ________________________________ Maura O'Connor, ARNP Director of Student Health Center Seattle University Phone: (206) 296-6300 Fax: (206) 296-6089 web: www2.seattleu.edu/student/health
From: Greto, Lindsey [mailto:Lindsey.Greto@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Friday, September 03, 2010 1:24 PM To: O'Connor, Maura; Hinchey, Deborah Cc: Neal, Scott; Ryan, Molly; Ross-Viles, Sarah; Hamilton, Joy Subject: Thanks for meeting with us

Hi Maura and Deb, Thank you both for taking the time to meet with us today. I have attached the resource sheet that I provided at the meeting, along letter and will send it next week for your edits.

If you have any questions or need anything please don't hesitate to contact us. As we discussed in the meeting, Molly is leading o policies and programs on campus. Any of us would be more than happy to lend a hand or pass on resources, though, so feel free Thank you again. Have a nice long weekend and a fun ramp-up to the students' arrival. Cheers, Lindsey

<<SU Hookah map.doc>> <<Hookah Resources for SU.doc>> <<Hookah University Students.pdf>> <<American Lung Report on --Lindsey Greto, MPA Tobacco Prevention Program Public Health - Seattle & King County 8_19_2011

Page 3 Ph: (206) 263-9410 Fax: (206) 296-0177

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> 10/18/2010 7:18:29 PM E-cig article about youth traveling to buy them

http://www.aolnews.com/health/article/your-kids-buy-e-cigs-do-you-know-whats-in-them/19633977 Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> 10/18/2010 7:26:57 PM Katherine Heigel

http://www.e-cig.org/2010/09/28/katherine-heigl-using-her-e-cigarette-on-david-letterman/ Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject: Attachments: Gary and Jim,

"Neal, Scott" "Johnson, Gareth" <Gareth.Johnson@kingcounty.gov> 10/18/2010 7:32:09 PM RE: Proposed Restrictions on E-Cigs for December BOH E-cigarette proposal draft.doc

Here's some info we have at our fingers...we would definitely dig up more info between now and december, but the FDA is clear that these products must be put through their approval process to confirm they are safe and their initial tests show quite a variation in ingredients from what is labeled. Ultimately we have three major concerns and after our meeting today...we have edited the draft proposal document that was sent last week. This is the current proposal with 3 options (1a, 1b, or 1c) and including in our smoking in public places regulation.

1. What is in the product: http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/PublicHealthFocus/ucm173146.htm http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/PublicHealthFocus/ucm172906.htm 2. False advertising and marketing claiming it as a cessation aid Recent David Letterman clip of Katherine Heigel promoting e-cigs (this was likely a paid advertisment) http://www.e-cig.org/2010/09/28/katherine-heigl-using-her-e-cigarette-on-david-letterman/ Picture of a mall kiosk "Quit Smoking Today"

3. Marketing to youth (many of these are flavored with candylike flavoring) http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/PublicHealthFocus/ucm173175.htm http://www.aolnews.com/health/article/your-kids-buy-e-cigs-do-you-know-whats-in-them/19633977 (picture of a new sign at a local N. Seattle 7-Eleven)

> _____________________________________________ > From: Johnson, Gareth > Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 4:06 PM > To: Neal, Scott > Subject: RE: Proposed Restrictions on E-Cigs for December BOH > > Jim tells me he talked with you today and has asked you for data that shows a health risk with E-cigs. I'm glad he did that because I am pretty certain DF would want the same. Let me know when you have it. > > _____________________________________________ > From: Neal, Scott > Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 12:25 PM > To: Johnson, Gareth > Subject: FW: Proposed Restrictions on E-Cigs for December BOH > Importance: High > > Gary,
8_19_2011

Page 2

> > Have you heard anything from David about this? > > Thanks > Scott > > ______________________________________________ > From: Johnson, Gareth > Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 3:04 PM > To: Fleming, David > Cc: Neal, Scott > Subject: FW: Proposed Restrictions on E-Cigs for December BOH > Importance: High > > David, a proposal for your review and comment. The inserted revisions are mine. > > ______________________________________________ > From: Neal, Scott > Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 2:58 PM > To: Johnson, Gareth > Cc: Wood, Maria; Allis, Donna; Krieger, James > Subject: Proposed Restrictions on E-Cigs for December BOH > Importance: High > > Gary, > > Our program has put together this initial document to provide some basis for the proposed action on E-cigarettes. We'd like to get this reviewed by you and David Fleming prior to providing this to the BOH Tobacco Policy Committee next Thursday (Oct. 21). However since CM Clark cannot attend the Oct 21st meeting, Maria has scheduled a 30 minute briefing for her and I to meet with CM Clark on this very topic and the overall strategy moving forward. > << File: E-cigarette proposal(draft 3).doc >> > Please review this document and provide your feedback so we can finalize this for next week. > > Thanks > Scott

8_19_2011

Page 3

8_19_2011

Page 4

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject: Gary,

"Neal, Scott" "Johnson, Gareth" <Gareth.Johnson@kingcounty.gov> 10/20/2010 4:55:08 PM E-Cigarette Update...needs discussion/decision

We gathered additional info from a couple of meetings today on the topic of e-cigarettes. We need to discuss next steps given we meet tomorrow afternoon with the BOH tobacco policy committee. We need to consider the following: 1. Should we identify a clear position our dept. wants to take on this issue and propose this to the BOH Tobacco Policy Committee OR should we provide this level of detail to the committee and have an open discussion and see where that takes us regarding the level of policy brought before the BOH? 2. What is our dept's position on waiting until 2011 to move this policy forward given the latest concern from our state partners?...some of this may be tempered or eliminated depending on what final policy might be adopted. Conference call with ACS regarding statewide agenda and how local e-cig policy may interact: * ACS is now feeling somewhat concerned that even passing policy on e-cigarettes may have some negative effect on the state agenda in January as opponents to a youth access bill could use our recent action to provide an example to how local policies will be far reaching and inconsistent across the state. They suggested that it might be best to wait on this agenda until after the legislative session. FDA call regarding e-cigs: * FDA is handling each e-cig product case by case and examining each to determine what they are. They have evaluated approximately 700 different products and deemed ALL of them as a drug and device required to be regulated by the FDA (not as a tobacco product). They continue to issue warning letters to companies and the ecigarette association regarding these findings. It does not sound like they would ever consider these products as tobacco products under their current system. Their evaluation of these products includes reviewing all marketing and company produced materials, perceptions of product, how products are used, and any claims the manufacturer makes about the product. So even if an e-cigarette was marketed simply as an alternative to smoking regular cigarettes, the FDA would still likely consider this a drug and device, given it contains nicotine. * The case against the FDA's enforcement of these products is currently in the appellate court and they had no update on any expected timeline for a decision. They did however state that one of the two companies that brought the initial case has dropped out. Smoking Everywhere has dropped out, yet still has mall kiosks selling their products here locally. * Regarding local regulations, the FDA noted that others have begun by considering a full prohibition of the sale of these products, but have scaled back their regulations to simple age restrictions due in part to the e-cigarette and vapor coaltions speaking out on behalf of the product and its use for people to quit smoking regular cigarettes. Thanks Scott

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Greto, Lindsey" <Lindsey.Greto@kingcounty.gov> "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> Date: 10/20/2010 6:39:02 PM Subject: RE: E-cigs - school policies Is there a win to having to do this level of engagement? E.g., could PSESD also be talking about other emerging nicotine/tobacco products (orbs) to get people's tobacco fire lit? Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

>_____________________________________________ >From: Greto, Lindsey >Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2010 1:05 PM >To: Neal, Scott; Ross-Viles, Sarah >Cc: Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne >Subject: E-cigs - school policies > >Just an FYI at this point: I brought up the e-cigarette issue at my meeting with Puget Sound Educational Service District yesterday. They're already on this issue at the policy level - and are currently working to revise school tobacco policies to include e-cigarettes. This is a huge task - to revise actual policies, they have to go to the state superintendent of instruction and also to each school board. Will keep you posted. > >Wendi Gilreath is the point person on this, if you want to talk with her. I let her know that we're doing some work in this arena as well. > >-->Lindsey Greto, MPA >Tobacco Prevention Program >Public Health - Seattle & King County >Ph: (206) 263-9410 Fax: (206) 296-0177 >

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject: Attachments: Hey Scott,

"Bennett, John" "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> 10/20/2010 7:23:54 PM FDA Warning Letter Review Draft FDA Warning.doc

I reviewed the letter to the ECA and the 5 major e-cigarette manufacturers. Luckily, the letter to the ECA provides general information as to why the products are in violation of the ACT. The 5 letters to the manufacturers only differ slightly in the evidence portion of the letter and the nature of the claims made. Generally they all claim that their product reduces nicotine cravings or withdrawal symptoms, and some claim to help people quit using nicotine all together by slowly reducing the amount of nicotine in the vapor inhaled. All such claims are the basis for why the product is classified as a drug and device. Details and the justification is in the document I drafted and attached in this email.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject: Attachments:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> 11/1/2010 7:00:00 PM FW: E-cigarette proposal 11.2.doc E-cigarette proposal 11.2.doc

Hi Scott- Would you consider me optional for this meeting? Are you, Joy and Anne going? I am happy to be optional.

>______________________________________________ >From: Hamilton, Joy >Sent: Monday, November 01, 2010 3:57 PM >To: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Neal, Scott >Subject: E-cigarette proposal 11.2.doc > > > >I edited this document for our meeting with DF tomorrow. I added a few details and a rationale section at the end - which is the part that I need more sets of eyes on! Also made some font changes and added a diagram but we should also bring the real e-cig to show. > >Scott- do you want to add more about the FDA? > >It would be ideal to get this to DF before the meeting at 11 am if possible. > > >Joy

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> "Bennett, John" <John.Bennett@kingcounty.gov> Date: 11/1/2010 7:45:00 PM Subject: RE: E-cigarette proposal 11.2.doc Attachments: E-cigarette proposal 11 2 sn.srv.doc With my comments:

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

>_____________________________________________ >From: Neal, Scott >Sent: Monday, November 01, 2010 4:22 PM >To: Bennett, John; Ross-Viles, Sarah >Cc: Hamilton, Joy >Subject: RE: E-cigarette proposal 11.2.doc > >Please review ASAP…focusing on the background and rationale sections…since those were the ones that were most recently edited. > >Thanks >Scott > << File: E-cigarette proposal 11 2.sn.doc >> > >_____________________________________________ >From: Hamilton, Joy >Sent: Monday, November 01, 2010 3:57 PM >To: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Neal, Scott >Subject: E-cigarette proposal 11.2.doc > > << File: E-cigarette proposal 11.2.doc >> > >I edited this document for our meeting with DF tomorrow. I added a few details and a rationale section at the end - which is the part that I need more sets of eyes on! Also made some font changes and added a diagram but we should also bring the real e-cig to show. > >Scott- do you want to add more about the FDA? > >It would be ideal to get this to DF before the meeting at 11 am if possible. > > >Joy
8_19_2011

Page 2

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Krieger, James" <James.Krieger@kingcounty.gov> "Kellogg, Ryan" <Ryan.Kellogg@kingcounty.gov> Date: 11/11/2010 7:21:52 PM Subject: RE: Recommendations from Strategy Meeting Hi Jim, Looking forward to your review. For attendance - the attendees of this week's meeting were: Nicole, Sarah, Ryan, Kirsten, Erin, Nicole and Amy B. Not attending, but also on the invite list are Ngozi, Scott and, of course, you. Scott and I discussed his attendance, and he will probably not come very often - only at time when a CPPW strategy is integrated with a TPP strategy/activity. We offered Erin the same out on Tuesday and she decided to stay, in part because she had rushed in to get to the meeting. I am not sure if Ngozi plans to attend any meetings. we may have items where her participation would be great - though it seems like our typical agenda may be too specific to merit her involvement. That leaves a core of Ryan, me, Kirsten, Amy, Nicole and you. As most topics we get into will relate to communications and/or the coalition and leadership, Nicole and Amy are great participants. What are your thoughts? Sarah ________________________________________ From: Krieger, James Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 5:34 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Kellogg, Ryan Subject: RE: Recommendations from Strategy Meeting Will look at next week. For next meeting, can we talk about sustainability and community engagement in policy work? Also, I’d like to review who attends the meetings so we can have a clear, consistent approach to this. Jim

James Krieger, MD, MPH Chief, Chronic Disease and Injury Prevention Section Public Health - Seattle and King County Chinook Building, Suite 900 401 5th Ave Seattle, WA 98104 voice: 206-263-8227 fax: 206 205 0525 email: james.krieger@kingcounty.gov

_____________________________________________ From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 2:31 PM To: Krieger, James Cc: Sadow-Hasenberg, Nicole; MacDougall, Erin; Kellogg, Ryan; Wysen, Kirsten; Bates, Amy
8_19_2011

Page 2

Subject: Recommendations from Strategy Meeting Hi Jim We had a great strategy meeting this morning and wanted to run the resulting proposals by you. • LT/WG membership expansion: The LT and LT WG are currently closed to new members. In the event a current member leaves, we will decide whether to replace the member and design a process to replace that member. • LT WG Nov. 30th Agenda: The Nov 30th will feature a half hour each for meaty program topics. On the HEAL side these will be options for SLB policy and upcoming WIC regulation change. On the tobacco side, we will update on the e-cig proposal for the BOH and then discuss the upcoming youth access bill. The draft agenda is attached. • Teeing up LT WG asks: We discussed the following steps to set up meetings to get meaningful LT/WG involvement in CPPW issues • Fill out a timeline of which policy issues could benefit from LT/WG (and coalition) engagement during each month using the CAPs (Amy making template, Sarah and Ryan fill out first draft by 23rd). • Identify what the ask is for each issue when preparing agenda and materials - or as part of issue policy strategy plans (campaign plans) • Send out relevant support materials that include background and even the ask - if it fits - on the Monday of the week before the meeting. This month, that will be the 22nd. We will prepare materials for Jim's review by COB on Wednesday the 17th. • Only use 4-5 minutes of issue agenda time for staff to present to issue - be disciplined in allowing LT/WG discussion time • Use the Monday management meeting following each LT/WG to debrief and identify emerging issues of discussions for next agenda • Ensuring Management Decisions get to other Department members: Since minutes are not always timely, we are going to take it upon ourselves to note when decisions from the Management meeting need to get out to people not at the meeting and decide who will do the communicating. • Staff Roles at Policy Workshop: Meeting set up for next week (Yolanda working with Claire on Jim's calendar) for participating staff to briefly discuss roles to ensure department participating is not overwhelming. Kathy was not on the attendance list form last week, but it interested in coming. We think this would be added value as demonstrating the department being a champion for CPPW and PSE change. Please let us know your thoughts, Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211
8_19_2011

Page 3

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Krieger, James" <James.Krieger@kingcounty.gov> "Kellogg, Ryan" <Ryan.Kellogg@kingcounty.gov> "Wysen, Kirsten" <Kirsten.Wysen@kingcounty.gov> Date: 11/2/2010 8:21:00 PM Subject: RE: f/u/ from CPPW meeting Some comments below: >_____________________________________________ >From: Krieger, James >Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2010 11:27 AM >To: Kellogg, Ryan; Wysen, Kirsten; Ross-Viles, Sarah >Subject: f/u/ from CPPW meeting > >Hi all, > >A great and engaged meeting. > >Some items that came up that seemed to me to be worth following up on are: >* Exploring how we can influence PSRC priority list for transportation projects >* Developing calendar of anticipated big successes such as boys and girls going SLB free on 1/12, tobacco-free gay pride in 6/11, e-cigs in 12/10…for use in planning media, keeping HHS up to speed, even planning the dates of major successes so we have a steady stream over time rather than a huge bolus at the end so that we can keep constant visibility * We touched on this after the Hallmark call. Importing projects to Clarizen will set us up to have all completion dates in one project/ on one timeline. We can use this timeline to flag Hallmark moments. We can also use it to create a large visual display of the timeline of successes. In my view, the strategy for constant visibility lies in highlighting milestones as successes. I do not think we are able to change when the final deliverables are due for the contractors, but we can take the overall timeline and use it to tell a story of ongoing success. >* What is plan to use the entre hermanos videos for policy change? The digital stories are part of the larger joint project with SeaMar to create a map of the factors that create health inequities in the Latino population. The map will be part of a website, and exhibition and direct outreach to decisionmakers as well as to other communities members. An interesting "early win" of this project is that after participating in the Policy and Advocacy training we held for grantees doing community mobilization, Entres Hermanos has decided they need to take a policy-oriented approach in all the issues they work in (e.g., HIV) and has hired a consultant to train their board on policy work with their own funds. >* How do the ReWA actions, which seem very education oriented, link to P/S/E change? * The youth are picking policies to develop educational materials on, primarily social media pieces. We are asking them to focus on parks and products with youth appeal. The youth groups will use the materials they develop to recruit more youth support for policies and to go to decision-makers. Youth will also be part of a legislative education day. The project is starting with a Tobacco 101 education because participants seem to need this information to move forward. >* What is ODIR doing with packaging CPPW for electeds and how have they coordinated with us? Maria Wood initiated this by developing a sheet for Kathy Lambert after the Redmond city council discussion on ARRA funds. >* What is way forward on developing a systematic approach to including health equity in every project….a checklist? A work group to review each project for opportunities? Other? I would love the answer - or suggestions for an answer - to this to come out of discussion in the team equity training
8_19_2011

Page 2

which Matias is leading for the next month. >* Add to agenda a row for updates on the initiative-wide efforts like SLB, childcare, alt tobacco products, etc. Agreed these are important to report out on, but we are going to need more timekeeping discipline in this meeting, especially if we add topics. I propose we touch on this briefly next Monday. >Jim > >James Krieger, MD, MPH >Chief, Chronic Disease and Injury Prevention Section >Public Health - Seattle and King County >Chinook Building, Suite 900 >401 5th Ave >Seattle, WA 98104 >voice: 206-263-8227 >fax: 206 205 0525 >email: james.krieger@kingcounty.gov > >

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject: Sweet! Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> 11/2/2010 7:51:00 PM RE: January 2011 winter newsletter

>_____________________________________________ >From: Neal, Scott >Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2010 10:50 AM >To: Ross-Viles, Sarah >Subject: FW: January 2011 winter newsletter > >FYI…the next newsletter is scheduled to come out in January right after the BOH meeting. And we are going with the theme "why is tobacco preventin still important?"... > >______________________________________________ >From: Holt, Lauren >Sent: Monday, November 01, 2010 4:31 PM >To: Brawley, Karen; de la Pena, Norilyn; Greto, Lindsey; Hamilton, Joy; Leon-Guerrero, Michael; Moreno, Emma; Neal, Scott; Pearson, Anne; Ronneberg, Brett; Ryan, Molly; Zemann, Paul >Subject: January 2011 winter newsletter > >Hey team, > >So I wanted to send out a quick recap of our upcoming newsletter and timeline! > >This newsletter will have more of a general theme, and basically will be one main article that is broken up into different sections. The theme of this newsletter is: >“Why is Tobacco Prevention Still Important”? >* Because tobacco prevention programs work (examples, areas where funding has been cut but usage still increasing, etc). >Anne, would you be interested in writing up something about this? If not, Joy has volunteered as well – it just sounded like something you might have some insight on! > >* To prevent youth from tobacco use (some general stats (such as x amount of smokers begin before age of 18, etc). >Lindsey’s section > >* Because tobacco companies are constantly evolving their marketing and products to hook new users (information on the Camel campaign (include image?) as well as new products, + e-cigs as a not-tobacco company but still a new product on the market). >Molly’s section
8_19_2011

Page 2

> >* Because everyone deserves to be tobacco-free (reviewing tobacco-free policy for housing/providers/etc, list of sites/agencies already there, or planning to). Maybe create a graph showing the number of agencies in each group? >Collaboration between Lindsey, Paul, Nori, & Karen. > >* Separate section: BOH Update (December e-cigs. January – Youth) >Joy’s section > >* Everyone: If you would like to include a picture or image with your article, Mike usually helps out with the artistic side of things :-) Mike, is it fine if people check in with you directly about any images they would like to include? > >Due date for everyone’s articles is DECEMBER 6th, except for Joy’s BOH stuff (due December 27, but if you have it done before the 27th that would be ideal!) >Please email me your articles directly when they are complete, or save them to this folder: G:\Administration\Newsletter\Content\Jan 2011. > >If anyone has any questions, let me know! Thanks everyone for your help! > > >Lauren Holt >Tobacco Prevention >Public Health - Seattle & King County >phone: 206-263-8222 >

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Krieger, James" <James.Krieger@kingcounty.gov> 11/3/2010 11:33:00 AM RE: f/u/ from CPPW meeting

Entres Hermanos is identifying their priority policies from among the CPPW priorities as they learn about how their environment shapes tobacco use through the mapping exercise. They will probably be involved in parks policies, housing and products that are attractive to youth. Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

>_____________________________________________ >From: Krieger, James >Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2010 5:49 PM >To: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Kellogg, Ryan; Wysen, Kirsten >Subject: RE: f/u/ from CPPW meeting > > > >James Krieger, MD, MPH >Chief, Chronic Disease and Injury Prevention Section >Public Health - Seattle and King County >Chinook Building, Suite 900 >401 5th Ave >Seattle, WA 98104 >voice: 206-263-8227 >fax: 206 205 0525 >email: james.krieger@kingcounty.gov > > > >_____________________________________________ >From: Ross-Viles, Sarah >Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2010 5:19 PM >To: Krieger, James; Kellogg, Ryan; Wysen, Kirsten >Subject: RE: f/u/ from CPPW meeting > >Some comments below: >_____________________________________________ >From: Krieger, James >Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2010 11:27 AM >To: Kellogg, Ryan; Wysen, Kirsten; Ross-Viles, Sarah >Subject: f/u/ from CPPW meeting > >Hi all,
8_19_2011

Page 2

> >A great and engaged meeting. > >Some items that came up that seemed to me to be worth following up on are: >* Exploring how we can influence PSRC priority list for transportation projects >* Developing calendar of anticipated big successes such as boys and girls going SLB free on 1/12, tobacco-free gay pride in 6/11, e-cigs in 12/10…for use in planning media, keeping HHS up to speed, even planning the dates of major successes so we have a steady stream over time rather than a huge bolus at the end so that we can keep constant visibility >* We touched on this after the Hallmark call. Importing projects to Clarizen will set us up to have all completion dates in one project/ on one timeline. We can use this timeline to flag Hallmark moments. We can also use it to create a large visual display of the timeline of successes. In my view, the strategy for constant visibility lies in highlighting milestones as successes. I do not think we are able to change when the final deliverables are due for the contractors, but we can take the overall timeline and use it to tell a story of ongoing success. [Krieger, James] Agree > >* What is plan to use the entre hermanos videos for policy change? > The digital stories are part of the larger joint project with SeaMar to create a map of the factors that create health inequities in the Latino population. The map will be part of a website, and exhibition and direct outreach to decisionmakers as well as to other communities members. An interesting "early win" of this project is that after participating in the Policy and Advocacy training we held for grantees doing community mobilization, Entres Hermanos has decided they need to take a policy-oriented approach in all the issues they work in (e.g., HIV) and has hired a consultant to train their board on policy work with their own funds. [Krieger, James] still not clear to me what policy outcomes will be affected > >* How do the ReWA actions, which seem very education oriented, link to P/S/E change? >* >The youth are picking policies to develop educational materials on, primarily social media pieces. We are asking them to focus on parks and products with youth appeal. The youth groups will use the materials they develop to recruit more youth support for policies and to go to decision-makers. Youth will also be part of a legislative education day. The project is starting with a Tobacco 101 education because participants seem to need this information to move forward. [Krieger, James] got it > >* What is ODIR doing with packaging CPPW for electeds and how have they coordinated with us? >Maria Wood initiated this by developing a sheet for Kathy Lambert after the Redmond city council discussion on ARRA funds. [Krieger, James] Ryan and I were not aware of this…so there is coordination? > >* What is way forward on developing a systematic approach to including health equity in every project….a checklist? A work group to review each project for opportunities? Other? > I would love the answer - or suggestions for an answer - to this to come out of discussion in the team equity training which Matias is leading for the next month. >[Krieger, James] sounds like a good participatory approach > >* Add to agenda a row for updates on the initiative-wide efforts like SLB, childcare, alt tobacco products, etc. > Agreed these are important to report out on, but we are going to need more timekeeping discipline in this meeting, especially if we add topics. I propose we touch on this briefly next Monday. [Krieger, James] agree…I think we need more proactive meeting facilitation so that we get to hear from all project officers…this is not Gary's strong point…should I or someone else take over meeting facilitation? > >Jim > >James Krieger, MD, MPH >Chief, Chronic Disease and Injury Prevention Section >Public Health - Seattle and King County >Chinook Building, Suite 900
8_19_2011

Page 3

>401 5th Ave >Seattle, WA 98104 >voice: 206-263-8227 >fax: 206 205 0525 >email: james.krieger@kingcounty.gov > >

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Bennett, John" To: "Hatzenbuehler, Eric" <Eric.Hatzenbuehler@kingcounty.gov> "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> "Ross-Viles, Sarah" <Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov> "Pearson, Anne" <Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov> Date: 11/8/2010 6:18:26 PM Subject: Other Un-regulated Nicotine Products Fact Sheet Attachments: 0248[1].pdf Hey all, Here is a fact sheet the TFK put together back in the day about other unregulated nicotine products that we can use when discussing our rationale for prohibiting the sale of nicotine products to minors.

John

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject: Hi Jim

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Krieger, James" <James.Krieger@kingcounty.gov> 11/9/2010 6:33:00 PM Recommendations from Strategy Meeting

We had a great strategy meeting this morning and wanted to run the resulting proposals by you. * LT/WG membership expansion: The LT and LT WG are currently closed to new members. In the event a current member leaves, we will decide whether to replace the member and design a process to replace that member. * LT WG Nov. 30th Agenda: The Nov 30th will feature a half hour each for meaty program topics. On the HEAL side these will be options for SLB policy and upcoming WIC regulation change. On the tobacco side, we will update on the e-cig proposal for the BOH and then discuss the upcoming youth access bill. The draft agenda is attached. * Teeing up LT WG asks: We discussed the following steps to set up meetings to get meaningful LT/WG involvement in CPPW issues * Fill out a timeline of which policy issues could benefit from LT/WG (and coalition) engagement during each month using the CAPs (Amy making template, Sarah and Ryan fill out first draft by 23rd). * Identify what the ask is for each issue when preparing agenda and materials - or as part of issue policy strategy plans (campaign plans) * Send out relevant support materials that include background and even the ask - if it fits - on the Monday of the week before the meeting. This month, that will be the 22nd. We will prepare materials for Jim's review by COB on Wednesday the 17th. * Only use 4-5 minutes of issue agenda time for staff to present to issue - be disciplined in allowing LT/WG discussion time * Use the Monday management meeting following each LT/WG to debrief and identify emerging issues of discussions for next agenda * Ensuring Management Decisions get to other Department members: Since minutes are not always timely, we are going to take it upon ourselves to note when decisions from the Management meeting need to get out to people not at the meeting and decide who will do the communicating. * Staff Roles at Policy Workshop: Meeting set up for next week (Yolanda working with Claire on Jim's calendar) for participating staff to briefly discuss roles to ensure department participating is not overwhelming. Kathy was not on the attendance list form last week, but it interested in coming. We think this would be added value as demonstrating the department being a champion for CPPW and PSE change. Please let us know your thoughts, Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager
8_19_2011

Page 2

Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Mahoney, Maggie" <maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu> 11/11/2010 8:05:25 PM RE: Seattle/King County Contract Update

Glad we are on the same page, I simply forgot we had not updated the scope. I will let you know when I hear if the letter can track the contract. Sarah ________________________________________ From: Mahoney, Maggie [maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 9:55 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: RE: Seattle/King County Contract Update That all sounds good, Sarah. I thought we were talking about $25,000, too, but then thought I must have been confused since the scope of work listed $50,000. Thanks! We got a message from Anne yesterday about ecigarettes. Dave is going to try to respond before the weekend. Thanks, Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 6:33 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Seattle/King County Contract Update Thanks, Maggie. The question regarding the letter is great one, and I am feeding it to risk management/contracts. On the Scope, I grabbed the latest one from my file, but did not verify the budget. In a phone call now likely more than a month ago, we discussed a $25,000 budget, which is what we anticipate we will need with our level of inhouse support. Of the options below, the middle arrangement looks like the best fit for us. We are not sure at which points in our projects we will need legal assistance above and beyond what is in house. The most concrete work will likely be TA to our community grantees. We are collecting requests and developing a plan for this now. I will let you know the department's response to the letter question. Please let me know if this budget and a flexible, use-as-needed arrangement works. Sarah
8_19_2011

Page 2

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

________________________________ From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 2:18 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: RE: Seattle/King County Contract Update Hi Sarah, Would we be signing something that has the same language as the contract – something like “Consultant agrees not to contract with any county employee who participated in determining the work to be done or processes to be followed under this contract, within one year after that employee leaves county employment”? If so, that’s fine and then we can just rely on the monitoring steps to help make sure that Anne isn’t determining our work to be done. I’ve made just a couple of minor edits to the scope of work – nothing of substance. See what you think. One issue I need to flag is that we have a $50,000 budget and the chart in part B breaks down our work by time period based on what you think your needs will be, with a large portion of that rate being spent before the end of the calendar year, which won’t be possible. Three possible alternatives to this would be:

• Identify key deliverables in advance for a flat project rate of $50,000. The benefit of this is that it allows for flexibility in the timing; the downside is that it doesn’t allow for flexibility in terms of the projects. • Remove the estimated breakdown of how the money will be split over different time periods, and just keep an hourly rate and monitor on a periodic basis. The benefit is that this allows for flexibility; the downside is that we’ll both have to stay on top of the budget to make sure we spread out the work over the contract period (if that’s the way you want it), but that shouldn’t be too hard. • Contract for the lump sum based on our agreeing that we will provide TA on an as-needed basis throughout the contract period and an estimate that the TA will end up being in the range of 285 hours or so (I think that this is about 10% of an attorney’s time for 15 months). The benefit to this is that it is easy to manage on both ends and that it seems to be allowed by the county’s standard contracting process; the downside is that your CPPW requirements might not allow this. We have contracts with other people that are structured this way and it’s nice to know roughly how much time we’ll be spending over a period of time and to not have to spend time invoicing when we could spend our time doing research instead. We have one other CPPW contract (with a state CPPW grantee), it is not structured this way. I don’t know whether that is a CPPW requirement or just a personal preference. I’m sure there are other possibilities, too. In fact, I thought I had a fourth idea but it likely was some sort of hybrid approach. Do you want to talk about this tomorrow?

Maggie Mahoney
8_19_2011

Page 3

Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 2:42 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Seattle/King County Contract Update Hi Maggie - It is looking like TCLC would have to sign a letter saying Anne would not work with you for a year after employment. I am seeing if we can put monitoring in place on our end that would make that unnecessary. Would TCLC be willing to sign such a letter if necessary? Sorry this has been the long, dark contracting process of the soul. I am attaching the most recent scope of work I have so that we can have that ready to go when we find a road to go on. Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

________________________________ From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 12:12 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: RE: Seattle/King County Contract Update Hi Sarah, Do you happen to have any news on the contract? Today is the day that I’m working on fun stuff like contract issues, so I thought I’d check in. I hope all is well with you. Thanks, Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue
8_19_2011

Page 4

St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject: Perfect, thanks. Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Greto, Lindsey" <Lindsey.Greto@kingcounty.gov> 11/12/2010 4:23:00 PM RE: For SPS meeting

>_____________________________________________ >From: Greto, Lindsey >Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 10:56 AM >To: Ross-Viles, Sarah >Subject: For SPS meeting > >Seattle Public Schools update > >Lisa is working to secure commitments from individual schools for the Alternative to Suspension pilot. She's received approvals from Nathan Hale and Ballard High Schools so far and will be meeting with Garfield, Chief Sealth, Rainier Beach and Center Schools as well. She is being very intentional about which schools to include in the pilot, so that it's as representative as possible, but also has buy-in. > >For the youth task forces, she's planning to invite every high school to participate. This is on hold, though, due to a change in the protocol for contacting principals. She has to wait until the protocol is implemented to contact them. She's hoping to contact all principals by the end of December, though, with the invitation. > >Lisa's also been meeting with health teachers to talk about how tobacco impacts education, along with information about emerging products. She's keeping an eye out for the time when the dissolvables and e-cigarettes hit the schools. > >If you need any other info, let me know. > > > >-->Lindsey Greto, MPA >Tobacco Prevention Program >Public Health - Seattle & King County >Ph: (206) 263-9410 Fax: (206) 296-0177 >

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Wysen, Kirsten" <Kirsten.Wysen@kingcounty.gov> 11/15/2010 8:07:00 PM RE: introduction call for Seattle King County, Friday, October 29 4:00 pm Eastern time

That sounds great. I can join that meeting, or just use what you propose (the latter is fine with me). I did not send it a week before the call - that is the date I asked POs for updates (which will no longer be a step after Clarizen is up and running). I think I usually send the CAP 1-2 days before. Here is a copy of text I sent to Beth in October to accompany the CAP (the one-page)> Hi Beth, Here are King Tobacco CAP updates, barely in advance of our call. Again, I am just listing things that are off track (or, ahead of track in some cases). 4. Quitline, Milestone 3 - We have finalized a scope of work, though Free & Clear is negotiating with our contracts on elements of the boilerplate. Close to agreement. Contract will start Nov 1 when ads start. 6. Smoke-free Housing, Milestone 7 - Ahead of schedule, Seattle Housing Authority is moving ahead to put smoke-free policies in place in new buildings, including the Tamarack, an 86 unit building funded in part with ARRA dollars. 7 and 10: Flavor Ban and Point of Sale, Milestone 5 and on: Partners in preemption strategy have asked that we not move with local policy that will risk a lawsuit until after the legislative session, as a lawsuit would stall the legislature's contemplation of related regulation. The BOH will likely look at these policies in June, and is contemplating e-cig regs for December. 8. Preemption, Milestone 3 - ALA had to do a separate contract from ACS, waiting for them to finalize scope. 11. Tobacco Free Schools - on track. Heads-up for next quarter - Milestone 7 will be started in Quarter 4, but likely extended throughout the school year (through Quarters 5 and 6). We've encountered some difficulty finding a good ATS program and for sustainability purposes, want to be sure it's a good one before having schools implement it. 16. College Dissemination Pilot - Millstone 4, ahead of schedule as UW Med Center is reaching out to campus in going all smoke-free together. South Campus is interested, working to interest North Campus as well. 21. Early Learning- Milestone 7 is incorrect. Change to Quarters 5 and 7 and remove it from Quarter 4. Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Wysen, Kirsten Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 3:58 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: RE: introduction call for Seattle King County, Friday, October 29 4:00 pm Eastern time thanks, and did you send it to him on 11/5, a week before the call? Helen, Ryan and I are meeting tomorrow briefly to get a system together to get him prepped for these calls going forward, and it would make some sense for the tobacco and heal reports to resemble each other in format and timing, when possible.

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 3:55 PM To: Wysen, Kirsten Subject: RE: introduction call for Seattle King County, Friday, October 29 4:00 pm Eastern time Just a CAP. Usually, I would send a page of highlights as well. Red reflects a change.

8_19_2011

Page 2

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Wysen, Kirsten Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 2:51 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: FW: introduction call for Seattle King County, Friday, October 29 4:00 pm Eastern time what did you send Mike last Friday? I'm going to debrief Ryan and wanted to compare what you and I sent. Thanks, Kirsten

From: Waldmiller, J. Mike (CDC/ONDIEH/NCCDPHP) [mailto:aii3@cdc.gov] Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 9:49 AM To: Wysen, Kirsten Cc: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Kellogg, Ryan Subject: RE: introduction call for Seattle King County, Friday, October 29 4:00 pm Eastern time

All sounds good. Looking forward to the call. I did receive a CAP update from Sarah re: tobacco. If you have something similar for obesity, that would be great. Otherwise, I will just take notes.

From: Wysen, Kirsten [mailto:Kirsten.Wysen@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 11:50 AM To: Waldmiller, J. Mike (CDC/ONDIEH/NCCDPHP) Cc: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Kellogg, Ryan Subject: FW: introduction call for Seattle King County, Friday, October 29 4:00 pm Eastern time Hi Mike, Sarah Ross-Viles and I are looking forward to talking to you today. Here is a short overview of the Public Health-Seattle & King County CPPW approach for your background. After we spend 5 or 10 minutes together describing the overview, Sarah will go over the Tobacco Prevention CAP with you, and then I'll update you on healthy eating, active living progress through the Obesity Prevention CAP. We'll talk to you soon at 10 am Pacific/2 pm Eastern. --Kirsten

From: Waldmiller, J. Mike (CDC/ONDIEH/NCCDPHP) [mailto:aii3@cdc.gov] Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2010 5:51 AM To: Kellogg, Ryan Cc: Hines, Elizabeth (CDC/ONDIEH/NCCDPHP); Payne, Rebecca L. (CDC/ONDIEH/NCCDPHP); Ross-Viles, Sarah; Wysen, Kirsten Subject: RE: introduction call for Seattle King County, Friday, October 29 4:00 pm Eastern time

Sure:
8_19_2011

Page 3

Let’s use 1-866-714-0826 Participant code: 2518499 Also – I put Friday, November 12, 2010 2:00 - 4:00 Eastern on my calendar. This call will be for an October update on the CAP objectives and milestones. I think your current call time with Beth Hines conflicts with one of my scheduled monthly calls. We will need to set up a time that works for everyone for our rotating calls. We can discuss (if we have time) on Friday. I’m looking forward to meeting you and the rest of the team! Mike
From: Kellogg, Ryan [mailto:Ryan.Kellogg@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 5:42 PM To: Waldmiller, J. Mike (CDC/ONDIEH/NCCDPHP) Cc: Hines, Elizabeth (CDC/ONDIEH/NCCDPHP); Payne, Rebecca L. (CDC/ONDIEH/NCCDPHP); Ross-Viles, Sarah; Wysen, Kirsten Subject: RE: introduction call for Seattle King County, Friday, October 29 4:00 pm Eastern time Hi Mike - 4 p.m. PST Friday works for us. Do you have a bridge line or can we set this up on our end? The 12th will also work, but you'll be hearing the HEAL update from Kirsten Wysen while I'm out on the Oregon coast. Kirsten works with Sarah and I on a variety of project management activities. She's great and I'm glad you'll be meeting her. How about 2-4 EST for the call with one hour tobacco and one hour HEAL? Ryan From: Waldmiller, J. Mike (CDC/ONDIEH/NCCDPHP) [mailto:aii3@cdc.gov] Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 12:49 PM To: Kellogg, Ryan Cc: Hines, Elizabeth (CDC/ONDIEH/NCCDPHP); Payne, Rebecca L. (CDC/ONDIEH/NCCDPHP) Subject: introduction call for Seattle King County, Friday, October 29 4:00 pm Eastern time

Ryan, 4:00 my time will work on Friday. Let’s plan a BRIEF overview of both Tobacco and Obesity. We’ll plan the October update call for my return in November. Right now November 12 looks the most open for me. I have another call that day from 12:00 – 1:00 Eastern time, the rest of the day is free. Let me know if we can plan a call for the 12th. Thanks! Mike

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject: Attachments:

"Mahoney, Maggie" <maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu> "Ross-Viles, Sarah" <Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov> 11/16/2010 8:10:30 PM RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Seattle King County & TCLC- Scope of Work Revised 11.16.10 mm.doc Budget for PH Seattle King County.xls

Great, thanks Sarah. I will put together a letter that copies the language of the contract and send it to you for review. A December 1 start date sounds good, and I look forward to wrapping up the contracting process, as I know you do, too! In the meantime, I accepted the changes in the draft scope of work, with one exception. I thought, based on our exchange from last week, that we werent going to allocate time to particular time periods so that we had flexibility throughout the remaining 15 months, since it would be hard to predict the ebb and flow of work. If that is still okay with you, I deleted the table in the draft scope of work because it just allocated funding over the life of the project and replaced it with a simple paragraph explaining that well invoice you and youll pay us, as the contract says, that our fee is $175 per hour, up to a maximum of $25,000 total. Ive attached it for your review. After I did that, I opened the budget document and see that the template had a lot of stuff that doesnt apply to this contract (e.g., supplies, fringe benefits, etc.). I simplified it to match the content that is in the scope of work. Ive attached it for your review. Please let me know how those two things look and, as I said, Ill draft a letter to match the contract language concerning the conflict issue. Thanks! Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 2:59 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Hi Maggie - I have the go-ahead that the letter can copy the language of the contract. I do not think it needs to contain much more than that. Thus, it looks like we are in the home stretch. Are you able to put that together to have in hand while we process the contract? The changes to the scope of work look fine to me, I made changes to the budget as discussed. I put December 1 as a start date. A contractor can begin work they will bill for as soon as we have an agreed upon scope of work. I chose the 1st to allow time to put the decision-making safeguards in place. I do know we will want your help in December in preparing for the leg session. Does this work for you? I am also attaching the template we use for contract budgets. I was not sure if you had other expenses besides the hourly fee. Please populate this template as part of the contract. If you need any assistance, Lauren Holt (cc'd above) is an ace. We will start processing the contract - getting Department and County approval - when we finalize these pieces. I will work on the safeguards. 8_19_2011

Page 2 Thanks for bearing with us, Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 10:16 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: FW: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Hi Sarah, This reminded me to ask you whether we should touch base on the contract. Is there anything else you need from me at this point? I have some time available this week to connect via phone, if youd like. Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 10:51 AM To: Schaibley, David Cc: Armstrong, Kate; Cork, Kerry; Mahoney, Maggie; Blanke, Doug Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Many, many thanks to all of you at TCLC! I really appreciate having so many sets of wonderful eyes to review our draft and to provide such helpful input. I am incorporating many of your comments, and will send a draft off to our county prosecutor's office this morning. This item will go to a vote by our Board of Health on December 16. I'll keep you posted on our progress. Thanks again!! Anne Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov

8_19_2011

Page 3 From: Schaibley, David [mailto:David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 12:59 PM To: Pearson, Anne Cc: Armstrong, Kate; Cork, Kerry; Mahoney, Maggie; Blanke, Doug Subject: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation

Dear Anne: Attached please find our thoughts on Seattle/King Countys proposed e-cigarette regulation. We hope these thoughts are helpful. Please let us know if you are in need of any assistance in the future. Sincerely, Dave

David J. Schaibley |Public Health Law Center Staff Attorney, Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 651-695-7611 | Fax: 651-290-7515 david.schaibley@wmitchell.edu 875 Summit Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 www.TCLConline.org The Tobacco Control Legal Consortium provides information and technical assistance on issues related to tobacco and public health. The Consortium does not provide legal representation or advice. This e-mail should not be considered legal advice or a substitute for obtaining legal advice from an attorney who can represent you. If you have specific legal questions, we recommend that you consult with an attorney familiar with the laws of your jurisdiction.

From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 10:13 AM To: Schaibley, David; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation Great! Thanks so much. Anne Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov

From: Schaibley, David [mailto:David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 7:24 AM To: Pearson, Anne; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation

Hi Anne: Just a quick update to let you know that well have our input to you today. Dave
From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 8:41 AM 8_19_2011

Page 4 To: Schaibley, David; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation We would like to send a draft to our Prosecuting Attorneys Office by Monday or Tuesday of next week. If we could incorporate your comments before sending, that would be ideal. But if that's too tight, we can still fold in your comments after we send it to her. Thanks!

From: Schaibley, David [David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 4:04 AM To: Pearson, Anne; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation Hello Anne: Thanks for forwarding it; we'll share our thoughts. When we spoke last week you mentioned a relatively tight time frame for this effort...can you let us know when you need our input by? Enjoy your long weekend, Dave From: Pearson, Anne [Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 6:55 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie; Schaibley, David Subject: Draft E-cigarette regulation Hi Maggie and David, I hope you are both well. I was wondering if you might have the time to review a draft regulation restricting the sale of eproducts (attached). Our Board of Health is not proposing to go so far as to prohibit their sale entirely, but is interested in restricting their availability to youth. If you have a chance to take a look, I would love to hear your thoughts. I'll be out of the office for the rest of the week but back on Monday. All the best, Anne

______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________
8_19_2011

Page 5

This email has been scanned for all viruses.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Mahoney, Maggie" <maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu> 11/16/2010 8:21:00 PM RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation

Maggie- My understanding is that budgeting into calendar years is something we must do on our end, even if we expect we may amend them. Mark - is that correct? Or is there a way to do a consulting contract in amount only? Sarah

From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 3:05 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Great, thanks Sarah. I will put together a letter that copies the language of the contract and send it to you for review. A December 1 start date sounds good, and I look forward to wrapping up the contracting process, as I know you do, too! In the meantime, I accepted the changes in the draft scope of work, with one exception. I thought, based on our exchange from last week, that we weren’t going to allocate time to particular time periods so that we had flexibility throughout the remaining 15 months, since it would be hard to predict the ebb and flow of work. If that is still okay with you, I deleted the table in the draft scope of work because it just allocated funding over the life of the project and replaced it with a simple paragraph explaining that we’ll invoice you and you’ll pay us, as the contract says, that our fee is $175 per hour, up to a maximum of $25,000 total. I’ve attached it for your review. After I did that, I opened the budget document and see that the template had a lot of stuff that doesn’t apply to this contract (e.g., supplies, fringe benefits, etc.). I simplified it to match the content that is in the scope of work. I’ve attached it for your review. Please let me know how those two things look and, as I said, I’ll draft a letter to match the contract language concerning the conflict issue. Thanks! Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 2:59 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Hi Maggie - I have the go-ahead that the letter can copy the language of the contract. I do not think it needs to contain much more than that. Thus, it looks like we are in the home stretch. Are you able to put that together to have in hand while we process the contract? 8_19_2011

Page 2 The changes to the scope of work look fine to me, I made changes to the budget as discussed. I put December 1 as a start date. A contractor can begin work they will bill for as soon as we have an agreed upon scope of work. I chose the 1st to allow time to put the decision-making safeguards in place. I do know we will want your help in December in preparing for the leg session. Does this work for you? I am also attaching the template we use for contract budgets. I was not sure if you had other expenses besides the hourly fee. Please populate this template as part of the contract. If you need any assistance, Lauren Holt (cc'd above) is an ace. We will start processing the contract - getting Department and County approval - when we finalize these pieces. I will work on the safeguards. Thanks for bearing with us, Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 10:16 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: FW: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Hi Sarah, This reminded me to ask you whether we should touch base on the contract. Is there anything else you need from me at this point? I have some time available this week to connect via phone, if you’d like. Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 10:51 AM To: Schaibley, David Cc: Armstrong, Kate; Cork, Kerry; Mahoney, Maggie; Blanke, Doug Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Many, many thanks to all of you at TCLC! I really appreciate having so many sets of wonderful eyes to review our draft and to provide such helpful input. I am incorporating many of your comments, and will send a draft off to our county prosecutor's office this morning. This item will go to a vote by our Board of Health on December 16. I'll keep you posted on our progress. 8_19_2011

Page 3 Thanks again!! Anne Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov

From: Schaibley, David [mailto:David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 12:59 PM To: Pearson, Anne Cc: Armstrong, Kate; Cork, Kerry; Mahoney, Maggie; Blanke, Doug Subject: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation

Dear Anne: Attached please find our thoughts on Seattle/King County’s proposed e-cigarette regulation. We hope these thoughts are helpful. Please let us know if you are in need of any assistance in the future. Sincerely, Dave

David J. Schaibley |Public Health Law Center Staff Attorney, Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 651-695-7611 | Fax: 651-290-7515 david.schaibley@wmitchell.edu 875 Summit Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 www.TCLConline.org The Tobacco Control Legal Consortium provides information and technical assistance on issues related to tobacco and public health. The Consortium does not provide legal representation or advice. This e-mail should not be considered legal advice or a substitute for obtaining legal advice from an attorney who can represent you. If you have specific legal questions, we recommend that you consult with an attorney familiar with the laws of your jurisdiction.

From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 10:13 AM To: Schaibley, David; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation Great! Thanks so much. Anne Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov

From: Schaibley, David [mailto:David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] 8_19_2011

Page 4 Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 7:24 AM To: Pearson, Anne; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation

Hi Anne: Just a quick update to let you know that we’ll have our input to you today. Dave
From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 8:41 AM To: Schaibley, David; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation We would like to send a draft to our Prosecuting Attorneys Office by Monday or Tuesday of next week. If we could incorporate your comments before sending, that would be ideal. But if that's too tight, we can still fold in your comments after we send it to her. Thanks!

From: Schaibley, David [David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 4:04 AM To: Pearson, Anne; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation Hello Anne: Thanks for forwarding it; we'll share our thoughts. When we spoke last week you mentioned a relatively tight time frame for this effort...can you let us know when you need our input by? Enjoy your long weekend, Dave From: Pearson, Anne [Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 6:55 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie; Schaibley, David Subject: Draft E-cigarette regulation Hi Maggie and David, I hope you are both well. I was wondering if you might have the time to review a draft regulation restricting the sale of eproducts (attached). Our Board of Health is not proposing to go so far as to prohibit their sale entirely, but is interested in restricting their availability to youth. If you have a chance to take a look, I would love to hear your thoughts. I'll be out of the office for the rest of the week but back on Monday. All the best, Anne

______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses.
8_19_2011

Page 5

______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject: Attachments:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Mahoney, Maggie" <maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu> 11/16/2010 5:01:00 PM RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Seattle King County TCLC- Scope of Work Revised 11 10 10.srv.doc Template - budget 6 30 10.xls

Hi Maggie - I have the go-ahead that the letter can copy the language of the contract. I do not think it needs to contain much more than that. Thus, it looks like we are in the home stretch. Are you able to put that together to have in hand while we process the contract? The changes to the scope of work look fine to me, I made changes to the budget as discussed. I put December 1 as a start date. A contractor can begin work they will bill for as soon as we have an agreed upon scope of work. I chose the 1st to allow time to put the decision-making safeguards in place. I do know we will want your help in December in preparing for the leg session. Does this work for you? I am also attaching the template we use for contract budgets. I was not sure if you had other expenses besides the hourly fee. Please populate this template as part of the contract. If you need any assistance, Lauren Holt (cc'd above) is an ace. We will start processing the contract - getting Department and County approval - when we finalize these pieces. I will work on the safeguards. Thanks for bearing with us, Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 10:16 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: FW: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Hi Sarah, This reminded me to ask you whether we should touch base on the contract. Is there anything else you need from me at this point? I have some time available this week to connect via phone, if you’d like. Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

8_19_2011

Page 2

From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 10:51 AM To: Schaibley, David Cc: Armstrong, Kate; Cork, Kerry; Mahoney, Maggie; Blanke, Doug Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Many, many thanks to all of you at TCLC! I really appreciate having so many sets of wonderful eyes to review our draft and to provide such helpful input. I am incorporating many of your comments, and will send a draft off to our county prosecutor's office this morning. This item will go to a vote by our Board of Health on December 16. I'll keep you posted on our progress. Thanks again!! Anne Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov

From: Schaibley, David [mailto:David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 12:59 PM To: Pearson, Anne Cc: Armstrong, Kate; Cork, Kerry; Mahoney, Maggie; Blanke, Doug Subject: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation

Dear Anne: Attached please find our thoughts on Seattle/King County’s proposed e-cigarette regulation. We hope these thoughts are helpful. Please let us know if you are in need of any assistance in the future. Sincerely, Dave

David J. Schaibley |Public Health Law Center Staff Attorney, Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 651-695-7611 | Fax: 651-290-7515 david.schaibley@wmitchell.edu 875 Summit Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 www.TCLConline.org The Tobacco Control Legal Consortium provides information and technical assistance on issues related to tobacco and public health. The Consortium does not provide legal representation or advice. This e-mail should not be considered legal advice or a substitute for obtaining legal advice from an attorney who can represent you. If you have specific legal questions, we recommend that you consult with an attorney familiar with the laws of your jurisdiction.

From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 10:13 AM To: Schaibley, David; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation Great! Thanks so much. 8_19_2011

Page 3 Anne Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov

From: Schaibley, David [mailto:David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 7:24 AM To: Pearson, Anne; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation

Hi Anne: Just a quick update to let you know that we’ll have our input to you today. Dave
From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 8:41 AM To: Schaibley, David; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation We would like to send a draft to our Prosecuting Attorneys Office by Monday or Tuesday of next week. If we could incorporate your comments before sending, that would be ideal. But if that's too tight, we can still fold in your comments after we send it to her. Thanks!

From: Schaibley, David [David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 4:04 AM To: Pearson, Anne; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation Hello Anne: Thanks for forwarding it; we'll share our thoughts. When we spoke last week you mentioned a relatively tight time frame for this effort...can you let us know when you need our input by? Enjoy your long weekend, Dave From: Pearson, Anne [Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 6:55 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie; Schaibley, David Subject: Draft E-cigarette regulation Hi Maggie and David, I hope you are both well. I was wondering if you might have the time to review a draft regulation restricting the sale of eproducts (attached). Our Board of Health is not proposing to go so far as to prohibit their sale entirely, but is interested in restricting their availability to youth. If you have a chance to take a look, I would love to hear your thoughts. I'll be out of the office for the rest of the week but back on Monday. 8_19_2011

Page 4 All the best, Anne

______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Kellogg, Ryan" <Ryan.Kellogg@kingcounty.gov> "Krieger, James" <James.Krieger@kingcounty.gov> Date: 11/16/2010 8:18:00 PM Subject: RE: Recommendations from Strategy Meeting Agreed.

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211 -----Original Message----From: Kellogg, Ryan Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 3:13 PM To: Krieger, James; Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: RE: Recommendations from Strategy Meeting That sounds like a good approach. -----Original Message----From: Krieger, James Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 1:45 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Kellogg, Ryan Subject: RE: Recommendations from Strategy Meeting It would help me think more about who should be there if we mapped out topics for discussion...and then maybe have a core of me, the two of you and Kirsten and invite others as related to the topic. I am not sure that Amy B needs to be there for all discussions, nor Nicole. James Krieger, MD, MPH Chief, Chronic Disease and Injury Prevention Section Public Health - Seattle and King County Chinook Building, Suite 900 401 5th Ave Seattle, WA 98104 voice: 206-263-8227 fax: 206 205 0525 email: james.krieger@kingcounty.gov

-----Original Message----From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 3:31 PM To: Krieger, James; Kellogg, Ryan Subject: RE: Recommendations from Strategy Meeting Hi Jim,
8_19_2011

Page 2

Looking forward to your review. For attendance - the attendees of this week's meeting were: Nicole, Sarah, Ryan, Kirsten, Erin, Nicole and Amy B. Not attending, but also on the invite list are Ngozi, Scott and, of course, you. Scott and I discussed his attendance, and he will probably not come very often - only at time when a CPPW strategy is integrated with a TPP strategy/activity. We offered Erin the same out on Tuesday and she decided to stay, in part because she had rushed in to get to the meeting. I am not sure if Ngozi plans to attend any meetings. we may have items where her participation would be great - though it seems like our typical agenda may be too specific to merit her involvement. That leaves a core of Ryan, me, Kirsten, Amy, Nicole and you. As most topics we get into will relate to communications and/or the coalition and leadership, Nicole and Amy are great participants. What are your thoughts? Sarah ________________________________________ From: Krieger, James Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 5:34 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Kellogg, Ryan Subject: RE: Recommendations from Strategy Meeting Will look at next week. For next meeting, can we talk about sustainability and community engagement in policy work? Also, I’d like to review who attends the meetings so we can have a clear, consistent approach to this. Jim

James Krieger, MD, MPH Chief, Chronic Disease and Injury Prevention Section Public Health - Seattle and King County Chinook Building, Suite 900 401 5th Ave Seattle, WA 98104 voice: 206-263-8227 fax: 206 205 0525 email: james.krieger@kingcounty.gov

_____________________________________________ From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 2:31 PM To: Krieger, James Cc: Sadow-Hasenberg, Nicole; MacDougall, Erin; Kellogg, Ryan; Wysen, Kirsten; Bates, Amy Subject: Recommendations from Strategy Meeting Hi Jim We had a great strategy meeting this morning and wanted to run the resulting proposals by you. • LT/WG membership expansion: The LT and LT WG are currently closed to new members. In the event a current member leaves, we will decide whether to replace the member and design a process to replace that member.
8_19_2011

Page 3

• LT WG Nov. 30th Agenda: The Nov 30th will feature a half hour each for meaty program topics. On the HEAL side these will be options for SLB policy and upcoming WIC regulation change. On the tobacco side, we will update on the e-cig proposal for the BOH and then discuss the upcoming youth access bill. The draft agenda is attached. • Teeing up LT WG asks: We discussed the following steps to set up meetings to get meaningful LT/WG involvement in CPPW issues • Fill out a timeline of which policy issues could benefit from LT/WG (and coalition) engagement during each month using the CAPs (Amy making template, Sarah and Ryan fill out first draft by 23rd). • Identify what the ask is for each issue when preparing agenda and materials - or as part of issue policy strategy plans (campaign plans) • Send out relevant support materials that include background and even the ask - if it fits - on the Monday of the week before the meeting. This month, that will be the 22nd. We will prepare materials for Jim's review by COB on Wednesday the 17th. • Only use 4-5 minutes of issue agenda time for staff to present to issue - be disciplined in allowing LT/WG discussion time • Use the Monday management meeting following each LT/WG to debrief and identify emerging issues of discussions for next agenda • Ensuring Management Decisions get to other Department members: Since minutes are not always timely, we are going to take it upon ourselves to note when decisions from the Management meeting need to get out to people not at the meeting and decide who will do the communicating. • Staff Roles at Policy Workshop: Meeting set up for next week (Yolanda working with Claire on Jim's calendar) for participating staff to briefly discuss roles to ensure department participating is not overwhelming. Kathy was not on the attendance list form last week, but it interested in coming. We think this would be added value as demonstrating the department being a champion for CPPW and PSE change. Please let us know your thoughts, Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Bates, Amy" <Amy.Bates@kingcounty.gov> "Krieger, James" <James.Krieger@kingcounty.gov> "Wysen, Kirsten" <Kirsten.Wysen@kingcounty.gov> Date: 11/17/2010 9:37:00 PM Subject: Materials for LT Hello folks, Tobacco issues have been up in flames this week (the Seattle packs, the ROI study and e-cigs) and we do not yet have a one-pager ready to share. I think I can get it done by ten AM tomorrow. Jim - want to make sure this respects your review time. Sound ok? Thanks, Sarah Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Mahoney, Maggie" <maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu> 11/17/2010 7:47:00 PM RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation

Thanks, Maggie. I will inquire about the letter. For the budget - we have to use the 3 year budget format as this is a consultant contract. It's a bit inconvenient, but we can make it work for ad hoc spending. The proposed break-up of the budget reflected the usage I would expect from the particular years. I proposed my budget breakdown based on knowing we will want some bill review in December and very little will likely happen in 2012. We can use the contract amendment process to move funds between years if necessary. Will that work on your end? Thanks, Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 10:35 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Thanks for checking on this Sarah. I’ve attached a draft letter to address the conflict issue. Do you want to see whether that’s sufficient? Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 6:19 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Maggie- My understanding is that budgeting into calendar years is something we must do on our end, even if we expect we may amend them. Mark - is that correct? Or is there a way to do a consulting contract in amount only? Sarah

8_19_2011

Page 2

From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 3:05 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Great, thanks Sarah. I will put together a letter that copies the language of the contract and send it to you for review. A December 1 start date sounds good, and I look forward to wrapping up the contracting process, as I know you do, too! In the meantime, I accepted the changes in the draft scope of work, with one exception. I thought, based on our exchange from last week, that we weren’t going to allocate time to particular time periods so that we had flexibility throughout the remaining 15 months, since it would be hard to predict the ebb and flow of work. If that is still okay with you, I deleted the table in the draft scope of work because it just allocated funding over the life of the project and replaced it with a simple paragraph explaining that we’ll invoice you and you’ll pay us, as the contract says, that our fee is $175 per hour, up to a maximum of $25,000 total. I’ve attached it for your review. After I did that, I opened the budget document and see that the template had a lot of stuff that doesn’t apply to this contract (e.g., supplies, fringe benefits, etc.). I simplified it to match the content that is in the scope of work. I’ve attached it for your review. Please let me know how those two things look and, as I said, I’ll draft a letter to match the contract language concerning the conflict issue. Thanks! Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 2:59 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Hi Maggie - I have the go-ahead that the letter can copy the language of the contract. I do not think it needs to contain much more than that. Thus, it looks like we are in the home stretch. Are you able to put that together to have in hand while we process the contract? The changes to the scope of work look fine to me, I made changes to the budget as discussed. I put December 1 as a start date. A contractor can begin work they will bill for as soon as we have an agreed upon scope of work. I chose the 1st to allow time to put the decision-making safeguards in place. I do know we will want your help in December in preparing for the leg session. Does this work for you? I am also attaching the template we use for contract budgets. I was not sure if you had other expenses besides the hourly fee. Please populate this template as part of the contract. If you need any assistance, Lauren Holt (cc'd above) is an ace. We will start processing the contract - getting Department and County approval - when we finalize these pieces. I will work on the safeguards.

8_19_2011

Page 3 Thanks for bearing with us, Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 10:16 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: FW: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Hi Sarah, This reminded me to ask you whether we should touch base on the contract. Is there anything else you need from me at this point? I have some time available this week to connect via phone, if you’d like. Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 10:51 AM To: Schaibley, David Cc: Armstrong, Kate; Cork, Kerry; Mahoney, Maggie; Blanke, Doug Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Many, many thanks to all of you at TCLC! I really appreciate having so many sets of wonderful eyes to review our draft and to provide such helpful input. I am incorporating many of your comments, and will send a draft off to our county prosecutor's office this morning. This item will go to a vote by our Board of Health on December 16. I'll keep you posted on our progress. Thanks again!! Anne Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov

8_19_2011

Page 4 From: Schaibley, David [mailto:David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 12:59 PM To: Pearson, Anne Cc: Armstrong, Kate; Cork, Kerry; Mahoney, Maggie; Blanke, Doug Subject: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation

Dear Anne: Attached please find our thoughts on Seattle/King County’s proposed e-cigarette regulation. We hope these thoughts are helpful. Please let us know if you are in need of any assistance in the future. Sincerely, Dave

David J. Schaibley |Public Health Law Center Staff Attorney, Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 651-695-7611 | Fax: 651-290-7515 david.schaibley@wmitchell.edu 875 Summit Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 www.TCLConline.org The Tobacco Control Legal Consortium provides information and technical assistance on issues related to tobacco and public health. The Consortium does not provide legal representation or advice. This e-mail should not be considered legal advice or a substitute for obtaining legal advice from an attorney who can represent you. If you have specific legal questions, we recommend that you consult with an attorney familiar with the laws of your jurisdiction.

From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 10:13 AM To: Schaibley, David; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation Great! Thanks so much. Anne Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov

From: Schaibley, David [mailto:David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 7:24 AM To: Pearson, Anne; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation

Hi Anne: Just a quick update to let you know that we’ll have our input to you today. Dave
From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 8:41 AM To: Schaibley, David; Mahoney, Maggie 8_19_2011

Page 5 Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation We would like to send a draft to our Prosecuting Attorneys Office by Monday or Tuesday of next week. If we could incorporate your comments before sending, that would be ideal. But if that's too tight, we can still fold in your comments after we send it to her. Thanks!

From: Schaibley, David [David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 4:04 AM To: Pearson, Anne; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation Hello Anne: Thanks for forwarding it; we'll share our thoughts. When we spoke last week you mentioned a relatively tight time frame for this effort...can you let us know when you need our input by? Enjoy your long weekend, Dave From: Pearson, Anne [Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 6:55 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie; Schaibley, David Subject: Draft E-cigarette regulation Hi Maggie and David, I hope you are both well. I was wondering if you might have the time to review a draft regulation restricting the sale of eproducts (attached). Our Board of Health is not proposing to go so far as to prohibit their sale entirely, but is interested in restricting their availability to youth. If you have a chance to take a look, I would love to hear your thoughts. I'll be out of the office for the rest of the week but back on Monday. All the best, Anne

______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________
8_19_2011

Page 6

This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Sherard, Mark" <Mark.Sherard@kingcounty.gov> 11/17/2010 1:06:00 PM RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation

That would make sense. How do we set that up - is it more elaborate than contracting? This is one of the contracts that has gone around and around and up to Ben Liefer for approval of the safeguards against conflict of interest. Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Sherard, Mark Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 7:36 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation I think we need to talk this out. A PO may be the answer. Mark

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 4:19 PM To: 'Mahoney, Maggie' Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Maggie- My understanding is that budgeting into calendar years is something we must do on our end, even if we expect we may amend them. Mark - is that correct? Or is there a way to do a consulting contract in amount only? Sarah

From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 3:05 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Great, thanks Sarah. I will put together a letter that copies the language of the contract and send it to you for review. A December 1 start date sounds good, and I look forward to wrapping up the contracting process, as I know you do, too! In the meantime, I accepted the changes in the draft scope of work, with one exception. I thought, based on our exchange from last week, that we weren’t going to allocate time to particular time periods so that we had flexibility throughout the remaining 15 months, since it would be hard to predict the ebb and flow of work. If that is still okay with you, I deleted the table in the draft scope of work because it just allocated funding over the life of the project and replaced it with a simple paragraph explaining that we’ll invoice you and you’ll pay us, as the contract says, that our fee is $175 per hour, up to a maximum of $25,000 total. I’ve attached it for your review. After I did that, I opened the budget document and see that the template had a lot of stuff that doesn’t apply to this contract (e.g., supplies, fringe benefits, etc.). I simplified it to match the content that is in the scope of work. I’ve attached it for your review. 8_19_2011

Page 2 Please let me know how those two things look and, as I said, I’ll draft a letter to match the contract language concerning the conflict issue. Thanks! Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 2:59 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Hi Maggie - I have the go-ahead that the letter can copy the language of the contract. I do not think it needs to contain much more than that. Thus, it looks like we are in the home stretch. Are you able to put that together to have in hand while we process the contract? The changes to the scope of work look fine to me, I made changes to the budget as discussed. I put December 1 as a start date. A contractor can begin work they will bill for as soon as we have an agreed upon scope of work. I chose the 1st to allow time to put the decision-making safeguards in place. I do know we will want your help in December in preparing for the leg session. Does this work for you? I am also attaching the template we use for contract budgets. I was not sure if you had other expenses besides the hourly fee. Please populate this template as part of the contract. If you need any assistance, Lauren Holt (cc'd above) is an ace. We will start processing the contract - getting Department and County approval - when we finalize these pieces. I will work on the safeguards. Thanks for bearing with us, Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 10:16 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: FW: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Hi Sarah, 8_19_2011

Page 3 This reminded me to ask you whether we should touch base on the contract. Is there anything else you need from me at this point? I have some time available this week to connect via phone, if you’d like. Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 10:51 AM To: Schaibley, David Cc: Armstrong, Kate; Cork, Kerry; Mahoney, Maggie; Blanke, Doug Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Many, many thanks to all of you at TCLC! I really appreciate having so many sets of wonderful eyes to review our draft and to provide such helpful input. I am incorporating many of your comments, and will send a draft off to our county prosecutor's office this morning. This item will go to a vote by our Board of Health on December 16. I'll keep you posted on our progress. Thanks again!! Anne Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov

From: Schaibley, David [mailto:David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 12:59 PM To: Pearson, Anne Cc: Armstrong, Kate; Cork, Kerry; Mahoney, Maggie; Blanke, Doug Subject: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation

Dear Anne: Attached please find our thoughts on Seattle/King County’s proposed e-cigarette regulation. We hope these thoughts are helpful. Please let us know if you are in need of any assistance in the future. Sincerely, Dave

David J. Schaibley |Public Health Law Center Staff Attorney, Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 651-695-7611 | Fax: 651-290-7515 david.schaibley@wmitchell.edu 875 Summit Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 www.TCLConline.org 8_19_2011

Page 4 The Tobacco Control Legal Consortium provides information and technical assistance on issues related to tobacco and public health. The Consortium does not provide legal representation or advice. This e-mail should not be considered legal advice or a substitute for obtaining legal advice from an attorney who can represent you. If you have specific legal questions, we recommend that you consult with an attorney familiar with the laws of your jurisdiction.

From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 10:13 AM To: Schaibley, David; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation Great! Thanks so much. Anne Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov

From: Schaibley, David [mailto:David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 7:24 AM To: Pearson, Anne; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation

Hi Anne: Just a quick update to let you know that we’ll have our input to you today. Dave
From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 8:41 AM To: Schaibley, David; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation We would like to send a draft to our Prosecuting Attorneys Office by Monday or Tuesday of next week. If we could incorporate your comments before sending, that would be ideal. But if that's too tight, we can still fold in your comments after we send it to her. Thanks!

From: Schaibley, David [David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 4:04 AM To: Pearson, Anne; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation Hello Anne: Thanks for forwarding it; we'll share our thoughts. When we spoke last week you mentioned a relatively tight time frame for this effort...can you let us know when you need our input by? Enjoy your long weekend, Dave 8_19_2011

Page 5 From: Pearson, Anne [Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 6:55 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie; Schaibley, David Subject: Draft E-cigarette regulation Hi Maggie and David, I hope you are both well. I was wondering if you might have the time to review a draft regulation restricting the sale of eproducts (attached). Our Board of Health is not proposing to go so far as to prohibit their sale entirely, but is interested in restricting their availability to youth. If you have a chance to take a look, I would love to hear your thoughts. I'll be out of the office for the rest of the week but back on Monday. All the best, Anne

______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject: Attachments:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Krieger, James" <James.Krieger@kingcounty.gov> 11/18/2010 9:12:00 PM For Review - Documents for LT WG LTWG Tobacco one-pager.srv.doc E-Cigarette Proposal (for DF mtg 11.2).doc

I will probably do more review on my end as well, specifically to add references of flavored tobacco as "gateway nicotine." Attached - One-page describing youth access bill components. Did not make ask in the doc, but will ask for support at the meeting (or can add it to the doc). Two-pager on upcoming e-cig regulation - longer piece because we will not go into this much at the meeting.

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> 11/18/2010 5:59:00 PM RE: Meeting Friday AM

So does hitting below the mark mean they wouldn't support? Can you ask Lucy?

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Hamilton, Joy Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:56 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

Basically, we are close to the policy statement. The partners encourage the total ban of e-cigs -- that is the primary difference. We match their recommendation of Smoke free places and defining e-cigs as NOT tobacco products. We also match not taxing these products.

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:38 PM To: Hamilton, Joy Subject: FW: Meeting Friday AM Can you run this comparison?

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Lucy Culp [mailto:lucy.culp@heart.org] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 11:08 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; 'cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org'; Muhm, Jennifer; Neal, Scott; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

I’m free before 11 or from 3-5 on 12/1. Anyone else? I think discussing how the program and partners can have the greatest impact would be a great topic for face to face, I’m also hoping it will be a little more clear after Friday’s meeting.
8_19_2011

Page 2

Attached is the ACS/AHA/ALA joint policy document on E-cigs. I haven’t seen a draft of the BOH code changes, I would assume if they meet the criteria in this document our organizations would be supportive. Let me know if you need anything else from me. See you tomorrow!
~Lucy From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 10:50 AM To: Lucy Culp Cc: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; 'cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org'; Muhm, Jennifer; Neal, Scott; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Hi Lucy It would be good for Scott to be part of the face to face meeting, and for the three of you to meet Anne. Are you able to do the next partner check-in (Wednesday, December 1st)? Then we will have had time to add comments and suggest revisions for the bill. We did have some items for discussion this Friday, but can get the conversation started on email. First, we are looking at how to run the campaign from our side. Do you have thoughts about how our program and partners can have the best impact? Also, we the e-cig code changes will be in front of the BOH on December 16th. We have partners in support of this work, but wondered if your organizations would want to do supportive letters or testimony. Thanks, Sarah Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Lucy Culp [mailto:lucy.culp@heart.org] Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 7:21 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; 'cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org' Subject: Meeting Friday AM Hi Sarah – Just wanted to check in on our 8:00 meeting Friday. Since Anne and Scott aren’t going to be there do you think we still need a face to face? We’re waiting on the draft bill from the code reviser’s office and can bounce it around on email for input. Did you have anything we needed to touch base on in person? Let me know what you think. Lucy Culp Senior Director, Advocacy American Heart Association American Stroke Association Pacific/Mountain Affiliate (360) 870-4016 - cell (206) 834-8658 - office (206) 632-8478 - fax Heart Disease and Stroke. You're the Cure. Join our grassroots network today! Click here to be part of the Cure!

8_19_2011

Page 3

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:
Thanks, Lucy.

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Lucy Culp" <lucy.culp@heart.org> 11/18/2010 5:41:00 PM RE: Meeting Friday AM

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Lucy Culp [mailto:lucy.culp@heart.org] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 11:08 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; 'cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org'; Muhm, Jennifer; Neal, Scott; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

I’m free before 11 or from 3-5 on 12/1. Anyone else? I think discussing how the program and partners can have the greatest impact would be a great topic for face to face, I’m also hoping it will be a little more clear after Friday’s meeting. Attached is the ACS/AHA/ALA joint policy document on E-cigs. I haven’t seen a draft of the BOH code changes, I would assume if they meet the criteria in this document our organizations would be supportive. Let me know if you need anything else from me. See you tomorrow!
~Lucy From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 10:50 AM To: Lucy Culp Cc: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; 'cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org'; Muhm, Jennifer; Neal, Scott; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Hi Lucy It would be good for Scott to be part of the face to face meeting, and for the three of you to meet Anne. Are you able to do the next partner check-in (Wednesday, December 1st)? Then we will have had time to add comments and suggest revisions for the bill. We did have some items for discussion this Friday, but can get the conversation started on email. First, we are looking at how to run the campaign from our side. Do you have thoughts about how our program and partners can have the best impact? Also, we the e-cig code changes will be in front of the BOH on December 16th. We have partners in support of this work, but wondered if your organizations would want to do supportive letters or testimony. Thanks, Sarah Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County 8_19_2011

Page 2 Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Lucy Culp [mailto:lucy.culp@heart.org] Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 7:21 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; 'cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org' Subject: Meeting Friday AM Hi Sarah – Just wanted to check in on our 8:00 meeting Friday. Since Anne and Scott aren’t going to be there do you think we still need a face to face? We’re waiting on the draft bill from the code reviser’s office and can bounce it around on email for input. Did you have anything we needed to touch base on in person? Let me know what you think. Lucy Culp Senior Director, Advocacy American Heart Association American Stroke Association Pacific/Mountain Affiliate (360) 870-4016 - cell (206) 834-8658 - office (206) 632-8478 - fax Heart Disease and Stroke. You're the Cure. Join our grassroots network today! Click here to be part of the Cure!

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org "Pearson, Anne" <Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov> "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> "Lucy Culp" <lucy.culp@heart.org> "Carrie Nyssen" <cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org> Date: 11/18/2010 5:38:00 PM Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM How about 1:30 PM? Looks like it fits all the PHSKC calendars.

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211 -----Original Message----From: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org [mailto:Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:29 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Pearson, Anne; Neal, Scott; Lucy Culp; 'Carrie Nyssen' Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: Re: Meeting Friday AM Can we do as early as possible that afternoon? Erin Dziedzic 425-466-5177

----- Original Message ----From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" [Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: 11/18/2010 01:25 PM PST To: "Pearson, Anne" ; "Neal, Scott" ; "'Lucy Culp'" ; "'Carrie Nyssen'" ; Erin Dziedzic Cc: "Muhm, Jennifer" ; "Hamilton, Joy" Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

Afternoon of the third is clear for me.

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211 -----Original Message----8_19_2011

Page 2

From: Pearson, Anne Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:13 PM To: Neal, Scott; 'Lucy Culp'; 'Carrie Nyssen'; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Works for me too.

Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov -----Original Message----From: Neal, Scott Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:11 PM To: 'Lucy Culp'; Pearson, Anne; 'Carrie Nyssen'; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Afternoon of the 3rd could work for me. Scott -----Original Message----From: Lucy Culp [mailto:lucy.culp@heart.org] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 12:46 PM To: Pearson, Anne; Neal, Scott; 'Carrie Nyssen'; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM I'm tied up on the second too. Anyone free the afternoon of the 30th or sometime on the 3rd? ~Lucy -----Original Message----From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 12:37 PM To: Neal, Scott; 'Carrie Nyssen'; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Lucy Culp; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Sorry, I have a conference call in the morning on the 2nd, and will be out of the office the remainder of the day.

Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104
8_19_2011

Page 3

(206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov -----Original Message----From: Neal, Scott Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 12:14 PM To: 'Carrie Nyssen'; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Lucy Culp; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Sarah, Dec. 2nd works for me too, but I am not sure Anne can make this time according to her schedule. Scott -----Original Message----From: Carrie Nyssen [mailto:cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 12:00 PM To: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Lucy Culp; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Neal, Scott; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM I could make the 2nd in the morning ... -C Carrie Nyssen | Director Health Initiatives Washington & Idaho Regional Director of Advocacy AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION OF THE MOUNTAIN PACIFIC Fighting for Air Home Office Phone: 360.883.3535 Cell Phone: 360.921.1484 Fax: 360.891.8988 9708 NE 133rd Ave Vancouver, WA 98682 www.lungmtpacific.org

________________________________ From: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org [mailto:Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org] Sent: Thu 11/18/2010 11:53 AM To: Carrie Nyssen; Lucy Culp; Sarah Ross-Viles Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Scott Neal; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: Re: Meeting Friday AM

I can make the 1st work, or what about the 2nd in the morning?
8_19_2011

Page 4

Erin Dziedzic 425-466-5177

----- Original Message ----From: "Carrie Nyssen" [cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org] Sent: 11/18/2010 11:16 AM PST To: "Lucy Culp" ; "Ross-Viles, Sarah" Cc: Erin Dziedzic; "Muhm, Jennifer" ; "Neal, Scott" ; "Hamilton, Joy" ; "Pearson, Anne" Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

I'm scheduled for several meetings in Portland on December 1. If this date works for others, I'll see if I can rearrange my schedule. -C Carrie Nyssen | Director Health Initiatives Washington & Idaho Regional Director of Advocacy AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION OF THE MOUNTAIN PACIFIC Fighting for Air Home Office Phone: 360.883.3535 Cell Phone: 360.921.1484 Fax: 360.891.8988 9708 NE 133rd Ave Vancouver, WA 98682 www.lungmtpacific.org

________________________________ From: Lucy Culp [mailto:lucy.culp@heart.org] Sent: Thu 11/18/2010 11:07 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Carrie Nyssen; Muhm, Jennifer; Neal, Scott; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

I'm free before 11 or from 3-5 on 12/1. Anyone else?

I think discussing how the program and partners can have the greatest impact would be a great topic for face to face, I'm also hoping it will be a little more clear after Friday's meeting.

Attached is the ACS/AHA/ALA joint policy document on E-cigs. I haven't seen a draft of the BOH code changes, I
8_19_2011

Page 5

would assume if they meet the criteria in this document our organizations would be supportive.

Let me know if you need anything else from me. See you tomorrow!

~Lucy From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 10:50 AM To: Lucy Culp Cc: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; 'cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org'; Muhm, Jennifer; Neal, Scott; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

Hi Lucy -

It would be good for Scott to be part of the face to face meeting, and for the three of you to meet Anne. Are you able to do the next partner check-in (Wednesday, December 1st)? Then we will have had time to add comments and suggest revisions for the bill.

We did have some items for discussion this Friday, but can get the conversation started on email. First, we are looking at how to run the campaign from our side. Do you have thoughts about how our program and partners can have the best impact? Also, we the e-cig code changes will be in front of the BOH on December 16th. We have partners in support of this work, but wondered if your organizations would want to do supportive letters or testimony.

Thanks, Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211
8_19_2011

Page 6

________________________________ From: Lucy Culp [mailto:lucy.culp@heart.org] Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 7:21 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; 'cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org' Subject: Meeting Friday AM Hi Sarah - Just wanted to check in on our 8:00 meeting Friday. Since Anne and Scott aren't going to be there do you think we still need a face to face? We're waiting on the draft bill from the code reviser's office and can bounce it around on email for input. Did you have anything we needed to touch base on in person?

Let me know what you think.

Lucy Culp Senior Director, Advocacy American Heart Association American Stroke Association Pacific/Mountain Affiliate (360) 870-4016 - cell (206) 834-8658 - office (206) 632-8478 - fax Heart Disease and Stroke. You're the Cure. Join our grassroots network today! Click here to be part of the Cure!

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Pearson, Anne" <Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov> "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> "Lucy Culp" <lucy.culp@heart.org> "Carrie Nyssen" <cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org> Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org Date: 11/18/2010 5:28:00 PM Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Afternoon of the third is clear for me.

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211 -----Original Message----From: Pearson, Anne Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:13 PM To: Neal, Scott; 'Lucy Culp'; 'Carrie Nyssen'; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Works for me too.

Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov -----Original Message----From: Neal, Scott Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:11 PM To: 'Lucy Culp'; Pearson, Anne; 'Carrie Nyssen'; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Afternoon of the 3rd could work for me. Scott -----Original Message----From: Lucy Culp [mailto:lucy.culp@heart.org] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 12:46 PM To: Pearson, Anne; Neal, Scott; 'Carrie Nyssen'; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Ross-Viles, Sarah
8_19_2011

Page 2

Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM I'm tied up on the second too. Anyone free the afternoon of the 30th or sometime on the 3rd? ~Lucy -----Original Message----From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 12:37 PM To: Neal, Scott; 'Carrie Nyssen'; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Lucy Culp; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Sorry, I have a conference call in the morning on the 2nd, and will be out of the office the remainder of the day.

Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov -----Original Message----From: Neal, Scott Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 12:14 PM To: 'Carrie Nyssen'; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Lucy Culp; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Sarah, Dec. 2nd works for me too, but I am not sure Anne can make this time according to her schedule. Scott -----Original Message----From: Carrie Nyssen [mailto:cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 12:00 PM To: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Lucy Culp; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Neal, Scott; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM I could make the 2nd in the morning ... -C Carrie Nyssen | Director Health Initiatives Washington & Idaho Regional Director of Advocacy AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION OF THE MOUNTAIN PACIFIC
8_19_2011

Page 3

Fighting for Air Home Office Phone: 360.883.3535 Cell Phone: 360.921.1484 Fax: 360.891.8988 9708 NE 133rd Ave Vancouver, WA 98682 www.lungmtpacific.org

________________________________ From: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org [mailto:Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org] Sent: Thu 11/18/2010 11:53 AM To: Carrie Nyssen; Lucy Culp; Sarah Ross-Viles Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Scott Neal; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: Re: Meeting Friday AM

I can make the 1st work, or what about the 2nd in the morning? Erin Dziedzic 425-466-5177

----- Original Message ----From: "Carrie Nyssen" [cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org] Sent: 11/18/2010 11:16 AM PST To: "Lucy Culp" ; "Ross-Viles, Sarah" Cc: Erin Dziedzic; "Muhm, Jennifer" ; "Neal, Scott" ; "Hamilton, Joy" ; "Pearson, Anne" Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

I'm scheduled for several meetings in Portland on December 1. If this date works for others, I'll see if I can rearrange my schedule. -C Carrie Nyssen | Director Health Initiatives Washington & Idaho Regional Director of Advocacy AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION OF THE MOUNTAIN PACIFIC Fighting for Air Home Office Phone: 360.883.3535 Cell Phone: 360.921.1484 Fax: 360.891.8988 9708 NE 133rd Ave Vancouver, WA 98682 www.lungmtpacific.org
8_19_2011

Page 4

________________________________ From: Lucy Culp [mailto:lucy.culp@heart.org] Sent: Thu 11/18/2010 11:07 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Carrie Nyssen; Muhm, Jennifer; Neal, Scott; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

I'm free before 11 or from 3-5 on 12/1. Anyone else?

I think discussing how the program and partners can have the greatest impact would be a great topic for face to face, I'm also hoping it will be a little more clear after Friday's meeting.

Attached is the ACS/AHA/ALA joint policy document on E-cigs. I haven't seen a draft of the BOH code changes, I would assume if they meet the criteria in this document our organizations would be supportive.

Let me know if you need anything else from me. See you tomorrow!

~Lucy From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 10:50 AM To: Lucy Culp Cc: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; 'cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org'; Muhm, Jennifer; Neal, Scott; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

Hi Lucy -

It would be good for Scott to be part of the face to face meeting, and for the three of you to meet Anne. Are you able to do the next partner check-in (Wednesday, December 1st)? Then we will have had time to add comments and suggest revisions for the bill.

We did have some items for discussion this Friday, but can get the conversation started on email.
8_19_2011

Page 5

First, we are looking at how to run the campaign from our side. Do you have thoughts about how our program and partners can have the best impact? Also, we the e-cig code changes will be in front of the BOH on December 16th. We have partners in support of this work, but wondered if your organizations would want to do supportive letters or testimony.

Thanks, Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

________________________________ From: Lucy Culp [mailto:lucy.culp@heart.org] Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 7:21 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; 'cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org' Subject: Meeting Friday AM Hi Sarah - Just wanted to check in on our 8:00 meeting Friday. Since Anne and Scott aren't going to be there do you think we still need a face to face? We're waiting on the draft bill from the code reviser's office and can bounce it around on email for input. Did you have anything we needed to touch base on in person?

Let me know what you think.

Lucy Culp Senior Director, Advocacy American Heart Association American Stroke Association Pacific/Mountain Affiliate (360) 870-4016 - cell (206) 834-8658 - office (206) 632-8478 - fax
8_19_2011

Page 6

Heart Disease and Stroke. You're the Cure. Join our grassroots network today! Click here to be part of the Cure!

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:
Hi Lucy -

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Lucy Culp" <lucy.culp@heart.org> 11/18/2010 2:52:00 PM RE: Meeting Friday AM

It would be good for Scott to be part of the face to face meeting, and for the three of you to meet Anne. Are you able to do the next partner check-in (Wednesday, December 1st)? Then we will have had time to add comments and suggest revisions for the bill. We did have some items for discussion this Friday, but can get the conversation started on email. First, we are looking at how to run the campaign from our side. Do you have thoughts about how our program and partners can have the best impact? Also, we the e-cig code changes will be in front of the BOH on December 16th. We have partners in support of this work, but wondered if your organizations would want to do supportive letters or testimony. Thanks, Sarah Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Lucy Culp [mailto:lucy.culp@heart.org] Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 7:21 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; 'cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org' Subject: Meeting Friday AM Hi Sarah – Just wanted to check in on our 8:00 meeting Friday. Since Anne and Scott aren’t going to be there do you think we still need a face to face? We’re waiting on the draft bill from the code reviser’s office and can bounce it around on email for input. Did you have anything we needed to touch base on in person? Let me know what you think. Lucy Culp Senior Director, Advocacy American Heart Association American Stroke Association Pacific/Mountain Affiliate (360) 870-4016 - cell (206) 834-8658 - office (206) 632-8478 - fax Heart Disease and Stroke. You're the Cure. Join our grassroots network today! Click here to be part of the Cure!

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject: Attachments:
Can you run this comparison?

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> 11/18/2010 5:40:00 PM FW: Meeting Friday AM Final Policy Guidance on E-Cigarettes 4-7-10.pdf

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Lucy Culp [mailto:lucy.culp@heart.org] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 11:08 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; 'cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org'; Muhm, Jennifer; Neal, Scott; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

I’m free before 11 or from 3-5 on 12/1. Anyone else? I think discussing how the program and partners can have the greatest impact would be a great topic for face to face, I’m also hoping it will be a little more clear after Friday’s meeting. Attached is the ACS/AHA/ALA joint policy document on E-cigs. I haven’t seen a draft of the BOH code changes, I would assume if they meet the criteria in this document our organizations would be supportive. Let me know if you need anything else from me. See you tomorrow!
~Lucy From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 10:50 AM To: Lucy Culp Cc: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; 'cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org'; Muhm, Jennifer; Neal, Scott; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Hi Lucy It would be good for Scott to be part of the face to face meeting, and for the three of you to meet Anne. Are you able to do the next partner check-in (Wednesday, December 1st)? Then we will have had time to add comments and suggest revisions for the bill. We did have some items for discussion this Friday, but can get the conversation started on email. First, we are looking at how to run the campaign from our side. Do you have thoughts about how our program and partners can have the best impact? Also, we the e-cig code changes will be in front of the BOH on December 16th. We have partners in support of this work, but wondered if your organizations would want to do supportive letters or testimony. Thanks, Sarah Sarah Ross-Viles 8_19_2011

Page 2 CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Lucy Culp [mailto:lucy.culp@heart.org] Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 7:21 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; 'cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org' Subject: Meeting Friday AM Hi Sarah – Just wanted to check in on our 8:00 meeting Friday. Since Anne and Scott aren’t going to be there do you think we still need a face to face? We’re waiting on the draft bill from the code reviser’s office and can bounce it around on email for input. Did you have anything we needed to touch base on in person? Let me know what you think. Lucy Culp Senior Director, Advocacy American Heart Association American Stroke Association Pacific/Mountain Affiliate (360) 870-4016 - cell (206) 834-8658 - office (206) 632-8478 - fax Heart Disease and Stroke. You're the Cure. Join our grassroots network today! Click here to be part of the Cure!

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:
Yes. Mark - can you summarize? Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Mahoney, Maggie" <maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu> 11/18/2010 5:31:00 PM RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation

From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 11:59 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Sure. I assume the contract amendment process will be easier once we get these initial kinks worked out! Thanks! Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 5:45 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Thanks, Maggie. I will inquire about the letter. For the budget - we have to use the 3 year budget format as this is a consultant contract. It's a bit inconvenient, but we can make it work for ad hoc spending. The proposed break-up of the budget reflected the usage I would expect from the particular years. I proposed my budget breakdown based on knowing we will want some bill review in December and very little will likely happen in 2012. We can use the contract amendment process to move funds between years if necessary. Will that work on your end? Thanks, Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County 8_19_2011

Page 2 Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 10:35 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Thanks for checking on this Sarah. I’ve attached a draft letter to address the conflict issue. Do you want to see whether that’s sufficient? Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 6:19 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Maggie- My understanding is that budgeting into calendar years is something we must do on our end, even if we expect we may amend them. Mark - is that correct? Or is there a way to do a consulting contract in amount only? Sarah

From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 3:05 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Great, thanks Sarah. I will put together a letter that copies the language of the contract and send it to you for review. A December 1 start date sounds good, and I look forward to wrapping up the contracting process, as I know you do, too! In the meantime, I accepted the changes in the draft scope of work, with one exception. I thought, based on our exchange from last week, that we weren’t going to allocate time to particular time periods so that we had flexibility throughout the remaining 15 months, since it would be hard to predict the ebb and flow of work. If that is still okay with you, I deleted the table in the draft scope of work because it just allocated funding over the life of the project and replaced it with a simple paragraph explaining that we’ll invoice you and you’ll pay us, as the contract says, that our fee is $175 per hour, up to a maximum of $25,000 total. I’ve attached it for your review. After I did that, I opened the budget document and see that the template had a lot of stuff that doesn’t apply to this contract (e.g., supplies, fringe benefits, etc.). I simplified it to match the content that is in the scope of work. I’ve attached it for your review. 8_19_2011

Page 3 Please let me know how those two things look and, as I said, I’ll draft a letter to match the contract language concerning the conflict issue. Thanks! Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 2:59 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Hi Maggie - I have the go-ahead that the letter can copy the language of the contract. I do not think it needs to contain much more than that. Thus, it looks like we are in the home stretch. Are you able to put that together to have in hand while we process the contract? The changes to the scope of work look fine to me, I made changes to the budget as discussed. I put December 1 as a start date. A contractor can begin work they will bill for as soon as we have an agreed upon scope of work. I chose the 1st to allow time to put the decision-making safeguards in place. I do know we will want your help in December in preparing for the leg session. Does this work for you? I am also attaching the template we use for contract budgets. I was not sure if you had other expenses besides the hourly fee. Please populate this template as part of the contract. If you need any assistance, Lauren Holt (cc'd above) is an ace. We will start processing the contract - getting Department and County approval - when we finalize these pieces. I will work on the safeguards. Thanks for bearing with us, Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 10:16 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: FW: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Hi Sarah, 8_19_2011

Page 4 This reminded me to ask you whether we should touch base on the contract. Is there anything else you need from me at this point? I have some time available this week to connect via phone, if you’d like. Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 10:51 AM To: Schaibley, David Cc: Armstrong, Kate; Cork, Kerry; Mahoney, Maggie; Blanke, Doug Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Many, many thanks to all of you at TCLC! I really appreciate having so many sets of wonderful eyes to review our draft and to provide such helpful input. I am incorporating many of your comments, and will send a draft off to our county prosecutor's office this morning. This item will go to a vote by our Board of Health on December 16. I'll keep you posted on our progress. Thanks again!! Anne Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov

From: Schaibley, David [mailto:David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 12:59 PM To: Pearson, Anne Cc: Armstrong, Kate; Cork, Kerry; Mahoney, Maggie; Blanke, Doug Subject: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation

Dear Anne: Attached please find our thoughts on Seattle/King County’s proposed e-cigarette regulation. We hope these thoughts are helpful. Please let us know if you are in need of any assistance in the future. Sincerely, Dave

David J. Schaibley |Public Health Law Center Staff Attorney, Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 651-695-7611 | Fax: 651-290-7515 david.schaibley@wmitchell.edu 875 Summit Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 www.TCLConline.org 8_19_2011

Page 5 The Tobacco Control Legal Consortium provides information and technical assistance on issues related to tobacco and public health. The Consortium does not provide legal representation or advice. This e-mail should not be considered legal advice or a substitute for obtaining legal advice from an attorney who can represent you. If you have specific legal questions, we recommend that you consult with an attorney familiar with the laws of your jurisdiction.

From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 10:13 AM To: Schaibley, David; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation Great! Thanks so much. Anne Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov

From: Schaibley, David [mailto:David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 7:24 AM To: Pearson, Anne; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation

Hi Anne: Just a quick update to let you know that we’ll have our input to you today. Dave
From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 8:41 AM To: Schaibley, David; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation We would like to send a draft to our Prosecuting Attorneys Office by Monday or Tuesday of next week. If we could incorporate your comments before sending, that would be ideal. But if that's too tight, we can still fold in your comments after we send it to her. Thanks!

From: Schaibley, David [David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 4:04 AM To: Pearson, Anne; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation Hello Anne: Thanks for forwarding it; we'll share our thoughts. When we spoke last week you mentioned a relatively tight time frame for this effort...can you let us know when you need our input by? Enjoy your long weekend, Dave 8_19_2011

Page 6 From: Pearson, Anne [Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 6:55 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie; Schaibley, David Subject: Draft E-cigarette regulation Hi Maggie and David, I hope you are both well. I was wondering if you might have the time to review a draft regulation restricting the sale of eproducts (attached). Our Board of Health is not proposing to go so far as to prohibit their sale entirely, but is interested in restricting their availability to youth. If you have a chance to take a look, I would love to hear your thoughts. I'll be out of the office for the rest of the week but back on Monday. All the best, Anne

______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Mahoney, Maggie" <maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu> 11/18/2010 5:34:00 PM FW: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation

Here is how our fiscal guy describe the process. The new contract would look exactly like the first one with the changes. In this case, we would not change the scope, just the budget (unless we had a reason to chance the scope).

From: Sherard, Mark Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:31 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Yes, All I have to do is move money from 1 year to the next and you get a new contract to sign. No work on your side. Mark

Mark Sherard
Public Health Seattle & King County Tobacco Prevention Program (CPPW) 401 Fifth Avenue # 900 Seattle, WA 98104
(desk) 206-263-8213 (main) 206-296-7613 office hours M-F 6-3

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:29 PM To: 'Mahoney, Maggie' Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Yes. Mark - can you summarize? Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 11:59 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Sure. I assume the contract amendment process will be easier once we get these initial kinks worked out! Thanks! Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue 8_19_2011

Page 2 St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 5:45 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Thanks, Maggie. I will inquire about the letter. For the budget - we have to use the 3 year budget format as this is a consultant contract. It's a bit inconvenient, but we can make it work for ad hoc spending. The proposed break-up of the budget reflected the usage I would expect from the particular years. I proposed my budget breakdown based on knowing we will want some bill review in December and very little will likely happen in 2012. We can use the contract amendment process to move funds between years if necessary. Will that work on your end? Thanks, Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 10:35 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Thanks for checking on this Sarah. I’ve attached a draft letter to address the conflict issue. Do you want to see whether that’s sufficient? Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 6:19 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy 8_19_2011

Page 3 Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Maggie- My understanding is that budgeting into calendar years is something we must do on our end, even if we expect we may amend them. Mark - is that correct? Or is there a way to do a consulting contract in amount only? Sarah

From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 3:05 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Great, thanks Sarah. I will put together a letter that copies the language of the contract and send it to you for review. A December 1 start date sounds good, and I look forward to wrapping up the contracting process, as I know you do, too! In the meantime, I accepted the changes in the draft scope of work, with one exception. I thought, based on our exchange from last week, that we weren’t going to allocate time to particular time periods so that we had flexibility throughout the remaining 15 months, since it would be hard to predict the ebb and flow of work. If that is still okay with you, I deleted the table in the draft scope of work because it just allocated funding over the life of the project and replaced it with a simple paragraph explaining that we’ll invoice you and you’ll pay us, as the contract says, that our fee is $175 per hour, up to a maximum of $25,000 total. I’ve attached it for your review. After I did that, I opened the budget document and see that the template had a lot of stuff that doesn’t apply to this contract (e.g., supplies, fringe benefits, etc.). I simplified it to match the content that is in the scope of work. I’ve attached it for your review. Please let me know how those two things look and, as I said, I’ll draft a letter to match the contract language concerning the conflict issue. Thanks! Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 2:59 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Hi Maggie - I have the go-ahead that the letter can copy the language of the contract. I do not think it needs to contain much more than that. Thus, it looks like we are in the home stretch. Are you able to put that together to have in hand while we process the contract? The changes to the scope of work look fine to me, I made changes to the budget as discussed. I put December 1 as a start date. A contractor can begin work they will bill for as soon as we have an agreed upon scope of work. I chose the 1st to allow time to put the decision-making safeguards in place. I do know we will want your help in December in preparing for the leg session. Does this work for you? 8_19_2011

Page 4 I am also attaching the template we use for contract budgets. I was not sure if you had other expenses besides the hourly fee. Please populate this template as part of the contract. If you need any assistance, Lauren Holt (cc'd above) is an ace. We will start processing the contract - getting Department and County approval - when we finalize these pieces. I will work on the safeguards. Thanks for bearing with us, Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 10:16 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: FW: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Hi Sarah, This reminded me to ask you whether we should touch base on the contract. Is there anything else you need from me at this point? I have some time available this week to connect via phone, if you’d like. Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 10:51 AM To: Schaibley, David Cc: Armstrong, Kate; Cork, Kerry; Mahoney, Maggie; Blanke, Doug Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Many, many thanks to all of you at TCLC! I really appreciate having so many sets of wonderful eyes to review our draft and to provide such helpful input. I am incorporating many of your comments, and will send a draft off to our county prosecutor's office this morning. This item will go to a vote by our Board of Health on December 16. I'll keep you posted on our progress. Thanks again!! Anne Anne Pearson, JD, MA 8_19_2011

Page 5 Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov

From: Schaibley, David [mailto:David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 12:59 PM To: Pearson, Anne Cc: Armstrong, Kate; Cork, Kerry; Mahoney, Maggie; Blanke, Doug Subject: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation

Dear Anne: Attached please find our thoughts on Seattle/King County’s proposed e-cigarette regulation. We hope these thoughts are helpful. Please let us know if you are in need of any assistance in the future. Sincerely, Dave

David J. Schaibley |Public Health Law Center Staff Attorney, Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 651-695-7611 | Fax: 651-290-7515 david.schaibley@wmitchell.edu 875 Summit Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 www.TCLConline.org The Tobacco Control Legal Consortium provides information and technical assistance on issues related to tobacco and public health. The Consortium does not provide legal representation or advice. This e-mail should not be considered legal advice or a substitute for obtaining legal advice from an attorney who can represent you. If you have specific legal questions, we recommend that you consult with an attorney familiar with the laws of your jurisdiction.

From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 10:13 AM To: Schaibley, David; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation Great! Thanks so much. Anne Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov

From: Schaibley, David [mailto:David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 7:24 AM To: Pearson, Anne; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation

Hi Anne:
8_19_2011

Page 6

Just a quick update to let you know that we’ll have our input to you today. Dave
From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 8:41 AM To: Schaibley, David; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation We would like to send a draft to our Prosecuting Attorneys Office by Monday or Tuesday of next week. If we could incorporate your comments before sending, that would be ideal. But if that's too tight, we can still fold in your comments after we send it to her. Thanks!

From: Schaibley, David [David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 4:04 AM To: Pearson, Anne; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation Hello Anne: Thanks for forwarding it; we'll share our thoughts. When we spoke last week you mentioned a relatively tight time frame for this effort...can you let us know when you need our input by? Enjoy your long weekend, Dave From: Pearson, Anne [Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 6:55 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie; Schaibley, David Subject: Draft E-cigarette regulation Hi Maggie and David, I hope you are both well. I was wondering if you might have the time to review a draft regulation restricting the sale of eproducts (attached). Our Board of Health is not proposing to go so far as to prohibit their sale entirely, but is interested in restricting their availability to youth. If you have a chance to take a look, I would love to hear your thoughts. I'll be out of the office for the rest of the week but back on Monday. All the best, Anne

______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses.
8_19_2011

Page 7

______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> Date: 11/19/2010 3:16:26 PM Subject: RE: Electronic cigarettes certainly takes any edge of the fear of a lawsuit. ________________________________________ From: Hamilton, Joy Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 10:50 AM To: Neal, Scott Cc: Pearson, Anne; Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: FW: Electronic cigarettes A letter from the E-cigs folks SUPPORTING youth restrictions. Could this help with the PAO? Joy ________________________________ From: Mulroy, Marie [mailto:mmulroy@breathenh.org] Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 10:19 AM To: Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Electronic cigarettes Here's the letter of support ________________________________ From: Hamilton, Joy [Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 11:45 AM To: Mulroy, Marie Subject: RE: Electronic cigarettes Marie, Thanks again for speaking to me about your work with e-cigs regulations in New Hampshire. I wanted to follow up on one quick point. I think that you mentioned the the e-cig industry/vapers were IN SUPPORT of your regulations around restricting the sale to youth. Can you confirm this? How did they express this view? Thanks, Joy Hamilton, MPH Public Health - Seattle & King County Communities Putting Prevention to Work Tobacco Policy and Advocacy Manager 401 5th Ave. Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9382 joy.hamilton@kingcounty.gov ________________________________ From: Marie Mulroy [mailto:mmulroy@breathenh.org] Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2010 9:39 AM
8_19_2011

Page 2

To: Hamilton, Joy Subject: Electronic cigarettes Here is some background information on our bill. If you go on to our website www.breathenh.org towards the end of the homepage is a picture of the youth who sponsored the bill with the Governor – click on the learn more about it here and it will take you to our YouTube information. Whatever help you need, let me know.

Marie Mulroy Manager Tobacco Program Breathe New Hampshire 9 Cedarwood Drive, Unit 12 Bedford, NH 03110 tel: 603.669.2411 fax: 603.645.6220 email: mmulroy@breathenh.org

This email, originating from Breathe New Hampshire, including any files or attachments transmitted with it, contains confidential information and is intended for use only by the specific individual or entity to which it is addressed, and accordingly is protected by law. Any disclosure, copying or distribution of this e-mail or the taking of any action based on its contents, other than for its intended purpose, is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact sender immediately by reply email and destroy all copies. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be error-free or secure from viruses, and Breathe New Hampshire disclaims all liability for any resulting damage, errors, or omissions

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> 11/19/2010 1:59:46 PM RE: Meeting Friday AM

9:30 to 10:30? Whichever of us is in land use can slip out early? ________________________________________ From: Hamilton, Joy Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 9:57 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Jen is free from 8 to 10:30 and 11:30 to 12:00. -----Original Message----From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 9:56 AM To: Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Can you look at Jen's too? Thanks. ________________________________________ From: Hamilton, Joy Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 9:47 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Neal, Scott; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM I checked Anne's schedule and she is free until 12 that day. Scott, how about you? -----Original Message----From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 9:44 AM To: Neal, Scott; Pearson, Anne; Hamilton, Joy Subject: FW: Meeting Friday AM I could do after 10. One of Joy or I should be at the 8:30 to 10 meeting. What are others' schedules? ________________________________________ From: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org [Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org] Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 9:15 AM To: Carrie Nyssen; Lucy Culp; Ross-Viles, Sarah; Pearson, Anne; Neal, Scott Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: Re: Meeting Friday AM Can we make Friday the 3rd in the morning work? Erin Dziedzic 425-466-5177

----- Original Message ----From: "Carrie Nyssen" [cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org] Sent: 11/18/2010 02:10 PM PST
8_19_2011

Page 2

To: "Carrie Nyssen" ; "Lucy Culp" ; Erin Dziedzic; "Sarah Ross-Viles" ; "Pearson, Anne" ; "Scott Neal" Cc: "Muhm, Jennifer" ; "Hamilton, Joy" Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

I am such a nightmare ... I would have to do Fri am. Carrie Nyssen Director of Health Initiatives-Idaho and Washington Regional Director of Advocacy American Lung Association of the Mountain Pacific Fighting for Air

-----Original Message----From: Carrie Nyssen Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 2:07 PM To: Lucy Culp ; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org ; Sarah Ross-Viles ; Pearson, Anne ; Scott Neal ; 'Carrie Nyssen' Cc: Muhm, Jennifer ; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Works for me too! Carrie Nyssen Director of Health Initiatives-Idaho and Washington Regional Director of Advocacy American Lung Association of the Mountain Pacific Fighting for Air

-----Original Message----From: Lucy Culp Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:44 PM To: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org ; Sarah Ross-Viles ; Pearson, Anne ; Scott Neal ; 'Carrie Nyssen' Cc: Muhm, Jennifer ; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Me too! Carrie? ~Lucy -----Original Message----From: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org [mailto:Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:38 PM To: Sarah Ross-Viles; Pearson, Anne; Scott Neal; Lucy Culp; 'Carrie Nyssen' Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: Re: Meeting Friday AM Works for me! Erin Dziedzic 425-466-5177
8_19_2011

Page 3

----- Original Message ----From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" [Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: 11/18/2010 01:36 PM PST To: Erin Dziedzic; "Pearson, Anne" ; "Neal, Scott" ; Lucy Culp ; "'Carrie Nyssen'" Cc: "Muhm, Jennifer" ; "Hamilton, Joy" Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

How about 1:30 PM? Looks like it fits all the PHSKC calendars.

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211 -----Original Message----From: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org [mailto:Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:29 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Pearson, Anne; Neal, Scott; Lucy Culp; 'Carrie Nyssen' Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: Re: Meeting Friday AM Can we do as early as possible that afternoon? Erin Dziedzic 425-466-5177

----- Original Message ----From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" [Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: 11/18/2010 01:25 PM PST To: "Pearson, Anne" ; "Neal, Scott" ; "'Lucy Culp'" ; "'Carrie Nyssen'" ; Erin Dziedzic Cc: "Muhm, Jennifer" ; "Hamilton, Joy" Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

Afternoon of the third is clear for me.

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211
8_19_2011

Page 4

-----Original Message----From: Pearson, Anne Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:13 PM To: Neal, Scott; 'Lucy Culp'; 'Carrie Nyssen'; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Works for me too.

Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov -----Original Message----From: Neal, Scott Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:11 PM To: 'Lucy Culp'; Pearson, Anne; 'Carrie Nyssen'; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Afternoon of the 3rd could work for me. Scott -----Original Message----From: Lucy Culp [mailto:lucy.culp@heart.org] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 12:46 PM To: Pearson, Anne; Neal, Scott; 'Carrie Nyssen'; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM I'm tied up on the second too. Anyone free the afternoon of the 30th or sometime on the 3rd? ~Lucy -----Original Message----From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 12:37 PM To: Neal, Scott; 'Carrie Nyssen'; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Lucy Culp; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Sorry, I have a conference call in the morning on the 2nd, and will be out of the office the remainder of the day.

Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900
8_19_2011

Page 5

Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov -----Original Message----From: Neal, Scott Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 12:14 PM To: 'Carrie Nyssen'; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Lucy Culp; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Sarah, Dec. 2nd works for me too, but I am not sure Anne can make this time according to her schedule. Scott -----Original Message----From: Carrie Nyssen [mailto:cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 12:00 PM To: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Lucy Culp; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Neal, Scott; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM I could make the 2nd in the morning ... -C Carrie Nyssen | Director Health Initiatives Washington & Idaho Regional Director of Advocacy AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION OF THE MOUNTAIN PACIFIC Fighting for Air Home Office Phone: 360.883.3535 Cell Phone: 360.921.1484 Fax: 360.891.8988 9708 NE 133rd Ave Vancouver, WA 98682 www.lungmtpacific.org

________________________________ From: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org [mailto:Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org] Sent: Thu 11/18/2010 11:53 AM To: Carrie Nyssen; Lucy Culp; Sarah Ross-Viles Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Scott Neal; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: Re: Meeting Friday AM

8_19_2011

Page 6

I can make the 1st work, or what about the 2nd in the morning? Erin Dziedzic 425-466-5177

----- Original Message ----From: "Carrie Nyssen" [cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org] Sent: 11/18/2010 11:16 AM PST To: "Lucy Culp" ; "Ross-Viles, Sarah" Cc: Erin Dziedzic; "Muhm, Jennifer" ; "Neal, Scott" ; "Hamilton, Joy" ; "Pearson, Anne" Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

I'm scheduled for several meetings in Portland on December 1. If this date works for others, I'll see if I can rearrange my schedule. -C Carrie Nyssen | Director Health Initiatives Washington & Idaho Regional Director of Advocacy AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION OF THE MOUNTAIN PACIFIC Fighting for Air Home Office Phone: 360.883.3535 Cell Phone: 360.921.1484 Fax: 360.891.8988 9708 NE 133rd Ave Vancouver, WA 98682 www.lungmtpacific.org

________________________________ From: Lucy Culp [mailto:lucy.culp@heart.org] Sent: Thu 11/18/2010 11:07 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Carrie Nyssen; Muhm, Jennifer; Neal, Scott; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

I'm free before 11 or from 3-5 on 12/1. Anyone else?

I think discussing how the program and partners can have the greatest impact would be a great topic for face to face, I'm also hoping it will be a little more clear after Friday's meeting.

8_19_2011

Page 7

Attached is the ACS/AHA/ALA joint policy document on E-cigs. I haven't seen a draft of the BOH code changes, I would assume if they meet the criteria in this document our organizations would be supportive.

Let me know if you need anything else from me. See you tomorrow!

~Lucy From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 10:50 AM To: Lucy Culp Cc: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; 'cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org'; Muhm, Jennifer; Neal, Scott; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

Hi Lucy -

It would be good for Scott to be part of the face to face meeting, and for the three of you to meet Anne. Are you able to do the next partner check-in (Wednesday, December 1st)? Then we will have had time to add comments and suggest revisions for the bill.

We did have some items for discussion this Friday, but can get the conversation started on email. First, we are looking at how to run the campaign from our side. Do you have thoughts about how our program and partners can have the best impact? Also, we the e-cig code changes will be in front of the BOH on December 16th. We have partners in support of this work, but wondered if your organizations would want to do supportive letters or testimony.

Thanks, Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211
8_19_2011

Page 8

________________________________ From: Lucy Culp [mailto:lucy.culp@heart.org] Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 7:21 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; 'cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org' Subject: Meeting Friday AM Hi Sarah - Just wanted to check in on our 8:00 meeting Friday. Since Anne and Scott aren't going to be there do you think we still need a face to face? We're waiting on the draft bill from the code reviser's office and can bounce it around on email for input. Did you have anything we needed to touch base on in person?

Let me know what you think.

Lucy Culp Senior Director, Advocacy American Heart Association American Stroke Association Pacific/Mountain Affiliate (360) 870-4016 - cell (206) 834-8658 - office (206) 632-8478 - fax Heart Disease and Stroke. You're the Cure. Join our grassroots network today! Click here to be part of the Cure!

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> 11/19/2010 1:55:33 PM RE: Meeting Friday AM

Can you look at Jen's too? Thanks. ________________________________________ From: Hamilton, Joy Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 9:47 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Neal, Scott; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM I checked Anne's schedule and she is free until 12 that day. Scott, how about you? -----Original Message----From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 9:44 AM To: Neal, Scott; Pearson, Anne; Hamilton, Joy Subject: FW: Meeting Friday AM I could do after 10. One of Joy or I should be at the 8:30 to 10 meeting. What are others' schedules? ________________________________________ From: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org [Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org] Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 9:15 AM To: Carrie Nyssen; Lucy Culp; Ross-Viles, Sarah; Pearson, Anne; Neal, Scott Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: Re: Meeting Friday AM Can we make Friday the 3rd in the morning work? Erin Dziedzic 425-466-5177

----- Original Message ----From: "Carrie Nyssen" [cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org] Sent: 11/18/2010 02:10 PM PST To: "Carrie Nyssen" ; "Lucy Culp" ; Erin Dziedzic; "Sarah Ross-Viles" ; "Pearson, Anne" ; "Scott Neal" Cc: "Muhm, Jennifer" ; "Hamilton, Joy" Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

I am such a nightmare ... I would have to do Fri am. Carrie Nyssen Director of Health Initiatives-Idaho and Washington Regional Director of Advocacy American Lung Association of the Mountain Pacific Fighting for Air

8_19_2011

Page 2

-----Original Message----From: Carrie Nyssen Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 2:07 PM To: Lucy Culp ; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org ; Sarah Ross-Viles ; Pearson, Anne ; Scott Neal ; 'Carrie Nyssen' Cc: Muhm, Jennifer ; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Works for me too! Carrie Nyssen Director of Health Initiatives-Idaho and Washington Regional Director of Advocacy American Lung Association of the Mountain Pacific Fighting for Air

-----Original Message----From: Lucy Culp Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:44 PM To: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org ; Sarah Ross-Viles ; Pearson, Anne ; Scott Neal ; 'Carrie Nyssen' Cc: Muhm, Jennifer ; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Me too! Carrie? ~Lucy -----Original Message----From: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org [mailto:Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:38 PM To: Sarah Ross-Viles; Pearson, Anne; Scott Neal; Lucy Culp; 'Carrie Nyssen' Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: Re: Meeting Friday AM Works for me! Erin Dziedzic 425-466-5177

----- Original Message ----From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" [Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: 11/18/2010 01:36 PM PST To: Erin Dziedzic; "Pearson, Anne" ; "Neal, Scott" ; Lucy Culp ; "'Carrie Nyssen'" Cc: "Muhm, Jennifer" ; "Hamilton, Joy" Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

How about 1:30 PM? Looks like it fits all the PHSKC calendars.

Sarah Ross-Viles
8_19_2011

Page 3

CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211 -----Original Message----From: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org [mailto:Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:29 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Pearson, Anne; Neal, Scott; Lucy Culp; 'Carrie Nyssen' Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: Re: Meeting Friday AM Can we do as early as possible that afternoon? Erin Dziedzic 425-466-5177

----- Original Message ----From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" [Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: 11/18/2010 01:25 PM PST To: "Pearson, Anne" ; "Neal, Scott" ; "'Lucy Culp'" ; "'Carrie Nyssen'" ; Erin Dziedzic Cc: "Muhm, Jennifer" ; "Hamilton, Joy" Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

Afternoon of the third is clear for me.

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211 -----Original Message----From: Pearson, Anne Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:13 PM To: Neal, Scott; 'Lucy Culp'; 'Carrie Nyssen'; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Works for me too.

Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411
8_19_2011

Page 4

anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov -----Original Message----From: Neal, Scott Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:11 PM To: 'Lucy Culp'; Pearson, Anne; 'Carrie Nyssen'; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Afternoon of the 3rd could work for me. Scott -----Original Message----From: Lucy Culp [mailto:lucy.culp@heart.org] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 12:46 PM To: Pearson, Anne; Neal, Scott; 'Carrie Nyssen'; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM I'm tied up on the second too. Anyone free the afternoon of the 30th or sometime on the 3rd? ~Lucy -----Original Message----From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 12:37 PM To: Neal, Scott; 'Carrie Nyssen'; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Lucy Culp; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Sorry, I have a conference call in the morning on the 2nd, and will be out of the office the remainder of the day.

Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov -----Original Message----From: Neal, Scott Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 12:14 PM To: 'Carrie Nyssen'; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Lucy Culp; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Sarah, Dec. 2nd works for me too, but I am not sure Anne can make this time according to her schedule.
8_19_2011

Page 5

Scott -----Original Message----From: Carrie Nyssen [mailto:cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 12:00 PM To: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Lucy Culp; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Neal, Scott; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM I could make the 2nd in the morning ... -C Carrie Nyssen | Director Health Initiatives Washington & Idaho Regional Director of Advocacy AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION OF THE MOUNTAIN PACIFIC Fighting for Air Home Office Phone: 360.883.3535 Cell Phone: 360.921.1484 Fax: 360.891.8988 9708 NE 133rd Ave Vancouver, WA 98682 www.lungmtpacific.org

________________________________ From: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org [mailto:Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org] Sent: Thu 11/18/2010 11:53 AM To: Carrie Nyssen; Lucy Culp; Sarah Ross-Viles Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Scott Neal; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: Re: Meeting Friday AM

I can make the 1st work, or what about the 2nd in the morning? Erin Dziedzic 425-466-5177

----- Original Message ----From: "Carrie Nyssen" [cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org] Sent: 11/18/2010 11:16 AM PST To: "Lucy Culp" ; "Ross-Viles, Sarah" Cc: Erin Dziedzic; "Muhm, Jennifer" ; "Neal, Scott" ; "Hamilton, Joy" ; "Pearson, Anne" Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

I'm scheduled for several meetings in Portland on December 1. If this date works for others, I'll see if I can re8_19_2011

Page 6

arrange my schedule. -C Carrie Nyssen | Director Health Initiatives Washington & Idaho Regional Director of Advocacy AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION OF THE MOUNTAIN PACIFIC Fighting for Air Home Office Phone: 360.883.3535 Cell Phone: 360.921.1484 Fax: 360.891.8988 9708 NE 133rd Ave Vancouver, WA 98682 www.lungmtpacific.org

________________________________ From: Lucy Culp [mailto:lucy.culp@heart.org] Sent: Thu 11/18/2010 11:07 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Carrie Nyssen; Muhm, Jennifer; Neal, Scott; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

I'm free before 11 or from 3-5 on 12/1. Anyone else?

I think discussing how the program and partners can have the greatest impact would be a great topic for face to face, I'm also hoping it will be a little more clear after Friday's meeting.

Attached is the ACS/AHA/ALA joint policy document on E-cigs. I haven't seen a draft of the BOH code changes, I would assume if they meet the criteria in this document our organizations would be supportive.

Let me know if you need anything else from me. See you tomorrow!

~Lucy From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 10:50 AM To: Lucy Culp Cc: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; 'cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org'; Muhm, Jennifer; Neal, Scott; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson,
8_19_2011

Page 7

Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

Hi Lucy -

It would be good for Scott to be part of the face to face meeting, and for the three of you to meet Anne. Are you able to do the next partner check-in (Wednesday, December 1st)? Then we will have had time to add comments and suggest revisions for the bill.

We did have some items for discussion this Friday, but can get the conversation started on email. First, we are looking at how to run the campaign from our side. Do you have thoughts about how our program and partners can have the best impact? Also, we the e-cig code changes will be in front of the BOH on December 16th. We have partners in support of this work, but wondered if your organizations would want to do supportive letters or testimony.

Thanks, Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

________________________________ From: Lucy Culp [mailto:lucy.culp@heart.org] Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 7:21 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; 'cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org' Subject: Meeting Friday AM Hi Sarah - Just wanted to check in on our 8:00 meeting Friday. Since Anne and Scott aren't going to be there do you think we still need a face to face? We're waiting on the draft bill from the code reviser's office and can bounce it
8_19_2011

Page 8

around on email for input. Did you have anything we needed to touch base on in person?

Let me know what you think.

Lucy Culp Senior Director, Advocacy American Heart Association American Stroke Association Pacific/Mountain Affiliate (360) 870-4016 - cell (206) 834-8658 - office (206) 632-8478 - fax Heart Disease and Stroke. You're the Cure. Join our grassroots network today! Click here to be part of the Cure!

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org "Carrie Nyssen" <cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org> "Lucy Culp" <lucy.culp@heart.org> "Pearson, Anne" <Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov> "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> Date: 11/19/2010 3:15:41 PM Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Looks like 9:30 to 10:30 will work for PHSKC folks. Going once, going twice . . . ________________________________________ From: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org [Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org] Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 9:15 AM To: Carrie Nyssen; Lucy Culp; Ross-Viles, Sarah; Pearson, Anne; Neal, Scott Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: Re: Meeting Friday AM Can we make Friday the 3rd in the morning work? Erin Dziedzic 425-466-5177

----- Original Message ----From: "Carrie Nyssen" [cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org] Sent: 11/18/2010 02:10 PM PST To: "Carrie Nyssen" ; "Lucy Culp" ; Erin Dziedzic; "Sarah Ross-Viles" ; "Pearson, Anne" ; "Scott Neal" Cc: "Muhm, Jennifer" ; "Hamilton, Joy" Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

I am such a nightmare ... I would have to do Fri am. Carrie Nyssen Director of Health Initiatives-Idaho and Washington Regional Director of Advocacy American Lung Association of the Mountain Pacific Fighting for Air

-----Original Message----From: Carrie Nyssen Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 2:07 PM To: Lucy Culp ; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org ; Sarah Ross-Viles ; Pearson, Anne ; Scott Neal ; 'Carrie Nyssen' Cc: Muhm, Jennifer ; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Works for me too! Carrie Nyssen
8_19_2011

Page 2

Director of Health Initiatives-Idaho and Washington Regional Director of Advocacy American Lung Association of the Mountain Pacific Fighting for Air

-----Original Message----From: Lucy Culp Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:44 PM To: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org ; Sarah Ross-Viles ; Pearson, Anne ; Scott Neal ; 'Carrie Nyssen' Cc: Muhm, Jennifer ; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Me too! Carrie? ~Lucy -----Original Message----From: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org [mailto:Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:38 PM To: Sarah Ross-Viles; Pearson, Anne; Scott Neal; Lucy Culp; 'Carrie Nyssen' Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: Re: Meeting Friday AM Works for me! Erin Dziedzic 425-466-5177

----- Original Message ----From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" [Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: 11/18/2010 01:36 PM PST To: Erin Dziedzic; "Pearson, Anne" ; "Neal, Scott" ; Lucy Culp ; "'Carrie Nyssen'" Cc: "Muhm, Jennifer" ; "Hamilton, Joy" Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

How about 1:30 PM? Looks like it fits all the PHSKC calendars.

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211 -----Original Message----From: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org [mailto:Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:29 PM
8_19_2011

Page 3

To: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Pearson, Anne; Neal, Scott; Lucy Culp; 'Carrie Nyssen' Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: Re: Meeting Friday AM Can we do as early as possible that afternoon? Erin Dziedzic 425-466-5177

----- Original Message ----From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" [Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: 11/18/2010 01:25 PM PST To: "Pearson, Anne" ; "Neal, Scott" ; "'Lucy Culp'" ; "'Carrie Nyssen'" ; Erin Dziedzic Cc: "Muhm, Jennifer" ; "Hamilton, Joy" Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

Afternoon of the third is clear for me.

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211 -----Original Message----From: Pearson, Anne Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:13 PM To: Neal, Scott; 'Lucy Culp'; 'Carrie Nyssen'; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Works for me too.

Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov -----Original Message----From: Neal, Scott Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:11 PM To: 'Lucy Culp'; Pearson, Anne; 'Carrie Nyssen'; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM
8_19_2011

Page 4

Afternoon of the 3rd could work for me. Scott -----Original Message----From: Lucy Culp [mailto:lucy.culp@heart.org] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 12:46 PM To: Pearson, Anne; Neal, Scott; 'Carrie Nyssen'; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM I'm tied up on the second too. Anyone free the afternoon of the 30th or sometime on the 3rd? ~Lucy -----Original Message----From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 12:37 PM To: Neal, Scott; 'Carrie Nyssen'; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Lucy Culp; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Sorry, I have a conference call in the morning on the 2nd, and will be out of the office the remainder of the day.

Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov -----Original Message----From: Neal, Scott Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 12:14 PM To: 'Carrie Nyssen'; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Lucy Culp; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Sarah, Dec. 2nd works for me too, but I am not sure Anne can make this time according to her schedule. Scott -----Original Message----From: Carrie Nyssen [mailto:cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 12:00 PM To: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Lucy Culp; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Neal, Scott; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM
8_19_2011

Page 5

I could make the 2nd in the morning ... -C Carrie Nyssen | Director Health Initiatives Washington & Idaho Regional Director of Advocacy AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION OF THE MOUNTAIN PACIFIC Fighting for Air Home Office Phone: 360.883.3535 Cell Phone: 360.921.1484 Fax: 360.891.8988 9708 NE 133rd Ave Vancouver, WA 98682 www.lungmtpacific.org

________________________________ From: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org [mailto:Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org] Sent: Thu 11/18/2010 11:53 AM To: Carrie Nyssen; Lucy Culp; Sarah Ross-Viles Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Scott Neal; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: Re: Meeting Friday AM

I can make the 1st work, or what about the 2nd in the morning? Erin Dziedzic 425-466-5177

----- Original Message ----From: "Carrie Nyssen" [cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org] Sent: 11/18/2010 11:16 AM PST To: "Lucy Culp" ; "Ross-Viles, Sarah" Cc: Erin Dziedzic; "Muhm, Jennifer" ; "Neal, Scott" ; "Hamilton, Joy" ; "Pearson, Anne" Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

I'm scheduled for several meetings in Portland on December 1. If this date works for others, I'll see if I can rearrange my schedule. -C Carrie Nyssen | Director Health Initiatives Washington & Idaho Regional Director of Advocacy AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION OF THE MOUNTAIN PACIFIC Fighting for Air
8_19_2011

Page 6

Home Office Phone: 360.883.3535 Cell Phone: 360.921.1484 Fax: 360.891.8988 9708 NE 133rd Ave Vancouver, WA 98682 www.lungmtpacific.org

________________________________ From: Lucy Culp [mailto:lucy.culp@heart.org] Sent: Thu 11/18/2010 11:07 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Carrie Nyssen; Muhm, Jennifer; Neal, Scott; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

I'm free before 11 or from 3-5 on 12/1. Anyone else?

I think discussing how the program and partners can have the greatest impact would be a great topic for face to face, I'm also hoping it will be a little more clear after Friday's meeting.

Attached is the ACS/AHA/ALA joint policy document on E-cigs. I haven't seen a draft of the BOH code changes, I would assume if they meet the criteria in this document our organizations would be supportive.

Let me know if you need anything else from me. See you tomorrow!

~Lucy From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 10:50 AM To: Lucy Culp Cc: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; 'cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org'; Muhm, Jennifer; Neal, Scott; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

Hi Lucy -

8_19_2011

Page 7

It would be good for Scott to be part of the face to face meeting, and for the three of you to meet Anne. Are you able to do the next partner check-in (Wednesday, December 1st)? Then we will have had time to add comments and suggest revisions for the bill.

We did have some items for discussion this Friday, but can get the conversation started on email. First, we are looking at how to run the campaign from our side. Do you have thoughts about how our program and partners can have the best impact? Also, we the e-cig code changes will be in front of the BOH on December 16th. We have partners in support of this work, but wondered if your organizations would want to do supportive letters or testimony.

Thanks, Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

________________________________ From: Lucy Culp [mailto:lucy.culp@heart.org] Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 7:21 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; 'cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org' Subject: Meeting Friday AM Hi Sarah - Just wanted to check in on our 8:00 meeting Friday. Since Anne and Scott aren't going to be there do you think we still need a face to face? We're waiting on the draft bill from the code reviser's office and can bounce it around on email for input. Did you have anything we needed to touch base on in person?

Let me know what you think.

Lucy Culp
8_19_2011

Page 8

Senior Director, Advocacy American Heart Association American Stroke Association Pacific/Mountain Affiliate (360) 870-4016 - cell (206) 834-8658 - office (206) 632-8478 - fax Heart Disease and Stroke. You're the Cure. Join our grassroots network today! Click here to be part of the Cure!

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> "Pearson, Anne" <Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov> "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> Date: 11/19/2010 1:43:59 PM Subject: FW: Meeting Friday AM I could do after 10. One of Joy or I should be at the 8:30 to 10 meeting. What are others' schedules? ________________________________________ From: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org [Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org] Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 9:15 AM To: Carrie Nyssen; Lucy Culp; Ross-Viles, Sarah; Pearson, Anne; Neal, Scott Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: Re: Meeting Friday AM Can we make Friday the 3rd in the morning work? Erin Dziedzic 425-466-5177

----- Original Message ----From: "Carrie Nyssen" [cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org] Sent: 11/18/2010 02:10 PM PST To: "Carrie Nyssen" ; "Lucy Culp" ; Erin Dziedzic; "Sarah Ross-Viles" ; "Pearson, Anne" ; "Scott Neal" Cc: "Muhm, Jennifer" ; "Hamilton, Joy" Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

I am such a nightmare ... I would have to do Fri am. Carrie Nyssen Director of Health Initiatives-Idaho and Washington Regional Director of Advocacy American Lung Association of the Mountain Pacific Fighting for Air

-----Original Message----From: Carrie Nyssen Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 2:07 PM To: Lucy Culp ; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org ; Sarah Ross-Viles ; Pearson, Anne ; Scott Neal ; 'Carrie Nyssen' Cc: Muhm, Jennifer ; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Works for me too! Carrie Nyssen Director of Health Initiatives-Idaho and Washington Regional Director of Advocacy
8_19_2011

Page 2

American Lung Association of the Mountain Pacific Fighting for Air

-----Original Message----From: Lucy Culp Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:44 PM To: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org ; Sarah Ross-Viles ; Pearson, Anne ; Scott Neal ; 'Carrie Nyssen' Cc: Muhm, Jennifer ; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Me too! Carrie? ~Lucy -----Original Message----From: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org [mailto:Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:38 PM To: Sarah Ross-Viles; Pearson, Anne; Scott Neal; Lucy Culp; 'Carrie Nyssen' Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: Re: Meeting Friday AM Works for me! Erin Dziedzic 425-466-5177

----- Original Message ----From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" [Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: 11/18/2010 01:36 PM PST To: Erin Dziedzic; "Pearson, Anne" ; "Neal, Scott" ; Lucy Culp ; "'Carrie Nyssen'" Cc: "Muhm, Jennifer" ; "Hamilton, Joy" Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

How about 1:30 PM? Looks like it fits all the PHSKC calendars.

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211 -----Original Message----From: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org [mailto:Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:29 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Pearson, Anne; Neal, Scott; Lucy Culp; 'Carrie Nyssen' Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy
8_19_2011

Page 3

Subject: Re: Meeting Friday AM Can we do as early as possible that afternoon? Erin Dziedzic 425-466-5177

----- Original Message ----From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" [Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: 11/18/2010 01:25 PM PST To: "Pearson, Anne" ; "Neal, Scott" ; "'Lucy Culp'" ; "'Carrie Nyssen'" ; Erin Dziedzic Cc: "Muhm, Jennifer" ; "Hamilton, Joy" Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

Afternoon of the third is clear for me.

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211 -----Original Message----From: Pearson, Anne Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:13 PM To: Neal, Scott; 'Lucy Culp'; 'Carrie Nyssen'; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Works for me too.

Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov -----Original Message----From: Neal, Scott Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:11 PM To: 'Lucy Culp'; Pearson, Anne; 'Carrie Nyssen'; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Afternoon of the 3rd could work for me.
8_19_2011

Page 4

Scott -----Original Message----From: Lucy Culp [mailto:lucy.culp@heart.org] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 12:46 PM To: Pearson, Anne; Neal, Scott; 'Carrie Nyssen'; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM I'm tied up on the second too. Anyone free the afternoon of the 30th or sometime on the 3rd? ~Lucy -----Original Message----From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 12:37 PM To: Neal, Scott; 'Carrie Nyssen'; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Lucy Culp; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Sorry, I have a conference call in the morning on the 2nd, and will be out of the office the remainder of the day.

Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov -----Original Message----From: Neal, Scott Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 12:14 PM To: 'Carrie Nyssen'; Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Lucy Culp; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM Sarah, Dec. 2nd works for me too, but I am not sure Anne can make this time according to her schedule. Scott -----Original Message----From: Carrie Nyssen [mailto:cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 12:00 PM To: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Lucy Culp; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Neal, Scott; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM I could make the 2nd in the morning ... -C
8_19_2011

Page 5

Carrie Nyssen | Director Health Initiatives Washington & Idaho Regional Director of Advocacy AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION OF THE MOUNTAIN PACIFIC Fighting for Air Home Office Phone: 360.883.3535 Cell Phone: 360.921.1484 Fax: 360.891.8988 9708 NE 133rd Ave Vancouver, WA 98682 www.lungmtpacific.org

________________________________ From: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org [mailto:Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org] Sent: Thu 11/18/2010 11:53 AM To: Carrie Nyssen; Lucy Culp; Sarah Ross-Viles Cc: Muhm, Jennifer; Scott Neal; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: Re: Meeting Friday AM

I can make the 1st work, or what about the 2nd in the morning? Erin Dziedzic 425-466-5177

----- Original Message ----From: "Carrie Nyssen" [cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org] Sent: 11/18/2010 11:16 AM PST To: "Lucy Culp" ; "Ross-Viles, Sarah" Cc: Erin Dziedzic; "Muhm, Jennifer" ; "Neal, Scott" ; "Hamilton, Joy" ; "Pearson, Anne" Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

I'm scheduled for several meetings in Portland on December 1. If this date works for others, I'll see if I can rearrange my schedule. -C Carrie Nyssen | Director Health Initiatives Washington & Idaho Regional Director of Advocacy AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION OF THE MOUNTAIN PACIFIC Fighting for Air Home Office Phone: 360.883.3535 Cell Phone: 360.921.1484
8_19_2011

Page 6

Fax: 360.891.8988 9708 NE 133rd Ave Vancouver, WA 98682 www.lungmtpacific.org

________________________________ From: Lucy Culp [mailto:lucy.culp@heart.org] Sent: Thu 11/18/2010 11:07 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; Carrie Nyssen; Muhm, Jennifer; Neal, Scott; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

I'm free before 11 or from 3-5 on 12/1. Anyone else?

I think discussing how the program and partners can have the greatest impact would be a great topic for face to face, I'm also hoping it will be a little more clear after Friday's meeting.

Attached is the ACS/AHA/ALA joint policy document on E-cigs. I haven't seen a draft of the BOH code changes, I would assume if they meet the criteria in this document our organizations would be supportive.

Let me know if you need anything else from me. See you tomorrow!

~Lucy From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 10:50 AM To: Lucy Culp Cc: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; 'cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org'; Muhm, Jennifer; Neal, Scott; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: RE: Meeting Friday AM

Hi Lucy -

It would be good for Scott to be part of the face to face meeting, and for the three of you to meet Anne. Are you able to do the next partner check-in (Wednesday, December 1st)? Then we will have had time to add comments and
8_19_2011

Page 7

suggest revisions for the bill.

We did have some items for discussion this Friday, but can get the conversation started on email. First, we are looking at how to run the campaign from our side. Do you have thoughts about how our program and partners can have the best impact? Also, we the e-cig code changes will be in front of the BOH on December 16th. We have partners in support of this work, but wondered if your organizations would want to do supportive letters or testimony.

Thanks, Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

________________________________ From: Lucy Culp [mailto:lucy.culp@heart.org] Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 7:21 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org; 'cnyssen@lungmtpacific.org' Subject: Meeting Friday AM Hi Sarah - Just wanted to check in on our 8:00 meeting Friday. Since Anne and Scott aren't going to be there do you think we still need a face to face? We're waiting on the draft bill from the code reviser's office and can bounce it around on email for input. Did you have anything we needed to touch base on in person?

Let me know what you think.

Lucy Culp Senior Director, Advocacy
8_19_2011

Page 8

American Heart Association American Stroke Association Pacific/Mountain Affiliate (360) 870-4016 - cell (206) 834-8658 - office (206) 632-8478 - fax Heart Disease and Stroke. You're the Cure. Join our grassroots network today! Click here to be part of the Cure!

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: Rosalind.Sciammas@gmmb.com "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> Date: 11/22/2010 1:34:10 PM Subject: Re: Resources for GMMB
Yes- this sort of information is what we would like to put in the Ed Network site. There is probably another round of polishing before it goes up. Sarah
From: Rosalind Sciammas [mailto:Rosalind.Sciammas@gmmb.com] Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 05:14 PM To: Hamilton, Joy; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Melissa Simpson <Melissa.Simpson@gmmb.com>; Erika Peterson <Erika.Peterson@gmmb.com> Subject: RE: Resources for GMMB

These are excellent resources for us and our potential partners. Thanks Joy.

Sarah, is this something you plan to make available on The Education Networks Ning web site too? Were working on how t repurpose these materials as media tools and resources for policy makers and other potential CPPW partners/organizers. I understand that you guys are still finalizing the model bill PHSKC is proposing for smoke-free parks and whether there wil be a clause forbidding e-cigs. Joy is getting back to me on this. Thanks again for sending these materials our way so quickly, Roz
From: Hamilton, Joy [mailto:Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 2:31 PM To: Rosalind Sciammas; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Melissa Simpson; Erika Peterson Subject: RE: Resources for GMMB

Roz,

I'm working on getting you the model policy from Pierce County. In the meantime, here are several model policies related to housing. As you may know, the KC Board of Health passed a resolution in September in support of smoke-free multi-unit housing. The staff report for that resolution included the model policies I'v attached here. Please let me know if there is other information or resources I can provide you with! Joy Hamilton, MPH Public Health - Seattle & King County Communities Putting Prevention to Work Tobacco Policy and Advocacy Manager 401 5th Ave. Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9382 joy.hamilton@kingcounty.gov

From: Rosalind Sciammas [mailto:Rosalind.Sciammas@gmmb.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 3:40 PM 8_19_2011

Page 2 To: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Hamilton, Joy Cc: Melissa Simpson; Erika Peterson Subject: RE: Resources for GMMB

Hi Sarah,

Thank you for making time to pull this information together for our use. The data has indeed been sliced in many different ways. It is helpful to see your reference maps and charts comparing King County Tobacco Use (and Physical Inactivity rates) to the 14 other most populous counties in the country.

The media will definitely be interested in background materials illustrating the disparities in King County, so well be thinki through how to make relevant information (contained in these separate PDFs) more accessible and interesting to the med We look forward to your model policy example from Pierce County thank you for your help too, Joy and the draft youth access policy from ACS later this week.

We are working with the CPPW team to finalize our approach to our Kids Meet Orbs filming project and will loop you back i once we finalize our approach. Please let me know if you need anything else. Thanks again for your time, Roz
From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 2:41 PM To: Rosalind Sciammas; Hamilton, Joy Cc: Melissa Simpson; Erika Peterson Subject: RE: Resources for GMMB Hi Ros -

Thanks for your patience on these materials. Data that shaped the CPPW priorities is here: http://www.kingcounty.gov/healthservices/health/partnerships/cppw/kcprofile.aspx at the bottom of the page under "Tobacco." Please let me know if we need to pull it apart more. For messaging, I am attaching our parks handout (that will likely be updated w local data after the Greenberg survey). I believe you have access to the housing guidebook. If not, it is here: http://www.kingcounty.gov/healthservices/health/tobacco/housing.aspx along with our other housing materials (landlord trade ads a a bus ad).

I am adding Joy Hamilton, our policy manager, to this email as well. Joy - can you do some thinking on model policies? The Pierc County policy referred to is for tobacco-free parks. Thanks, Sarah Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Rosalind Sciammas [mailto:Rosalind.Sciammas@gmmb.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 3:59 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Melissa Simpson; Erika Peterson Subject: Resources for GMMB

Hi Sarah,
8_19_2011

Page 3

I wanted to flag the resources weve requested of the Tobacco Program to make resource transmission easy for you. We are working on developing an FTP site exclusive to CPPW one that ensures only our CPPW team at GMMB can access the files placed on the site. In the meantime, if any of the files are small enough to be sent via email or yousendit.com, wed appreciate the following background materials: · · ·

Data on Tobacco Usage in PHSKC PHSKC Approved Key Messaging Documents as they Relate to the Tobacco Program and/or your tobacco policy priorities Any model bills speaking to your policy priorities that PHSKC plans to make available to CPPW cities [Searching for Tacoma Pierce County bill, as it relates to Youth Access, but are there others?]

Thanks so much for your help with this, Roz
Rosalind Sciammas Vice President 206.352.8598 | office +gmmb cause the effect

Confidentiality Notice: This email and all attachments are intended solely for the named person or entity to which it is addressed and contains information that may be privileged, confidential or copyrighted under applicable law. Any review, distribution, dissemination or copying of this email or the information herein b anyone other than the intended recipient, or an agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, is strictly prohibited. If you have receive this email in error, please immediately notify the sender or contact the offices of GMMB Inc. at 202-572-2818.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> 11/22/2010 4:34:05 PM RE: Resources for GMMB

for 1. My hunch is yes - we would want to include smoking devices in the parks policies - to make enforcement easy and to follow the argument of modeling for youth. I am not sure about the polishing of policies. I remember the big one as coming up with a city policy. Checking in with John about what needs to be done sounds like the right first step (you may want to review first and see what you think is missing). Sarah ________________________________________ From: Hamilton, Joy Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 12:22 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: RE: Resources for GMMB Two questions: 1. What do you think about e-cigs being in model parks language? My hunch is that its okay but wanted to check and not make sure it was part of a bigger discussion. 2. Do you want me to work on "polishing" the model housing policies? John was the point person on these so I'm happy to check with him about content or pick up the ball if polishing just means format. Thanks! ________________________________ From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 9:34 AM To: 'Rosalind.Sciammas@gmmb.com'; Hamilton, Joy Cc: 'Melissa.Simpson@gmmb.com'; 'Erika.Peterson@gmmb.com' Subject: Re: Resources for GMMB Yes- this sort of information is what we would like to put in the Ed Network site. There is probably another round of polishing before it goes up. Sarah From: Rosalind Sciammas [mailto:Rosalind.Sciammas@gmmb.com] Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 05:14 PM To: Hamilton, Joy; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Melissa Simpson ; Erika Peterson Subject: RE: Resources for GMMB These are excellent resources for us and our potential partners. Thanks Joy. Sarah, is this something you plan to make available on The Education Network’s Ning web site too? We’re working on how to repurpose these materials as media tools and resources for policy makers and other potential CPPW partners/organizers. I understand that you guys are still finalizing the model bill PHSKC is proposing for smoke-free parks and whether there will be a clause forbidding e-cigs. Joy is getting back to me on this.
8_19_2011

Page 2

Thanks again for sending these materials our way so quickly, Roz From: Hamilton, Joy [mailto:Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 2:31 PM To: Rosalind Sciammas; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Melissa Simpson; Erika Peterson Subject: RE: Resources for GMMB Roz, I'm working on getting you the model policy from Pierce County. In the meantime, here are several model policies related to housing. As you may know, the KC Board of Health passed a resolution in September in support of smoke-free multi-unit housing. The staff report for that resolution included the model policies I've attached here. Please let me know if there is other information or resources I can provide you with!

Joy Hamilton, MPH Public Health - Seattle & King County Communities Putting Prevention to Work Tobacco Policy and Advocacy Manager 401 5th Ave. Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9382 joy.hamilton@kingcounty.gov ________________________________ From: Rosalind Sciammas [mailto:Rosalind.Sciammas@gmmb.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 3:40 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Hamilton, Joy Cc: Melissa Simpson; Erika Peterson Subject: RE: Resources for GMMB Hi Sarah, Thank you for making time to pull this information together for our use. The data has indeed been sliced in many different ways. It is helpful to see your reference maps and charts comparing King County Tobacco Use (and Physical Inactivity rates) to the 14 other most populous counties in the country. The media will definitely be interested in background materials illustrating the disparities in King County, so we’ll be thinking through how to make relevant information (contained in these separate PDFs) more accessible and interesting to the media. We look forward to your “model” policy example from Pierce County – thank you for your help too, Joy – and the draft youth access policy from ACS later this week. We are working with the CPPW team to finalize our approach to our “Kids Meet Orbs” filming project and will loop you back in once we finalize our approach. Please let me know if you need anything else. Thanks again for your time, Roz
8_19_2011

Page 3

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 2:41 PM To: Rosalind Sciammas; Hamilton, Joy Cc: Melissa Simpson; Erika Peterson Subject: RE: Resources for GMMB Hi Ros Thanks for your patience on these materials. Data that shaped the CPPW priorities is here: http://www.kingcounty.gov/healthservices/health/partnerships/cppw/kcprofile.aspx at the bottom of the page under "Tobacco." Please let me know if we need to pull it apart more. For messaging, I am attaching our parks handout (that will likely be updated with local data after the Greenberg survey). I believe you have access to the housing guidebook. If not, it is here: http://www.kingcounty.gov/healthservices/health/tobacco/housing.aspx along with our other housing materials (landlord trade ads and a bus ad). I am adding Joy Hamilton, our policy manager, to this email as well. Joy - can you do some thinking on model policies? The Pierce County policy referred to is for tobacco-free parks. Thanks, Sarah Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

________________________________ From: Rosalind Sciammas [mailto:Rosalind.Sciammas@gmmb.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 3:59 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Melissa Simpson; Erika Peterson Subject: Resources for GMMB Hi Sarah, I wanted to flag the resources we’ve requested of the Tobacco Program to make resource transmission easy for you. We are working on developing an FTP site exclusive to CPPW – one that ensures only our CPPW team at GMMB can access the files placed on the site. In the meantime, if any of the files are small enough to be sent via email or yousendit.com, we’d appreciate the following background materials:

• Data on Tobacco Usage in PHSKC • PHSKC Approved Key Messaging Documents as they Relate to the Tobacco Program and/or your tobacco policy priorities • Any model bills speaking to your policy priorities that PHSKC plans to make available to CPPW cities [Searching for Tacoma Pierce County bill, as it relates to Youth Access, but are there others?]
8_19_2011

Page 4

Thanks so much for your help with this, Roz Rosalind Sciammas Vice President 206.352.8598 | office +gmmb cause the effect Confidentiality Notice: This email and all attachments are intended solely for the named person or entity to which it is addressed and contains information that may be privileged, confidential or copyrighted under applicable law. Any review, distribution, dissemination or copying of this email or the information herein by anyone other than the intended recipient, or an agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender or contact the offices of GMMB Inc. at 202572-2818.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> 11/22/2010 8:09:15 PM RE: tomorrow

Yikes! ________________________________________ From: Hamilton, Joy Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 4:07 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: RE: tomorrow Sounds like the best use of my time too. I'll check in tomorrow am. On a side-note, Lindsey had a particularly scary bus ride already. Her bus driver didn't know that they didn't switch the express lanes today and entered and headed toward oncoming traffic. They got off safely but she said it was pretty scary! ________________________________ From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 4:05 PM To: Hamilton, Joy Subject: Re: tomorrow Sounds like you have a bunch to do at home. Safety is first. Since ice looks like the problem for the AM, you could plan to do a couple hours at home first thing and see how the roads are and if there are busses. Sound like a plan? From: Hamilton, Joy Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 03:56 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: RE: tomorrow I've put a bunch of documents on my desktop and will take work home. Thinking it might be a great day to churn out drafts of much-needed one pagers: preemption, flavored, Tobacco Prevention Program and start my e-cig staff report. What is the process for deciding in the morning if I should try to come in? ________________________________ From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 3:54 PM To: Hamilton, Joy Subject: Re: tomorrow Proactive thinking is the parrot on Pirate Safety's shoulder! Preparing for a telecommute tomorrow is a good idea. The weather is supposed to be clearer but colder tomorrow. From: Hamilton, Joy Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 02:48 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: tomorrow
8_19_2011

Page 2

Sarah, Just checking in about tomorrow. If the roads are really bad -- should I still try to come in? I can take my laptop home with me so that I could work at home just in case. Chances are that I can get a ride with Patrick but just wanted to think proactively. Joy

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> 11/22/2010 8:04:58 PM Re: tomorrow

Sounds like you have a bunch to do at home. Safety is first. Since ice looks like the problem for the AM, you could plan to do a couple hours at home first thing and see how the roads are and if there are busses. Sound like a plan?
From: Hamilton, Joy Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 03:56 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: RE: tomorrow

I've put a bunch of documents on my desktop and will take work home. Thinking it might be a great day to churn out drafts of much-needed one pagers: preemption, flavored, Tobacco Prevention Program and start my e-cig staff report. What is the process for deciding in the morning if I should try to come in?

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 3:54 PM To: Hamilton, Joy Subject: Re: tomorrow

Proactive thinking is the parrot on Pirate Safety's shoulder! Preparing for a telecommute tomorrow is a good idea. The weather is supposed to be clearer but colder tomorrow.
From: Hamilton, Joy Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 02:48 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: tomorrow

Sarah, Just checking in about tomorrow. If the roads are really bad -- should I still try to come in? I can take my laptop home with me so that I could work at home just in case. Chances are that I can get a ride with Patrick but just wanted to think proactively. Joy

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:
Hi Maggie,

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Mahoney, Maggie" <maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu> 11/23/2010 6:36:00 PM RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation

Our compliance and contracts had some issues with this draft and our taking the opportunity to craft their own draft, which I will forward when I obtain it. Sarah Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 10:35 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Thanks for checking on this Sarah. I’ve attached a draft letter to address the conflict issue. Do you want to see whether that’s sufficient? Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 6:19 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Maggie- My understanding is that budgeting into calendar years is something we must do on our end, even if we expect we may amend them. Mark - is that correct? Or is there a way to do a consulting contract in amount only? Sarah

From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] 8_19_2011

Page 2 Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 3:05 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Great, thanks Sarah. I will put together a letter that copies the language of the contract and send it to you for review. A December 1 start date sounds good, and I look forward to wrapping up the contracting process, as I know you do, too! In the meantime, I accepted the changes in the draft scope of work, with one exception. I thought, based on our exchange from last week, that we weren’t going to allocate time to particular time periods so that we had flexibility throughout the remaining 15 months, since it would be hard to predict the ebb and flow of work. If that is still okay with you, I deleted the table in the draft scope of work because it just allocated funding over the life of the project and replaced it with a simple paragraph explaining that we’ll invoice you and you’ll pay us, as the contract says, that our fee is $175 per hour, up to a maximum of $25,000 total. I’ve attached it for your review. After I did that, I opened the budget document and see that the template had a lot of stuff that doesn’t apply to this contract (e.g., supplies, fringe benefits, etc.). I simplified it to match the content that is in the scope of work. I’ve attached it for your review. Please let me know how those two things look and, as I said, I’ll draft a letter to match the contract language concerning the conflict issue. Thanks! Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 2:59 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Hi Maggie - I have the go-ahead that the letter can copy the language of the contract. I do not think it needs to contain much more than that. Thus, it looks like we are in the home stretch. Are you able to put that together to have in hand while we process the contract? The changes to the scope of work look fine to me, I made changes to the budget as discussed. I put December 1 as a start date. A contractor can begin work they will bill for as soon as we have an agreed upon scope of work. I chose the 1st to allow time to put the decision-making safeguards in place. I do know we will want your help in December in preparing for the leg session. Does this work for you? I am also attaching the template we use for contract budgets. I was not sure if you had other expenses besides the hourly fee. Please populate this template as part of the contract. If you need any assistance, Lauren Holt (cc'd above) is an ace. We will start processing the contract - getting Department and County approval - when we finalize these pieces. I will work on the safeguards. Thanks for bearing with us, Sarah 8_19_2011

Page 3

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 10:16 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: FW: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Hi Sarah, This reminded me to ask you whether we should touch base on the contract. Is there anything else you need from me at this point? I have some time available this week to connect via phone, if you’d like. Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 10:51 AM To: Schaibley, David Cc: Armstrong, Kate; Cork, Kerry; Mahoney, Maggie; Blanke, Doug Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Many, many thanks to all of you at TCLC! I really appreciate having so many sets of wonderful eyes to review our draft and to provide such helpful input. I am incorporating many of your comments, and will send a draft off to our county prosecutor's office this morning. This item will go to a vote by our Board of Health on December 16. I'll keep you posted on our progress. Thanks again!! Anne Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov

From: Schaibley, David [mailto:David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 12:59 PM To: Pearson, Anne 8_19_2011

Page 4 Cc: Armstrong, Kate; Cork, Kerry; Mahoney, Maggie; Blanke, Doug Subject: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation

Dear Anne: Attached please find our thoughts on Seattle/King County’s proposed e-cigarette regulation. We hope these thoughts are helpful. Please let us know if you are in need of any assistance in the future. Sincerely, Dave

David J. Schaibley |Public Health Law Center Staff Attorney, Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 651-695-7611 | Fax: 651-290-7515 david.schaibley@wmitchell.edu 875 Summit Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 www.TCLConline.org The Tobacco Control Legal Consortium provides information and technical assistance on issues related to tobacco and public health. The Consortium does not provide legal representation or advice. This e-mail should not be considered legal advice or a substitute for obtaining legal advice from an attorney who can represent you. If you have specific legal questions, we recommend that you consult with an attorney familiar with the laws of your jurisdiction.

From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 10:13 AM To: Schaibley, David; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation Great! Thanks so much. Anne Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov

From: Schaibley, David [mailto:David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 7:24 AM To: Pearson, Anne; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation

Hi Anne: Just a quick update to let you know that we’ll have our input to you today. Dave
From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 8:41 AM To: Schaibley, David; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation We would like to send a draft to our Prosecuting Attorneys Office by Monday or Tuesday of next week. If we could 8_19_2011

Page 5 incorporate your comments before sending, that would be ideal. But if that's too tight, we can still fold in your comments after we send it to her. Thanks!

From: Schaibley, David [David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 4:04 AM To: Pearson, Anne; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation Hello Anne: Thanks for forwarding it; we'll share our thoughts. When we spoke last week you mentioned a relatively tight time frame for this effort...can you let us know when you need our input by? Enjoy your long weekend, Dave From: Pearson, Anne [Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 6:55 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie; Schaibley, David Subject: Draft E-cigarette regulation Hi Maggie and David, I hope you are both well. I was wondering if you might have the time to review a draft regulation restricting the sale of eproducts (attached). Our Board of Health is not proposing to go so far as to prohibit their sale entirely, but is interested in restricting their availability to youth. If you have a chance to take a look, I would love to hear your thoughts. I'll be out of the office for the rest of the week but back on Monday. All the best, Anne

______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________
8_19_2011

Page 6

This email has been scanned for all viruses.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject: Attachments:

"Hamilton, Joy" "Ross-Viles, Sarah" <Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov> 11/24/2010 5:29:46 PM FW: BOH e-cigarettes R&R and public notice BOH Regulation E-cigarette FINAL sent 11-23-2010.doc KC BOH Public Notice e-cigs 12-01-10.docx

FYI -- R& R sent to clerk's office! ________________________________________ From: Wood, Maria Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2010 12:46 PM To: Noris, Anne; Ritzen, Bruce; Pedroza, Melani; Blossey, Linda Cc: Pearson, Anne; Hamilton, Joy; Neal, Scott Subject: BOH e-cigarettes R&R and public notice Hi Attached please find the final draft of the R&R incorporating Bruce's comments with the following exceptions: 1) Bruce recommended minor changes to section 11 (governing e-cigs sold by machine.) That section is patterned on language in the RCW governing cigarette machines, and I think it is important we keep the restrictions identical. 2) Bruce suggested we move section 14 up and incorporate it into section 3. Section 14 is important for purposes of clarifying that our law is not applicable should the FDA eventually regulate e-cigs, so I think it makes sense to isolate the provision for emphasis.

The R&R is ready to be entered into Legistar so that we have the R&R number to include in the Public Notice. Here is the draft Public Notice. Please include the legistar number once known, otherwise it is good to go unless you have any suggested changes.

I understand Linda is out of the office today, so we don't expect this to be submitted to the Seattle Times until Monday morning per our discussion earlier this week. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns, and thanks for your flexibility in working around the holiday and unexpected winter weather. Maria E. Maria Wood, MA Board of Health Administrator Public Health – Seattle & King County 401 Fifth Avenue, Suite 1300 Seattle, WA 98104 t: 206-263-8791 f: 206-296-0166

8_19_2011

Page 2

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject: Snow day success!

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> 11/24/2010 5:42:00 PM RE: BOH e-cigarettes R&R and public notice

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211 -----Original Message----From: Hamilton, Joy Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2010 1:29 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: FW: BOH e-cigarettes R&R and public notice FYI -- R& R sent to clerk's office! ________________________________________ From: Wood, Maria Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2010 12:46 PM To: Noris, Anne; Ritzen, Bruce; Pedroza, Melani; Blossey, Linda Cc: Pearson, Anne; Hamilton, Joy; Neal, Scott Subject: BOH e-cigarettes R&R and public notice Hi Attached please find the final draft of the R&R incorporating Bruce's comments with the following exceptions: 1) Bruce recommended minor changes to section 11 (governing e-cigs sold by machine.) That section is patterned on language in the RCW governing cigarette machines, and I think it is important we keep the restrictions identical. 2) Bruce suggested we move section 14 up and incorporate it into section 3. Section 14 is important for purposes of clarifying that our law is not applicable should the FDA eventually regulate e-cigs, so I think it makes sense to isolate the provision for emphasis.

The R&R is ready to be entered into Legistar so that we have the R&R number to include in the Public Notice. Here is the draft Public Notice. Please include the legistar number once known, otherwise it is good to go unless you have any suggested changes.

I understand Linda is out of the office today, so we don't expect this to be submitted to the Seattle Times until Monday morning per our discussion earlier this week.
8_19_2011

Page 2

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns, and thanks for your flexibility in working around the holiday and unexpected winter weather. Maria E. Maria Wood, MA Board of Health Administrator Public Health – Seattle & King County 401 Fifth Avenue, Suite 1300 Seattle, WA 98104 t: 206-263-8791 f: 206-296-0166

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> 11/24/2010 11:58:54 AM RE: Tomorrow

OK - I will be in the office, so let me know if you need things sent. Sarah ________________________________________ From: Hamilton, Joy Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2010 7:47 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: RE: Tomorrow Sarah, I don't think that I can safely make it into work today. Patrick isn't planning to go to work so I don't have the option of a ride. They cancelled all buses going to/from Queen Anne yesterday so its likely that will happen again and I don't want to get stranded at work! I'm still working on the one pagers -- keep tweaking,re-thinking etc -- for preemption, flavored, TPP. Also am going to start the e-cig staff report for the BOH today. AND -- have several performance reviews for colleagues. I'll be on email and reachable by cell all day. Sorry that I can't make it in to keep you company in the office. Thanks, Joy ________________________________________ From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2010 4:13 PM To: Hamilton, Joy; Greto, Lindsey; Brawley, Karen; Moreno, Emma; Ryan, Molly Subject: Tomorrow Hi Folks, Just wanted to send a reminder out to get in touch with me before 8 tomorrow with your workplans for the day. I will be coming into the office again and it will be lovely to see whoever can safely make it. If you are not able to commute tomorrow, please send me the projects you will be working on, how you can be reached (if it has changed), or if you intend to use vacation. Stay warm! Sarah Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211
8_19_2011

Page 2

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Hatzenbuehler, Eric" <Eric.Hatzenbuehler@kingcounty.gov> "Bennett, John" <John.Bennett@kingcounty.gov> "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> Date: 11/29/2010 3:54:00 PM Subject: RE: question elec.vapor cigarettes
Thanks for working on a new draft, John. My concerns are being very direct with folks about the law they are actually enforcing (smoking in public places) and not giving them so much information that they become confused.

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Hatzenbuehler, Eric Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 11:25 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Bennett, John; Neal, Scott Subject: RE: question elec.vapor cigarettes A few thoughts and a question: 1. I think this is the first of many times we'll be getting a question like this from bar/restaurant owners and the differing opinion on how to respond is worth discussing. 2. We might want to consider establishing a clear rationale for not permitting e-cigarettes that includes Sarah's and John's responses. I like being fully transparent in our thinking which definitely includes federal, state, and local laws as well as practical/enforcement perspectives. One question - how public do we want to be about pending BOH policy initiatives? I've asked John to re-draft a response that we can discuss from there. Eric

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 9:48 AM To: Bennett, John; Neal, Scott; Leon-Guerrero, Michael; Hatzenbuehler, Eric; Zemann, Paul; de la Pena, Norilyn Subject: RE: question elec.vapor cigarettes While John's information is right, it does not look like what Dan is looking for. Currently, there is no State or King County Code that prohibits the use electronic cigarettes in areas that are non-smoking by law. However, these products make enforcement of the smoking law more difficult, and the Board of Health is looking at including these devices into the smoking in public places law. As a business owner and someone who enforces the law, it is our recommendation that The Cuff prohibit the use of these devices where they prohibit smoking in order to have uniform enforcement. How does this sound to folks?

From: Bennett, John 8_19_2011

Page 2 Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 7:14 AM To: Neal, Scott; Leon-Guerrero, Michael; Hatzenbuehler, Eric; Zemann, Paul; de la Pena, Norilyn Cc: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: RE: question elec.vapor cigarettes Mike, I think the answer is that these products are unapproved drug delivery devices and that they are not currently legal in the US? As far as signage goes, there is no officially endorsed state signage but we can send him some signs that the state made that will work. Otherwise, he is free to use any other signage as long as it clearly indicates that smoking is prohibited. John

From: Neal, Scott Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2010 4:04 PM To: Leon-Guerrero, Michael; Bennett, John; Hatzenbuehler, Eric; Zemann, Paul; de la Pena, Norilyn Cc: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: Re: question elec.vapor cigarettes Importance: High

Mike there is nothing yet but the BOH is looking to include the use of e-cigs in areas where reg cigs are prohibited. They will be considering this at the dec. BOH mtg. Please talk with sarah or joy about how we should respond to this inquiry. Scott
From: Leon-Guerrero, Michael Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2010 03:58 PM To: Bennett, John; Neal, Scott; Hatzenbuehler, Eric; Zemann, Paul; de la Pena, Norilyn Subject: FW: question elec.vapor cigarettes Hello all I haven't been able to find a formal answer, is there something King County specific that addresses E-cigs in nonsmoking areas? I'm guessing that someone was trying to use on on the deck...

From: thecuffcomplex@aol.com [mailto:thecuffcomplex@aol.com] Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 2:28 PM To: Leon-Guerrero, Michael Subject: question elec.vapor cigarettes

Hello Michael, I have a question on the use of Electronic Vapor Cigarettes. Is there any regulations on these and there use in no smoking areas ? any info would be help full . Also where can I get state endorsed no smoking sign age. Have a great Thanksgiving ! Thanks Dan Daniels GM The Cuff 206-323-1525 Dan@cuffcomplex.com

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Bennett, John" <John.Bennett@kingcounty.gov> "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> "Leon-Guerrero, Michael" <Michael.Leon-Guerrero@kingcounty.gov> "Hatzenbuehler, Eric" <Eric.Hatzenbuehler@kingcounty.gov> "Zemann, Paul" <Paul.Zemann@kingcounty.gov> "de la Pena, Norilyn" <Norilyn.DelaPena@kingcounty.gov> Date: 11/29/2010 1:50:00 PM Subject: RE: question elec.vapor cigarettes
While John's information is right, it does not look like what Dan is looking for. Currently, there is no State or King County Code that prohibits the use electronic cigarettes in areas that are non-smoking by law. However, these products make enforcement of the smoking law more difficult, and the Board of Health is looking at including these devices into the smoking in public places law. As a business owner and someone who enforces the law, it is our recommendation that The Cuff prohibit the use of these devices where they prohibit smoking in order to have uniform enforcement. How does this sound to folks?

From: Bennett, John Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 7:14 AM To: Neal, Scott; Leon-Guerrero, Michael; Hatzenbuehler, Eric; Zemann, Paul; de la Pena, Norilyn Cc: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: RE: question elec.vapor cigarettes Mike, I think the answer is that these products are unapproved drug delivery devices and that they are not currently legal in the US? As far as signage goes, there is no officially endorsed state signage but we can send him some signs that the state made that will work. Otherwise, he is free to use any other signage as long as it clearly indicates that smoking is prohibited. John

From: Neal, Scott Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2010 4:04 PM To: Leon-Guerrero, Michael; Bennett, John; Hatzenbuehler, Eric; Zemann, Paul; de la Pena, Norilyn Cc: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: Re: question elec.vapor cigarettes Importance: High

Mike there is nothing yet but the BOH is looking to include the use of e-cigs in areas where reg cigs are prohibited. They will be considering this at the dec. BOH mtg. Please talk with sarah or joy about how we should respond to this inquiry. Scott
From: Leon-Guerrero, Michael Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2010 03:58 PM To: Bennett, John; Neal, Scott; Hatzenbuehler, Eric; Zemann, Paul; de la Pena, Norilyn Subject: FW: question elec.vapor cigarettes Hello all I haven't been able to find a formal answer, is there something King County specific that addresses E-cigs in nonsmoking areas? I'm guessing that someone was trying to use on on the deck... 8_19_2011

Page 2

From: thecuffcomplex@aol.com [mailto:thecuffcomplex@aol.com] Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 2:28 PM To: Leon-Guerrero, Michael Subject: question elec.vapor cigarettes

Hello Michael, I have a question on the use of Electronic Vapor Cigarettes. Is there any regulations on these and there use in no smoking areas ? any info would be help full . Also where can I get state endorsed no smoking sign age. Have a great Thanksgiving ! Thanks Dan Daniels GM The Cuff 206-323-1525 Dan@cuffcomplex.com

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Bennett, John" To: "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> "Ross-Viles, Sarah" <Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov> "Hatzenbuehler, Eric" <Eric.Hatzenbuehler@kingcounty.gov> Date: 11/30/2010 4:33:24 PM Subject: RE: question elec.vapor cigarettes
Hey all! Here is some information regarding the legality of electronic cigarettes in the US, followed by my draft response to the owner or the Cuff. Have a look and let me know what you think.

Statement from the FDA:
"The products we reviewed so far we found to be illegal. There is pending litigation on the issue of FDA• fs jurisdiction over e-cigarettes." attorney Michael Levy, director of the FDA• office of compliance in the division of drug fs evaluation and research, says, as quoted by the aforementioned publication. "We felt it important that while there is litigation and we are considering options, there is no reason to be confused about FDA• position on this fs issue." Joshua Sharfstein, MD, FDA principal deputy commissioner, adds.

Rationale:
The FDA has established that electronic cigarettes are considered "new drugs". New drugs must receive extensive scrutiny before FDA approval in a process called a New Drug Application or NDA. New drugs are available only by prescription by default. A change to Over the Counter (OTC) status is a separate process and the drug must be approved through an NDA first. A drug that is approved is said to be "safe and effective when used as directed." "New drugs" require approval of an application filed in accordance with section 505 of the Act (21 U.S.C. • 355) to be legally marketed in the United States. None of the electronic cigarette or cigar products is so approved; therefore, marketing these products in the United States violates section 505 of the Act. The FDA has the power to take legal action against manufacturers of these products, including, without limitation, seizure and injunction.

Supporting Code:
SEC. 301. [21 USC • Prohibited acts 331] The following acts and the causing thereof are hereby prohibited: @1 • (a) The introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate commerce of any food, drug, device, or cosmetic that is adulterated or misbranded. (b) The adulteration or misbranding of any food, drug, device, or cosmetic in interstate commerce. (c) The receipt in interstate commerce of any food, drug, device, or cosmetic that is adulterated or misbranded, and the delivery or proffered delivery thereof for pay or otherwise. (d) The introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate commerce of any article in violation of section 404, 505 or 564. SEC. 505. [21 USC • New Drugs 355] (a) • Necessity of effective approval of application. No person shall introduce or deliver for introduction into @ interstate commerce any new drug, unless an approval of an application filed pursuant to subsection (b) or (j) is effective with respect to such drug. @ •

Related Court Ruling (Civ. No. 09-cv-0771 (RJL) :
"The intervener also incorrectly asserts that a product is not a "drug" within the meaning of the FDCA unless the manufacturer makes "medical or therapeutic claims . . . on the product• labeling or promotional materials." Int. Supp. Br. fs 8_19_2011

Page 2 at 2. Such a restrictive definition is contrary to the language of the statute, FDA regulations, FDA administrative practice, and case law. The FDCA defines "drug" to include, among other things, "articles (other than food) intended to affect the structure or any function of the body," as well as "articles intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease." 21 U.S.C. • 321(g)(1)(B) & (C). Thus, whether an article is a drug depends on its "intended use." The "intended use" of a product refers, in turn, "to the objective intent of the persons legally responsible for the labeling of drugs," which "is determined by such persons• f expressions or may be shown by the circumstances surrounding the distribution of the article. This objective intent may, for example, be shown by labeling claims, advertising matter, or oral or written statements by such persons or their representatives. . . ." 21 C.F.R. • 201.128. The case law further supports a far broader definition of "drug" than the intervener espouses. See, e.g., Action on Smoking and Health v. Harris, 655 F.2d 236, 239 (D.C. Cir. 1980) ("[I]t is well established that the eintended use• a • f of product, within the meaning of the Act, is determined from its label, accompanying labeling, promotional claims, advertising, and any other relevant source.") (internal citations and quotation marks omitted); United States v. Travia, 180 F. Supp. 2d 115, 119 (D.D.C. 2001) (Despite the absence of labeling, "the surrounding circumstances of the sales" demonstrated that the intended use of the nitrous oxide product was to affect the structure or any function of the body of man). See also U.S. Mem. at 4-5, 16-21. "

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>_______DRAFT RESPONSE_________<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Hey Dan, Thanks for contacting the Tobacco Prevention Program with your questions concerning the use of electronic cigarettes in public places. The Tobacco Prevention Program strongly recommends that you not permit the use of these products on your property for the following reasons: #1. It is not legal to market, distribute, or receive E-Cigarettes in the United States. The Food and Drug Administration has determined that electronic cigarettes are unapproved drug delivery devices. They have also begun confiscating shipments of electronic cigarettes into the country. More information about the action the FDA has taken can be found online here: http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm225224.htm. #2. Permitting their use complicates enforcement of the state and county smoking bans. The Tobacco Prevention Program has learned from the experiences of business owners who had a person attempt to use an electronic cigarette in their establishment that permitting their use even for a short time tends to upset other customers who are often very vocal about demanding that the electronic cigarettes be put away. In addition, on some occasions customers actually began using traditional cigarettes under the mistaken assumption that it may be legal to do so or that the owner/management of the establishment was not enforcing the law. Many owners have made the decision not to allow electronic cigarettes simply to keep their customers from being upset and to reduce confusion about the law. I hope this information has been helpful. If you have any further questions or concerns, please feel free to contact John Bennett by email at john.bennett@kingcounty.gov or by phone at 206-263-8156. John Bennett Public Health- Seattle & King County 401 5th Ave, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (p) 206.263.8156 (f) 206.296.0177 Office Hours: Monday-Thursday 7:00am – 5:30pm

From: thecuffcomplex@aol.com [mailto:thecuffcomplex@aol.com] Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 2:28 PM To: Leon-Guerrero, Michael Subject: question elec.vapor cigarettes

Hello Michael, 8_19_2011

Page 3 I have a question on the use of Electronic Vapor Cigarettes. Is there any regulations on these and there use in no smoking areas ? any info would be help full . Also where can I get state endorsed no smoking sign age. Have a great Thanksgiving ! Thanks Dan Daniels GM The Cuff 206-323-1525 Dan@cuffcomplex.com

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Hamilton, Joy" To: "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> "Ross-Viles, Sarah" <Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov> "Pearson, Anne" <Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov> Date: 12/1/2010 12:18:55 PM Subject: E-cig staff report Attachments: December Rule and Regulation Staff Report.doc Scott/Sarah/Anne, Here's what I've put together for the BOH staff report on e-cigs. The final draft is due Friday COB to Maria. I do my best to keep these reports succinct and approachable but I'm concerned that it still may be missing a strong argument about why we need to regulate these products. Anne -- I know that you have a good sense of what specific evidence the PAO needs (and will know more after today's meeting with Jane!) so feedback from you will be especially helpful. Please send comments in track changes ASAP.

Thanks!!! Joy

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Neal, Scott" To: "Pearson, Anne" <Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov> "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> "Ross-Viles, Sarah" <Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov> Date: 12/1/2010 4:49:42 PM Subject: RE: E-cig staff report Thanks Anne, I am adding my comments and inserting additions (some of which address your comments). I have meetings for the next three hours so I won't have this finished until tomorrow. But just so you know, I'm on it and will send this back to you all and maybe Joy or Sarah can take the next stab after my input? Scott >_____________________________________________ >From: Pearson, Anne >Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 10:54 AM >To: Hamilton, Joy; Neal, Scott; Ross-Viles, Sarah >Subject: RE: E-cig staff report > >Wow. Great job! > >I've made a number of suggestions in the attached. > >Some general comments: > >- I think we need to provide more information about nicotine delivery devices other than e-cigs to justify our regulation of them; >- I think we should also try to provide more information about the enforcement concerns. Can we find out from John how many complaints/inquiries re: e-cigs we have received, and provide a little more detail about why permitting e-cig use in public is a problem? >- Lastly, I think we should support the staff report with as many documents as possible. There are a few additional FDA documents that would be useful to attach. There are also some recent articles that look at e-cigs that are worth reviewing to see if they provide support. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20980012; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20644205. If so, they could be attached. Always important to make sure we describe what the source says with 100% accuracy. > >After you look through, let me know if you want to discuss. > >A > > << File: December Rule and Regulation Staff Report_ap.doc >> > > >_____________________________________________ >From: Hamilton, Joy >Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 8:19 AM >To: Neal, Scott; Ross-Viles, Sarah; Pearson, Anne >Subject: E-cig staff report >
8_19_2011

Page 2

>Scott/Sarah/Anne, > >Here's what I've put together for the BOH staff report on e-cigs. The final draft is due Friday COB to Maria. > >I do my best to keep these reports succinct and approachable but I'm concerned that it still may be missing a strong argument about why we need to regulate these products. Anne -- I know that you have a good sense of what specific evidence the PAO needs (and will know more after today's meeting with Jane!) so feedback from you will be especially helpful. > >Please send comments in track changes ASAP. > > > << File: December Rule and Regulation Staff Report.doc >> > >Thanks!!! >Joy

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Pearson, Anne" To: "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> "Ross-Viles, Sarah" <Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov> Date: 12/1/2010 2:53:31 PM Subject: RE: E-cig staff report Attachments: December Rule and Regulation Staff Report_ap.doc Wow. Great job! I've made a number of suggestions in the attached. Some general comments: - I think we need to provide more information about nicotine delivery devices other than e-cigs to justify our regulation of them; - I think we should also try to provide more information about the enforcement concerns. Can we find out from John how many complaints/inquiries re: e-cigs we have received, and provide a little more detail about why permitting ecig use in public is a problem? - Lastly, I think we should support the staff report with as many documents as possible. There are a few additional FDA documents that would be useful to attach. There are also some recent articles that look at e-cigs that are worth reviewing to see if they provide support. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20980012; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20644205. If so, they could be attached. Always important to make sure we describe what the source says with 100% accuracy. After you look through, let me know if you want to discuss. A

>_____________________________________________ >From: Hamilton, Joy >Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 8:19 AM >To: Neal, Scott; Ross-Viles, Sarah; Pearson, Anne >Subject: E-cig staff report > >Scott/Sarah/Anne, > >Here's what I've put together for the BOH staff report on e-cigs. The final draft is due Friday COB to Maria. > >I do my best to keep these reports succinct and approachable but I'm concerned that it still may be missing a strong argument about why we need to regulate these products. Anne -- I know that you have a good sense of what specific evidence the PAO needs (and will know more after today's meeting with Jane!) so feedback from you will be especially helpful. > >Please send comments in track changes ASAP. > > > << File: December Rule and Regulation Staff Report.doc >>
8_19_2011

Page 2

> >Thanks!!! >Joy

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> "Pearson, Anne" <Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov> "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> Date: 12/1/2010 5:46:00 PM Subject: RE: E-cig staff report I wait with baited breath. I have a meetings until 4:30 tomorrow, so my comments will be at COB. Is that enough time? Alternatively: Scott - if you finish by COB today, I can take a stab tonight. Or, I can jump you in line . . . Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

>_____________________________________________ >From: Neal, Scott >Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 12:50 PM >To: Pearson, Anne; Hamilton, Joy; Ross-Viles, Sarah >Subject: RE: E-cig staff report > >Thanks Anne, > >I am adding my comments and inserting additions (some of which address your comments). I have meetings for the next three hours so I won't have this finished until tomorrow. But just so you know, I'm on it and will send this back to you all and maybe Joy or Sarah can take the next stab after my input? > >Scott > >_____________________________________________ >From: Pearson, Anne >Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 10:54 AM >To: Hamilton, Joy; Neal, Scott; Ross-Viles, Sarah >Subject: RE: E-cig staff report > >Wow. Great job! > >I've made a number of suggestions in the attached. > >Some general comments: > >- I think we need to provide more information about nicotine delivery devices other than e-cigs to justify our regulation of them; >- I think we should also try to provide more information about the enforcement concerns. Can we find out from John how many complaints/inquiries re: e-cigs we have received, and provide a little more detail about why permitting e-cig use in public is a problem? >- Lastly, I think we should support the staff report with as many documents as possible. There are a few additional FDA documents that would be useful to attach. There are also some recent articles that look at e-cigs that are worth
8_19_2011

Page 2

reviewing to see if they provide support. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20980012; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20644205. If so, they could be attached. Always important to make sure we describe what the source says with 100% accuracy. > >After you look through, let me know if you want to discuss. > >A > > << File: December Rule and Regulation Staff Report_ap.doc >> > > >_____________________________________________ >From: Hamilton, Joy >Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 8:19 AM >To: Neal, Scott; Ross-Viles, Sarah; Pearson, Anne >Subject: E-cig staff report > >Scott/Sarah/Anne, > >Here's what I've put together for the BOH staff report on e-cigs. The final draft is due Friday COB to Maria. > >I do my best to keep these reports succinct and approachable but I'm concerned that it still may be missing a strong argument about why we need to regulate these products. Anne -- I know that you have a good sense of what specific evidence the PAO needs (and will know more after today's meeting with Jane!) so feedback from you will be especially helpful. > >Please send comments in track changes ASAP. > > > << File: December Rule and Regulation Staff Report.doc >> > >Thanks!!! >Joy

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Leon-Guerrero, Michael" To: "Pajimula, Fel" <Fel.Pajimula@kingcounty.gov> "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> "Bennett, John" <John.Bennett@kingcounty.gov> "Brawley, Karen" <Karen.Brawley@kingcounty.gov> "de la Pena, Norilyn" <Norilyn.DelaPena@kingcounty.gov> "Greto, Lindsey" <Lindsey.Greto@kingcounty.gov> "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> "Hatzenbuehler, Eric" <Eric.Hatzenbuehler@kingcounty.gov> "Holt, Lauren" <Lauren.Holt@kingcounty.gov> "Moreno, Emma" <Emma.Moreno@kingcounty.gov> "Ronneberg, Brett" <Brett.Ronneberg@kingcounty.gov> "Ross-Viles, Sarah" <Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov> "Ryan, Molly" <Molly.Ryan@kingcounty.gov> "Sherard, Mark" <Mark.Sherard@kingcounty.gov> "Zemann, Paul" <Paul.Zemann@kingcounty.gov> Date: 12/1/2010 6:04:49 PM Subject: RE: Just more interesting clips regarding e-cigs Sorry if I'm out of the loop on this, but what about the e-cigarettes that have no nicotine, such as the first link below? My partner's mom is staying with us currently and she's using an e-cigarette (black with a green glow-tip) has no nicotine - would they specifically be included in a potential ban? The one she is using does have an electronic component, does emit vapor, and must have other chemicals. I know we don't condone the e-cigarette for reasons which I am very well aware of, but my partners mother hasn't smoked a conventional cigarette in three months and only uses the e-cigarette 2-3 times a day. She has emphysema, previously smoked a pack a day and has tried Chantix, Welbutrin and the patch coupled with counseling without success. My favorite line from the video: "My shrimp and grits will make you slap yo grandma!" >_____________________________________________ >From: Pajimula, Fel >Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 12:58 PM >To: Neal, Scott; Bennett, John; Brawley, Karen; de la Pena, Norilyn; Greto, Lindsey; Hamilton, Joy; Hatzenbuehler, Eric; Holt, Lauren; Leon-Guerrero, Michael; Moreno, Emma; Ronneberg, Brett; Ross-Viles, Sarah; Ryan, Molly; Sherard, Mark; Zemann, Paul >Cc: Pearson, Anne >Subject: RE: Just more interesting clips regarding e-cigs > >After viewing the 1st link Scott provided, I found these as well: > >A 3 part news story compiled on youtube on the E-Cig. >the news station recruited 8 smokers to test it and followed their progress over 3 weeks: > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6-AovJrdf0 > >
8_19_2011

Page 2

>and this FOX News story that seems to be cheering on the e-cig: >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDZ6tQC05A4 > > >_____________________________________________ >From: Neal, Scott >Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 10:28 AM >To: Bennett, John; Brawley, Karen; de la Pena, Norilyn; Greto, Lindsey; Hamilton, Joy; Hatzenbuehler, Eric; Holt, Lauren; Leon-Guerrero, Michael; Moreno, Emma; Pajimula, Fel; Ronneberg, Brett; Ross-Viles, Sarah; Ryan, Molly; Sherard, Mark; Zemann, Paul >Cc: Pearson, Anne >Subject: Just more interesting clips regarding e-cigs > >Thought you might like to see some interesting clips from major network tv shows discussing e-cigs. > >Doctors show on ABC discuss benefits of E-cigs (not sure when it aired, but was posted on youtube in Feb. 2010) >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FaZ6abK2RrQ > >Dude talks about clip of Rachel Ray's show that discusses banning e-cigs (posted to youtube March 2010) >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flXtE8hb6cs

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject: Thanks, John! Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Bennett, John" <John.Bennett@kingcounty.gov> 12/1/2010 6:36:00 PM RE: Just more interesting clips regarding e-cigs

>_____________________________________________ >From: Bennett, John >Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 2:11 PM >To: Leon-Guerrero, Michael; Pajimula, Fel; Neal, Scott; Brawley, Karen; de la Pena, Norilyn; Greto, Lindsey; Hamilton, Joy; Hatzenbuehler, Eric; Holt, Lauren; Moreno, Emma; Ronneberg, Brett; Ross-Viles, Sarah; Ryan, Molly; Sherard, Mark; Zemann, Paul >Cc: Pearson, Anne >Subject: RE: Just more interesting clips regarding e-cigs > >Hey all! I will respond to Mike so that we don't have a dozen people all working on this :-) > >John > >_____________________________________________ >From: Leon-Guerrero, Michael >Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 2:05 PM >To: Pajimula, Fel; Neal, Scott; Bennett, John; Brawley, Karen; de la Pena, Norilyn; Greto, Lindsey; Hamilton, Joy; Hatzenbuehler, Eric; Holt, Lauren; Moreno, Emma; Ronneberg, Brett; Ross-Viles, Sarah; Ryan, Molly; Sherard, Mark; Zemann, Paul >Cc: Pearson, Anne >Subject: RE: Just more interesting clips regarding e-cigs > >Sorry if I'm out of the loop on this, but what about the e-cigarettes that have no nicotine, such as the first link below? > >My partner's mom is staying with us currently and she's using an e-cigarette (black with a green glow-tip) has no nicotine - would they specifically be included in a potential ban? The one she is using does have an electronic component, does emit vapor, and must have other chemicals. > >I know we don't condone the e-cigarette for reasons which I am very well aware of, but my partners mother hasn't smoked a conventional cigarette in three months and only uses the e-cigarette 2-3 times a day. She has emphysema, previously smoked a pack a day and has tried Chantix, Welbutrin and the patch coupled with counseling without success. > >My favorite line from the video: >"My shrimp and grits will make you slap yo grandma!"
8_19_2011

Page 2

> >_____________________________________________ >From: Pajimula, Fel >Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 12:58 PM >To: Neal, Scott; Bennett, John; Brawley, Karen; de la Pena, Norilyn; Greto, Lindsey; Hamilton, Joy; Hatzenbuehler, Eric; Holt, Lauren; Leon-Guerrero, Michael; Moreno, Emma; Ronneberg, Brett; Ross-Viles, Sarah; Ryan, Molly; Sherard, Mark; Zemann, Paul >Cc: Pearson, Anne >Subject: RE: Just more interesting clips regarding e-cigs > >After viewing the 1st link Scott provided, I found these as well: > >A 3 part news story compiled on youtube on the E-Cig. >the news station recruited 8 smokers to test it and followed their progress over 3 weeks: > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6-AovJrdf0 > > >and this FOX News story that seems to be cheering on the e-cig: >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDZ6tQC05A4 > > >_____________________________________________ >From: Neal, Scott >Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 10:28 AM >To: Bennett, John; Brawley, Karen; de la Pena, Norilyn; Greto, Lindsey; Hamilton, Joy; Hatzenbuehler, Eric; Holt, Lauren; Leon-Guerrero, Michael; Moreno, Emma; Pajimula, Fel; Ronneberg, Brett; Ross-Viles, Sarah; Ryan, Molly; Sherard, Mark; Zemann, Paul >Cc: Pearson, Anne >Subject: Just more interesting clips regarding e-cigs > >Thought you might like to see some interesting clips from major network tv shows discussing e-cigs. > >Doctors show on ABC discuss benefits of E-cigs (not sure when it aired, but was posted on youtube in Feb. 2010) >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FaZ6abK2RrQ > >Dude talks about clip of Rachel Ray's show that discusses banning e-cigs (posted to youtube March 2010) >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flXtE8hb6cs>

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Neal, Scott" To: "Bennett, John" <John.Bennett@kingcounty.gov> "Brawley, Karen" <Karen.Brawley@kingcounty.gov> "de la Pena, Norilyn" <Norilyn.DelaPena@kingcounty.gov> "Greto, Lindsey" <Lindsey.Greto@kingcounty.gov> "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> "Hatzenbuehler, Eric" <Eric.Hatzenbuehler@kingcounty.gov> "Holt, Lauren" <Lauren.Holt@kingcounty.gov> "Leon-Guerrero, Michael" <Michael.Leon-Guerrero@kingcounty.gov> "Moreno, Emma" <Emma.Moreno@kingcounty.gov> "Pajimula, Fel" <Fel.Pajimula@kingcounty.gov> "Ronneberg, Brett" <Brett.Ronneberg@kingcounty.gov> "Ross-Viles, Sarah" <Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov> "Ryan, Molly" <Molly.Ryan@kingcounty.gov> "Sherard, Mark" <Mark.Sherard@kingcounty.gov> "Zemann, Paul" <Paul.Zemann@kingcounty.gov> Date: 12/1/2010 2:27:59 PM Subject: Just more interesting clips regarding e-cigs Thought you might like to see some interesting clips from major network tv shows discussing e-cigs. Doctors show on ABC discuss benefits of E-cigs (not sure when it aired, but was posted on youtube in Feb. 2010) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FaZ6abK2RrQ Dude talks about clip of Rachel Ray's show that discusses banning e-cigs (posted to youtube March 2010) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flXtE8hb6cs

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Hamilton, Joy" "Ross-Viles, Sarah" <Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov> 12/2/2010 7:34:57 PM RE: E-cig description for CPPW Update

> << OLE Object: Picture (Enhanced Metafile) >> King County Board of Health to consider electronic cigarette regulations On December 16th the King County Board of Health will be considering electronic cigarette regulations. This proposal is being brought to the board on behalf of the Tobacco Policy Committee, which is supported by CPPW Tobacco Prevention staff. Electronic cigarettes are battery-operated devices that deliver vaporized nicotine instead of burning tobacco. These products are available to buy online and at smoke shops and at mall kiosks. These devices are currently under investigation by the FDA and have not currently been approved. The BOH will consider several regulations including restricting the sale to adults 18 and older, prohibiting free samples, and prohibiting the use of these products in places where smoking is prohibited by law.

>Sarah Ross-Viles >CPPW Tobacco Project Manager >Public Health - Seattle & King County >Suite 900 401 5th Avenue >Seattle, WA 98102 >(206) 263-8211 >

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> 12/2/2010 7:22:00 PM E-cig description for CPPW Update

Anything you would want to add to this paragraph in the CPPW newsletter.

Board of Health will take up e-cigarettes CPPW Tobacco prevention staff will be working with the King County Board of Health to look at the health effects of e-cigarettes, which are battery-operated devices that deliver vaporized nicotine instead of burning tobacco. These devices are currently under investigation with FDA, but they are available to buy online and at smoke shops. Will be on BOH agenda, restrict sale to adults 18 and older, prohibits free samples and blanket product restriction. Add ecigarettes to smoking in public paces code like regular cigarettes.

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Neal, Scott" To: "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> "Ross-Viles, Sarah" <Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov> Date: 12/2/2010 12:15:05 PM Subject: FW: Meeting with PAO re: E-cigarette regulation
FYI...more to come later today.

From: Johnson, Gareth Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 9:55 PM To: Pearson, Anne Cc: Fleming, David; Neal, Scott; Wood, Maria Subject: Re: Meeting with PAO re: E-cigarette regulation

Thanks Anne. So we feel we made progress, but not on every point David. It may finally come down to whether you decide to proceed even though we have heard Jane's concerns. Should we get together again to discuss this further?

From: Pearson, Anne Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 05:46 PM To: Johnson, Gareth Cc: Fleming, David; Neal, Scott; Wood, Maria Subject: Meeting with PAO re: E-cigarette regulation

Gary, At your request, I’m summarizing today’s meeting with Jane McKenzie concerning the proposed e-cigarette regulation. As I think you would agree, the meeting was very cordial and we had a healthy back and forth about the legal issues presented by the proposal. As to the proposed ban on using e-cigarettes in public places, Jane conceded that since the state law does not affirmatively permit e-cigarette use, the proposed restriction is not likely preempted. We noted our appreciation of Cynthia’s recommended edits, and I believe there is agreement that this provision is within the authority of the Board of Health. As to the question of whether the proposed regulation of e-cigarettes is preempted by the state law prohibiting local regulation of the retail sale of tobacco products, Jane agrees that it is not preempted so long as e-cigarettes do not contain tobacco. We agreed that this question hinges entirely on the contents of the products. Where we continue to disagree is on the scope of federal preemption. As you know, the question that has been raised in litigation is whether e-cigarettes are tobacco products or drug delivery devices. Jane said that an appellate decision in the litigation might be handed down shortly, and suggested that the Board might want to wait to act until that decision has been rendered. That said, if the decision -- which will not be binding in WA state -- finds that e-cigarettes are “drug/device combination products with the primary mode of action being that of a drug,” which is the current position of the FDA, I believe that localities will not be preempted from regulating them until such time as the FDA issues specific regulations governing them as devices. Notably, Scott and I have spoken with FDA officials in the drug/device division, and while they have not expressly said that they do not believe our proposed regulation is not preempted by federal drug/device laws, they have expressed support for our efforts and never raised any concerns with respect to preemption. If the decision finds that they are modified risk tobacco products, it is Jane’s position that localities will be preempted from regulating them even before the manufacturers of those products have applied for and received an order from the FDA finding that they meet that definition. She reads the FDA law to provide that modified risk tobacco products that have not gone through the FDA approval process are prohibited from being sold, but at the same time may not be regulated at the local level. I think that the preemptive scope of the new FDA law with respect to modified risk tobacco products is very much an open question, but that it is not consistent with the spirit of the law to prohibit localities from regulating products 8_19_2011

Page 2 that are essentially operating on the black market. At the end of the day, no state or locality that has passed an e-cigarette law has been sued. In all likelihood, this is the case because to claim that the local laws are preempted is tantamount to conceding that e-cigarettes are either tobacco products (in which case they are already subject to minimum age and sampling restrictions), modified risk tobacco products (in which case they may not even be sold in the U.S. prior to FDA approval) or drug/delivery devices (in which case they will require approval from a different branch of the FDA.) Please let me know if you have any questions. -Anne

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject: Attachments: Gary,

"Hamilton, Joy" "Johnson, Gareth" <Gareth.Johnson@kingcounty.gov> 12/3/2010 12:24:02 PM E cigs staff report December Rule and Regulation Staff Report_ap sn srv jmh.doc

I'm attaching the most recent draft of the e-cigs staff report. This has been reviewed by Anne, Scott and Sarah. The deadline to submit a final draft to Maria is COB today. As you will see in the draft, it is still a work in progress as there are a few sources and information that still need to be added. Since we are meeting with ACS/ALA/AHA this morning and I won't have time to complete the needed changes, I wanted to send you the draft to look at now and provide any feedback so that can be incorporated by the end of the day. Please send any comments/changes back to me ASAP.

Thanks so much, Joy

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Rosalind Sciammas" <Rosalind.Sciammas@gmmb.com> To: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" <Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov> "Apa, James" <James.Apa@kingcounty.gov> Date: 12/3/2010 3:27:33 PM Subject: E-Cigarette Promotion Strategy Attachments: E-cigarette Promotion.PDF
Hi all,

The attached flyer (promoting e-cigarette kits as a great Holiday gift) was placed in Melissas residential mailbox, located in Phinney Ridge. Thought you might be interested in seeing how widespread Vapures reach truly is these days. They are using a local salon market products. Sounds like this local business partnership and outreach strategy is making the rounds in King County. Just an FYI, Roz
Rosalind Sciammas Vice President 206.352.8598 | office +gmmb cause the effect

Confidentiality Notice: This email and all attachments are intended solely for the named person or entity to w hich it is addressed and contains information tha may be privileged, confidential or copyrighted under applicable law . Any review , distribution, dissemination or copying of this email or the information herein anyone other than the intended recipient, or an agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, is strictly prohibited. If you have recei this email in error, please immediately notify the sender or contact the offices of GMMB Inc. at 202-572-2818.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Bates, Amy" <Amy.Bates@kingcounty.gov> Date: 12/6/2010 6:27:00 PM RE: *** Reminder***[Draft for Review - Due Tuesday] Communities Putting Prevention to Work: Subject: Partner Update Hi May - I made changes on version on the shared drive. Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

>_____________________________________________ >From: Bates, Amy >Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 11:13 AM >To: Kellogg, Ryan; Ross-Viles, Sarah; Krieger, James; Valenzuela, Matias >Cc: Sadow-Hasenberg, Nicole; Huus, Kathie; Johnson, Gareth; Bates, Amy >Subject: *** Reminder***[Draft for Review - Due Tuesday] Communities Putting Prevention to Work: Partner Update >Importance: High > >[***Original Note Sent Thursday, December 2nd***] A draft of the CPPW Update is ready for review. Please review the document by Tuesday, December 7th for distribution on Wednesday, December 8th. Thank you. You may make your corrections to the attachment and return it or make them directly upon the draft with is housed in the EO updates file. (Path = Joint Implementation\Reporting and updates\EO Updates\EO Update for 113010\Final Draft for Editing.) Thank you. > << File: 113010 CPPW Update Editing.doc >> >Communities Putting Prevention to Work >Update for November 30, 2010 > >The following items are provided as an update for our CPPW partners. The items covered in this update include the following: > > >* CPPW “thumbs up” to child care providers combating obesity and to cooperative food purchasing efforts >* Sugar-loaded beverages on TV >* CPPW Calendar (Important Updates) > >CPPW “thumbs up” – > >Child care providers improving nutrition and physical activity >The Coalition for Safety and Health and Early Learning (C-SHEL) is working with child care centers run by the City of Seattle and the Seattle Housing Authority to adopt stricter standards for nutrition, physical activity and screen time. These child care providers have CPPW funds to make these changes. CSHEL is also looking best practices of other states, limiting juice intake, regulating screen time. The enhanced standards provide more detail about how to put together healthy meals for children in the child care centers. Right now the regulations are vague, requiring only that dairy, grain, and fruit and/or vegetable be served at every meal. CSHEL has been training staff to do further
8_19_2011

Page 2

training with new staff. Seattle city is survey their staff to get sense of attitudes and thoughts around nutrition standards. > >Child care work group has been active, how do you revise regulations around healthy child care. City of Seattle aging disability is looking at farm to childcare, Puget Sound food network, working to link up farmer to childcare. Would like to serve healthier food but cost is a barrier learning ways to decrease the cost. > >Seattle Churches Use CPPW Funds to Create a Legacy of Health >On Tuesday November 16th, church pastors from the 6 churches working on the CPPW project “Moving Together in Faith and Health” met at the Douglass Truth Library in central Seattle. Churches funded through CPPW to promote the well being of their congregations by changing church policies, environments and systems include First A.M.E., Tabernacle Missionary Baptist, Immaculate Conception, New Direction Baptist, Goodwill Missionary Baptist, and Mt. Zion Baptist. These 6 churches serve mostly African American populations and a large percentage of persons from working class and fixed income backgrounds. > >Church pastors, church leaders, and Dr. Doris Boutain from the University of Washington’s School of Nursing collaboratively developed the idea to work directly with pastors, with “church change teams,”> and with Schools of Nursing at the University of Washington, Seattle University, and Seattle Pacific University to implement policy, environment and systems change. Each church change team includes two youth, a lead from the health ministry, a lead cook/chef, and a lead from the children/youth program. Pastors provide leadership and encouragement to the church change teams by championing recommended changes. Pastors are also taking an active role in learning about and advocating for policy changes to promote health in underserved neighborhoods where their churches are located. Early significant accomplishments include two churches removing their soda machines within the first few months of grant implementation. Congratulations to Goodwill Missionary Baptist and New Direction Missionary Baptist! (For more information about this project please contact Dr. Doris Boutain at >dboutain@u.washington.edu ) > >Joining together to make healthy food more affordable >Working with the state Office of Public Instruction (OSPI) on cooperative buying programs for fed school lunch working to be broader and expand to programs that are on the child and adult food care program to expand coop buying as there are more childcare sites than school sits. > >KC agricultural commission can be connected, Erin and Adrian and Kathie to meet and see how we can cooperative buying. St. Paul has a similar program regarding dairy management and regulation made into forms that is useable or something that children will eat. > >Board of Health will take up e-cigarettes >CPPW Tobacco prevention staff will be working with the King County Board of Health to look at the health effects of e-cigarettes, which are battery-operated devices that deliver vaporized nicotine instead of burning tobacco. These devices are currently under investigation with FDA, but they are available to buy online and at smoke shops. Will be on BOH agenda, restrict sale to adults 18 and older, prohibits free samples and blanket product restriction. Add ecigarettes to smoking in public paces code like regular cigarettes. > >Sugar Loaded Beverages on TV > >Dr Jim Krieger was on KIRO TV talking about the health impacts of consuming sugar in sodas, AKA sugar-loaded beverages. > >People in the United States now consume 200-300 more calories each day than we did 30 years ago, and more than half of these calories come from sugar-loaded beverages. >A sugar-loaded beverage (also known as a sugar-sweetened beverage) is a drink with sugar added such as soda, sports drinks, energy drinks and sweetened fruit drinks. Drinking sugar-loaded beverages contributes to more adults and children being overweight or obese and at serious risk for major health problems, such as Type 2 diabetes and
8_19_2011

Page 3

high blood pressure. >Choose low-fat milk or water instead! > >Campaign materials, including a new video, are available at: www.kingcounty.gov/health/sugarydrinks > > >CPPW Calendar: > >“Chronic Disease Prevention Policy Collaboration Workshop” scheduled for November 19 - Public Health – Seattle & King County convened a "Chronic Disease Prevention Policy Collaboration Workshop" with support from stimulus funds from the Communities Putting Prevention to Work (CPPW) Initiative. The current challenges to public health require strong cross-sector collaboration on public policy. The workshop engaged a small number of organizations and advocates across multiple sectors to increase collaboration on policies related to chronic disease prevention. Results of this workshop will be featured in a future CPPW update. > >Leadership Team Working Group Meeting - The Leadership Team Working Group, which meets monthly, met on November 30. The Working Group provides strategic advice for engaging the full Leadership Team members when there are specific actions they can take to support CPPW. The full Leadership Team including elected officials will meet next in >March 10, 2011 with a second meeting planned for 30 September 2011. This schedule will give the RFP funded grants and health department staff time to structure those meetings as productively as possible. > >CPPW Coalition - The next CPPW Coalition meeting will be on January 25, 2011. Training on how to make policy, system and environment changes and how to talk to the media is planned, and specific break-out sessions on policy and system change topics will be offered, as well. > >Amy Bates >Coalition & Education Network Coordinator/Project Manager III >Public Health - Seattle & King County >401 5th Avenue >Seattle, WA 98104 >Phone: 206.263.9391 >Email: Amy.Bates@KingCounty.gov >

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Hamilton, Joy" "Ross-Viles, Sarah" <Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov> 12/6/2010 5:21:54 PM RE: CAP Update time - still manual

Point of Sale Objective -- Justification for Alternative Rating isn't quite right -- shouldn't say e-cigs and instead say Point of Sale for BOH vote in 6/11. Otherwise -- looks good. >_____________________________________________ >From: Ross-Viles, Sarah >Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 12:50 PM >To: Hamilton, Joy >Subject: FW: CAP Update time - still manual >Importance: High > >Hi Joy - I forgot to put a date on the email below. Can you let me know by COB today is anything is off track since the last update? > >Thanks, >Sarah > >Sarah Ross-Viles >CPPW Tobacco Project Manager >Public Health - Seattle & King County >Suite 900 401 5th Avenue >Seattle, WA 98102 >(206) 263-8211 > > >______________________________________________ >From: Ross-Viles, Sarah >Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 9:54 AM >To: Greto, Lindsey; Hamilton, Joy; Moreno, Emma >Subject: CAP Update time - still manual > >Hi Folks, > >Please work off of this CAP - . Please let me know of any milestones that are off-track, or anything changes you see to future milestones. > >Sarah > >Sarah Ross-Viles >CPPW Tobacco Project Manager >Public Health - Seattle & King County >Suite 900 401 5th Avenue >Seattle, WA 98102 >(206) 263-8211 >
8_19_2011

Page 2

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject: Attachments:

"Hamilton, Joy" "Wood, Maria" <Maria.Wood@kingcounty.gov> 12/6/2010 3:51:59 PM E Cig staff report E-cig staff report FINAL 12.6.10.doc BOH Regulation E-cigarette FINAL sent 11-23-2010.doc ALL Exhibits.pdf

Maria, I've attached the e-cig staff report. The proposed regulation language is an attachment and then there are a series of exhibits (all in one document).

Please let me know if you need anything else or have comments or questions.

Thanks, Joy Hamilton, MPH Public Health - Seattle & King County Communities Putting Prevention to Work Tobacco Policy and Advocacy Manager 401 5th Ave. Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9382 joy.hamilton@kingcounty.gov

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject: Yay! Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> 12/6/2010 4:27:00 PM RE: E Cig staff report

>_____________________________________________ >From: Hamilton, Joy >Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 11:52 AM >To: Wood, Maria >Cc: Neal, Scott; Johnson, Gareth; Pearson, Anne; Ross-Viles, Sarah >Subject: E Cig staff report > >Maria, >I've attached the e-cig staff report. The proposed regulation language is an attachment and then there are a series of exhibits (all in one document). > > << File: E-cig staff report FINAL 12.6.10.doc >> << File: BOH Regulation E-cigarette FINAL sent 11-232010.doc >> << File: ALL Exhibits.pdf >> > >Please let me know if you need anything else or have comments or questions. > > >Thanks, >Joy Hamilton, MPH >Public Health - Seattle & King County >Communities Putting Prevention to Work >Tobacco Policy and Advocacy Manager >401 5th Ave. Suite 900 >Seattle, WA 98104 >(206) 263-9382 >joy.hamilton@kingcounty.gov > > >

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Stan Shatenstein" <shatenstein@globalink.org> mju@globalink.org 12/6/2010 8:53:07 PM GLOBALink MJU: 367th Edition: 7-December-2010

Medical Journal Update 367th Edition 7-December-2010 Dear readers, Please make PDF requests by sending journal and author name information (e.g. AJPH - Cook) to shatensteins@sympatico.ca. Please also include your own e-mail address in every request message. Click on links to access papers freely available to all, but feel free to ask for these if you have a problem opening the PDFs. Do not send back full abstracts or MJU editions, just the journal and author names and, if you can, the number of the edition in which they appear. Studies are listed below by alphabetical order of journal names. Stan Shatenstein

In this edition: Am J Cardiol - Frey Impact of Smoking on Cardiovascular Events in Patients With Coronary Disease Receiving Contemporary Medical Therapy (from the Treating to New Targets [TNT] and the Incremental Decrease in End Points Through Aggressive Lipid Lowering [IDEAL] Trials)

The American Journal of Cardiology Article in Press, Corrected Proof Available online 2 December 2010. Paul Frey MD, David D. Waters MD, David A. DeMicco PharmD, Andrei Breazna PhD, Larry Samuels PhD, Andrew Pipe CM, MD, Chuan-Chuan Wun PhD and Neal L. Benowitz MD Abstract

To define the incremental risk of cigarette smoking in patients with coronary disease receiving contemporary medical therapy, we performed a post hoc analysis of 18,885 patients by combining data from the Treating to New Targets (TNT) and the Incremental Decrease in End Points through Aggressive Lipid Lowering (IDEAL) trials. These studies compared high-dose treatment (atorvastatin 80 mg/day) to moderate-dose treatment (atorvastatin 10 mg/day in TNT and simvastatin 20 to 40 mg/day in IDEAL) in patients with established coronary heart disease. The primary end point of this pooled analysis was major cardiovascular events, a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or resuscitated cardiac arrest. At baseline 4,196 patients had never smoked, 11,513 were ex-smokers, and 3,176 were current smokers. The adjusted hazard ratio for current smokers compared to never smokers was 1.68 (95% confidence interval 1.46 to 1.94) and that for current smokers compared to ex-smokers was 1.57 (95% confidence interval 1.41 to 1.76). Event rates for current smokers compared to ex-smokers were similarly increased in each treatment group. The difference in absolute event rates between current and ex-smokers in this pooled analysis was 4.5%, which is >2 times as large as the decrease in absolute event rates between high-dose and moderate-dose statin therapy found in the IDEAL (1.7%) and TNT (2.2%) trials, respectively. In conclusion, in patients with coronary disease receiving modern medical therapy, smoking cessation is of substantial benefit with a number needed to treat of 22 to prevent a major cardiovascular event over 5 years. Smoking cessation deserves greater emphasis in secondary prevention. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00029149

Ann Epi - Ko/Cupul-Uicab/DeRoo 8_19_2011

Page 2 A Prospective Study Investigating the Association Between Environmental Tobacco Smoke Exposure and the Incidence of Type 2 Diabetes in Never Smokers

Annals of Epidemiology Volume 21, Issue 1, January 2011, Pages 42-47 Available online 2 December 2010. Kwang-Pil Ko MD, PhD, Haesook Min MS, Younjhin Ahn PhD, Seon-Joo Park Phd, Cheong-Sik Kim PhD, Jae Kyung Park MPH and Sung Soo Kim PhD Abstract Purpose

We studied a cohort of individuals to assess whether intensity of environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) exposure is associated with the incidence of type 2 diabetes. Methods

Study subjects were selected from an ongoing population-based cohort of Korea Genome and Epidemiology Study. Participants of the baseline study 10,038 persons within the age range of 40 to 69 years old. Among 4,442 never smokers without prevalent diabetes, 465 type 2 diabetes cases were identified through biennial active follow-ups for a 6-year period. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) after adjustment for covariates. Results

The risk of type 2 diabetes was higher in subjects exposed to ETS compared with the nonexposure group (HR = 1.41, 95% CI: 1.11.70). Daily exposure to ETS at home increased the risk of type 2 diabetes when compared with the risk level of nonexposure (HR = 1.46, 95% CI: 1.161.83). Over 4 hours exposure to ETS at home and in the workplace was associated with increased the risk of type 2 diabetes (HR = 1.96, 95% CI: 1.213.19). Conclusions

Our study suggests that ETS exposure is a significant risk factor for the development of type 2 diabetes with doseresponse relationship. Also: Reproducibility of Reported In Utero Exposure to Tobacco Smoke Smoking During First Pregnancy and Breast Cancer: A Case-Control Study Using Washington State Registry Data http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/10472797

Ann Thorac Surg - Berman Comparison of Outcomes From Smoking and Nonsmoking Donors: Thirteen-Year Experience Ann Thorac Surg 2010;90:1786-1792. Marius Berman, MD, Kim Goldsmith, MS, MPH, David Jenkins, MS, FRCS, Catherine Sudarshan, FRCS, Pedro Catarino, FRCS, Nair Sukumaran, FRCS, John Dunning, FRCS, Linda D. Sharples, PhD, Steven Tsui, MD, FRCS, Jasvir Parmar, PhD, FRCP Abstract 8_19_2011

Page 3 Background: Lung transplantation remains the best treatment option for a variety of end-stage lung diseases. Pressure on the limited donor pool has led to the use of extended criteria donors. One aspect of this has been the liberalization of the use of smoking donors (SmD). Methods: This study is a retrospective review of lung transplants performed between April 1995 and August 2008 at a single institute. We examined the impact of donor smoking on short-term and long-term survival in relationship to recipient and donor demographics such as ischemic time, cytomegalovirus status, rates of rejection and infection, ventilation, and intensive care stay. Endpoints were survival, infection, and rejection. Results: During this 13-year period, 454 lung transplants were performed. Smoking history was available on 424 (93.4%) of these (SmD, n = 184; NSmD, n = 240). Seventy-one patients died within 3 months of transplant leaving 353 alive at 3 months posttransplant. Fatalities within the first 3 months were significantly higher in the SmD group (21% vs 13%, odds ratio 1.9, hazard ratio 3.3, p = 0.04). No significant difference in rejection and infection rates between recipients of lungs from SmD and NSmD at 3 months and at 1 year posttransplantation (p = 0.51 and 0.09) was found. Although recipients of lungs from SmD had higher odds of ventilation for more than 10 hours, the odds were only increased by 20%, which was not statistically significant. Recipients from SmD had significantly longer stays in the intensive care (odds ratio 1.9, p = 0.002). There was little evidence for an effect of SmD on the development of bronchiolitis obliterans. Conclusions: In this large cohort of patients, donor smoking history has an effect on early survival but no effect on longterm survival. The cause of this early mortality is independent of infection and rejection. However, these data suggest that overall outcomes from the use of donor lungs from smokers are acceptable, particularly in the current era with limited donor organs. http://ats.ctsnetjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/90/6/1786

BMC Psych - Johnson Gender-specific profiles of tobacco use among non-institutionalized people with serious mental illness

BMC Psychiatry 2010, 10:101doi:10.1186/1471-244X-10-101. Published: 30 November 2010 Joy L Johnson, Pamela A Ratner, Leslie A. Malchy, Chizimuzo T C Okoli, Ric M Procyshyn, Joan L Bottorff, Marlee Groening, Annette Schultz, Marg Osborne Abstract Background In many countries, smoking remains the leading preventable cause of death. In North America, reductions in population smoking levels are stabilising and, in recent years, those involved in tobacco control programming have turned their attention to particular segments of society that are at greatest risk for tobacco use. One such group is people with mental illness. A picture of tobacco use patterns among those with mental illness is beginning to emerge; however, there are several unanswered questions. In particular, most studies have been limited to particular in-patient groups. In addition, while it is recognised that men and women differ in relation to their reasons for smoking, levels of addiction to nicotine, and difficulties with cessation, these sex and gender differences have not been fully explored in psychiatric populations. Methods Community residents with serious mental illness were surveyed to describe their patterns of tobacco use and to develop a gender-specific profile of their smoking status and its predictors. Results Of 729 respondents, almost one half (46.8%) were current tobacco users with high nicotine dependence levels. They spent a majority of their income on tobacco, and reported using smoking to cope with their psychiatric symptoms. Current smokers, compared with non-smokers, were more likely to be: diagnosed with a schizophrenia spectrum disorder (rather than a mood disorder); male; relatively young; not a member of a racialised group (e.g., Aboriginal, Asian, South Asian, Black); poorly educated; separated or divorced; housed in a residential facility, shelter, or on the street; receiving social assistance; and reporting co-morbid substance use. There is evidence of a gender interaction with these factors; in the gender-specific multivariate logistic regression models, schizophrenia spectrum disorder versus mood disorder was not predictive of women's smoking, nor was education, marital status or cocaine use. Women, and not men, however, 8_19_2011

Page 4 were more likely to be smokers if they were young and living in a residential facility. Conclusion For men only, the presence of schizophrenia spectrum disorder is a risk factor for tobacco use. Other factors, of a social nature, contribute to the risk of smoking for both men and women with serious mental illness. The findings suggest that important social determinants of smoking are "gendered" in this population, thus tobacco control and smoking cessation programming should be gender sensitive. http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-244X/10/101/abstract http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1471-244x-10-101.pd... Note: Full text PDF freely available from link immediately above.

Br J Cancer - Key/JNCI - Boffetta/Willett Fruit and vegetables and cancer risk British Journal of Cancer advance online publication 30 November 2010; doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6606032 T J Key Abstract The possibility that fruit and vegetables may help to reduce the risk of cancer has been studied for over 30 years, but no protective effects have been firmly established. For cancers of the upper gastrointestinal tract, epidemiological studies have generally observed that people with a relatively high intake of fruit and vegetables have a moderately reduced risk, but these observations must be interpreted cautiously because of potential confounding by smoking and alcohol. For lung cancer, recent large prospective analyses with detailed adjustment for smoking have not shown a convincing association between fruit and vegetable intake and reduced risk. For other common cancers, including colorectal, breast and prostate cancer, epidemiological studies suggest little or no association between total fruit and vegetable consumption and risk. It is still possible that there are benefits to be identified: there could be benefits in populations with low average intakes of fruit and vegetables, such that those eating moderate amounts have a lower cancer risk than those eating very low amounts, and there could also be effects of particular nutrients in certain fruits and vegetables, as fruit and vegetables have very varied composition. Nutritional principles indicate that healthy diets should include at least moderate amounts of fruit and vegetables, but the available data suggest that general increases in fruit and vegetable intake would not have much effect on cancer rates, at least in well-nourished populations. Current advice in relation to diet and cancer should include the recommendation to consume adequate amounts of fruit and vegetables, but should put most emphasis on the well-established adverse effects of obesity and high alcohol intakes. http://www.nature.com/bjc/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/6606032... http://www.nature.com/bjc/journal/vaop/ncurrent/pdf/6606032a... Related Br J Cancer & JNCI studies & Editorial: Cancer incidence in British vegetarians http://www.nature.com/bjc/journal/v101/n1/abs/6605098a.html http://www.nature.com/bjc/journal/v101/n1/pdf/6605098a.pdf Fruit and Vegetable Intake and Overall Cancer Risk in the European Prospective Investigation Into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/102/8/529.abstract http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/102/8/529.full.pdf+ht... Fruits, Vegetables, and Cancer Prevention: Turmoil in the Produce Section http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/102/8/510.extract http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/102/8/510.full.pdf+ht... Note: Full text PDFs freely available from links immediately above.

Crim Just Stud - Worley 8_19_2011

Page 5 Preventing fatal attractions: lessons learned from inmate boundary violators in a southern penitentiary system Criminal Justice Studies, Volume 23, Issue 4 December 2010 , pages 347 - 360 Robert M. Worley; Richard Tewksbury; Durant Frantzen Abstract Correctional officers are trained to establish a professional distance between themselves and the inmates they are paid to supervise. Nevertheless, some officers allow themselves to be compromised by inmates who are adept at manipulating prison staff. In this study, we employ face-to-face interviews with 32 inmate boundary violators in order to examine inappropriate relationships from the offender point-of-view. We are specifically interested in understanding the consequences of boundary violations between correctional employees and inmates, and more importantly, how these relationships can be prevented. http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all~content=a929...

Eur J Health Econ - Melberg Do smoke-free laws affect revenues in pubs and restaurants? Eur J Health Econ. 2010 Nov 20. [Epub ahead of print] Melberg HO, Lund KE. Abstract In the debate about laws regulating smoking in restaurants and pubs, there has been some controversy as to whether smoke-free laws would reduce revenues in the hospitality industry. Norway presents an interesting case for three reasons. First, it was among the first countries to implement smoke-free laws, so it is possible to assess the long-term effects. Second, it has a cold climate so if there is a negative effect on revenue one would expect to find it in Norway. Third, the data from Norway are detailed enough to distinguish between revenue from pubs and restaurants. Autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) intervention analysis of bi-monthly observations of revenues in restaurants and pubs show that the law did not have a statistically significant long-term effect on revenue in restaurants or on restaurant revenue as a share of personal consumption. Similar analysis for pubs shows that there was no significant long-run effect on pub revenue. http://www.springerlink.com/content/w77330120051x612/ http://www.springerlink.com/content/w77330120051x612/fulltex... Note: Full text PDF freely available from link immediately above.

Eur J Ob Gyn Reprod Biol - Freour Smoking among French infertility specialists: habits, opinions and patients management

European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproduc... Article in Press, Corrected Proof Available online 26 November 2010. Thomas Freour, Lionel Dessolle, Miguel Jean and Paul Barriere Abstract Objective

The deleterious effects of tobacco on fertility are now largely demonstrated. Little is known, however, about how infertility doctors communicate on smoking and about their own smoking habits. In this study, we examined smoking habits among French infertility specialists and their attitudes towards infertile couples exposure to tobacco. 8_19_2011

Page 6 Study design

A postal survey was sent in 2009 to the 803 French certified physicians (gynaecologists, urologists, endocrinologists and embryologists) specializing in infertility. Demographical data, smoking habits and attitude towards patients smoking were recorded. Statistical analysis and multiple correspondence analysis were performed in order to identify differences among physicians according to age, gender, occupation or smoking status. Results

Response rate was 42.3%. Half of the respondents were male, 41% were under 45 years, 37% were embryologists and 53.3% were gynaecologists. Thirteen percent reported current smoking. More than 80% always asked their patients about smoking status and cannabis consumption. Most physicians specifically informed infertile couples on tobacco, advised them to quit and proposed smoking cessation therapies. Only 24% refused care unless smoking cessation occurred. Statistical analysis showed some differences among subgroups according to gender, occupation or age. Surprisingly, results were comparable according to smoking status. Conclusion

Most infertility specialists are aware of the deleterious effects of tobacco on fertility and ask their patients to quit. The heterogeneity in infertile patients management, however, underlines the need for better professional and patients information on smoking. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03012115

HER - Berg College student reactions to smoking bans in public, on campus and at home Health Educ Res. 2010 Dec 1. [Epub ahead of print] Berg CJ, Lessard L, Parelkar PP, Thrasher J, Kegler MC, Escoffery C, Goldade K, Ahluwalia JS. Abstract We examined college student reactions to a statewide public smoke-free policy, campus policies and private restrictions through an online survey among 2260 students at a 2-year college and a university and 12 focus groups among smokers. Among survey participants, 34.6% smoked in the past month (35.0% daily, 65.0% non-daily). Correlates of receptivity to public policies included attending the university, not living with smokers and non-smoker status (versus daily and nondaily smoking). Correlates of receptivity to outdoor campus policies included being a university student, unmarried, without children, from homes where parents banned indoor smoking and a non-smoker. Correlates of having home restrictions included not living with smokers, no children, parents banning indoor smoking and non-smoker status. Correlates of having car restrictions included attending the university, not living with smokers, having children, parents banning indoor smoking and non-smoker status. Qualitative findings indicated support for smoke-free policies in public (albeit greater support for those in restaurants versus bars) and on campus. Participants reported concern about smokers' and bar/restaurant owners' rights, while acknowledging several benefits. Overall, 2-year college students and smokers (non-daily and daily) were less supportive of smoke-free policies. http://her.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2010/12/01/her.c...

Hum Reprod - Shrestha Smoking and alcohol use during pregnancy and age of menarche in daughters Hum. Reprod. (2010) doi: 10.1093/humrep/deq316 First published online: November 23, 2010 Anshu Shrestha, Ellen Aagaard Nohr, Bodil Hammer Bech, Cecilia Høst Ramlau-Hansen and Jørn Olsen 8_19_2011

Page 7 Abstract BACKGROUND We assessed whether exposure to prenatal smoking or alcohol accelerates age of menarche (AOM) in offspring. METHODS We studied a Danish cohort of 3169 singleton females born in April 1984April 1987. Linear regressions were conducted to examine associations between prenatal smoking or alcohol exposure and offspring's AOM on: (i) the daughters who provided data on both month and the year of menarche (n= 1634) and (ii) the entire sample that provided at least the year of menarche (n= 3169). We also examined associations between only pre-pregnancy smoking or childhood exposure to smoking and AOM. The full model was adjusted for maternal pre-pregnancy body mass index, maternal age at childbirth, parental socio-economic status, parity, consumption of milk products during pregnancy and marital status. RESULTS Among those who provided both year and month, AOM was accelerated by 2.8 months (95% CI in months: −5.3, −0.4) among those exposed to 10+ cigarettes/day throughout pregnancy and by 4.1 months (95% CI in months: −7.7, −0.5) among those with mothers who quit smoking sometime during pregnancy, compared with the unexposed group after adjustment for covariates. Similar, but much weaker, associations were observed among girls whose mothers smoked 19cigarettes/day throughout pregnancy or whose fathers smoked compared with their unexposed counterparts after adjustment for covariates [−0.8 months (95% CI: −2.6, 1.0)]. No associations were observed between AOM and only pre-pregnancy smoking or only childhood exposure or prenatal alcohol exposure. CONCLUSIONS Our study indicates that heavy smoking throughout the pregnancy may be important in prenatal programming of AOM. http://humrep.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2010/11/22/hu...

J Clin Lipidol - Beauchamp Associations among smoking status, lifestyle and lipoprotein subclasses J Clin Lipidol. 2010 November - December;4(6):522-530. Epub 2010 Oct 1. Beauchamp A, Tonkin A, Peeters A, Wolfe R, Turrell G, Harriss L, Giles GG, English DR, Jenkins AJ. Abstract BACKGROUND: The relationship between cigarette smoking and cardiovascular disease is well established, yet the underlying mechanisms remain unclear. Although smokers have a more atherogenic lipid profile, this may be mediated by other lifestyle-related factors. Analysis of lipoprotein subclasses by the use of nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy (NMR) may improve characterisation of lipoprotein abnormalities. OBJECTIVE: We used NMR spectroscopy to investigate the relationships between smoking status, lifestyle-related risk factors, and lipoproteins in a contemporary cohort. METHODS: A total of 612 participants (360 women) aged 40-69 years at baseline (1990-1994) enrolled in the Melbourne Collaborative Cohort Study had plasma lipoproteins measured with NMR. Data were analysed separately by sex. RESULTS: After adjusting for lifestyle-related risk factors, including alcohol and dietary intake, physical activity, and weight, mean total low-density lipoprotein (LDL) particle concentration was greater for female smokers than nonsmokers. Both medium- and small-LDL particle concentrations contributed to this difference. Total high-density lipoprotein (HDL) and large-HDL particle concentrations were lower for female smokers than nonsmokers. The proportion with low HDL particle number was greater for female smokers than nonsmokers. For men, there were few smoking-related differences in lipoprotein measures. CONCLUSION: Female smokers have a more atherogenic lipoprotein profile than nonsmokers. This difference is independent of other lifestyle-related risk factors. Lipoprotein profiles did not differ greatly between male smokers and nonsmokers. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/19332874

J Crohns Colitis - van der Heide Active and passive smoking behaviour and cessation plans of patients with Crohn's disease and ulcerative 8_19_2011

Page 8 colitis J Crohns Colitis. 2010 Jun;4(2):125-131. Epub 2009 Dec 1. van der Heide F, Dijkstra A, Albersnagel FA, Kleibeuker JH, Dijkstra G.

Abstract BACKGROUND: Smoking is a remarkable risk factor in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), with negative effects on Crohn's disease (CD) and positive effects on ulcerative colitis (UC). This makes different changes in smoking behaviour after diagnosis between CD and UC likely. Changes in active smoking, cessation plans and passive smoking were studied in IBD patients. METHODS: 820 IBD patients were sent a questionnaire on active and passive smoking, and cessation plans. A total of 675 (82%) patients (380 CD and 295 UC) responded. RESULTS: More ever smoking UC patients stopped smoking before diagnosis than CD patients (63% vs 22%; p<0.001), resulting in 30% former smokers at diagnosis in UC and 13% in CD (p<0.001). The smoking cessation rates at and after diagnosis are equal between CD and UC. Half of the CD patients stopped smoking after diagnosis leading to less present smokers in CD than in a control population (26% (95% confidence interval: 21.1%-29.9%) vs 33%). For both CD (22% vs 35%; p=0.044) and UC (24% vs 53%; p=0.024) continuing smokers after diagnosis were less often higher educated than quitters. Cessation plans (89%), passive smoking in childhood and present passive smoking were not different between CD and UC patients. CONCLUSION: There are no differences in changes in smoking behaviour at and after diagnosis between CD and UC patients, suggesting a lack of knowledge in these patients about the link between their disease and smoking behaviour. However, CD patients seem less refractory to smoking cessation than the general population. Therefore it is worthwhile putting energy in helping CD patients stop smoking. http://www.ecco-jccjournal.org/article/S1873-9946%2809%29001...

JNCI - Aberle Baseline Characteristics of Participants in the Randomized National Lung Screening Trial JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst (2010) 102 (23): 1771-1779. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djq434 First published online: November 22, 2010 The National Lung Screening Trial Research Team Writing committee:, Denise R. Aberle, Amanda M. Adams, Christine D. Berg, Jonathan D. Clapp, Kathy L. Clingan, Ilana F. Gareen, David A. Lynch, Pamela M. Marcus and Paul F. Pinsky Abstract Background The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST), a randomized study conducted at 33 US sites, is comparing lung cancer mortality among persons screened with reduced dose helical computerized tomography and among persons screened with chest radiograph. In this article, we present characteristics of the study population. Methods Eligible participants were aged 5574 years and were current or former smokers with a cigarette smoking history of at least 30 pack-years. Randomization was stratified by site, sex, and age. To assess representativeness of the study population, demographic characteristics of individuals from the general population who met NLST age and smoking history inclusion criteria were obtained from the Tobacco Use Supplement of the US Census Bureau Current Population Surveys. Results The NLST enrolled 53 456 persons, with 26 733 randomly assigned to chest radiograph screening and 26 723 to computerized tomography screening. Characteristics of the participants were as follows: 31 533 (59%) were men, 39 234 (73%) were younger than 65 years, 25 779 (48%) were current smokers, and 16 839 (32%) had a college or higher degree. Median cigarette exposure was 48 pack-years. Among Tobacco Use Supplement respondents who met NLST age and smoking history criteria, 59% were men, 65% were younger than 65 years, and 57% were current smokers. Median cigarette exposure among this group was 47 pack-years, and 14% had a college degree or higher. Conclusion The NLST cohort has a distribution of sex and pack-year history that is similar to the component of the general US population that meets the major NLST eligibility criteria; however, NLST participants are younger, better 8_19_2011

Page 9 educated, and less likely to be current smokers. http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/102/23/1771.abstract http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/102/23/1771.full.pdf+... Note: Full text PDF freely available from link immediately above.

J Pediatr - Reynolds Prevalence of Tobacco Use and Association between Cardiometabolic Risk Factors and Cigarette Smoking in Youth with Type 1 or Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

The Journal of Pediatrics Article in Press, Corrected Proof Available online 3 December 2010. Abstract Objectives

To examine prevalence of tobacco use and coexistence of cardiometabolic risk factors according to smoking status in youth with diabetes mellitus. Study design

Youth aged 10 to 22 years who participated in the SEARCH for Diabetes in Youth study (n = 3466) were surveyed about their tobacco use and examined for cardiometabolic risk factors: waist circumference, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, physical activity, and lipid profile. Results

The prevalence of tobacco use in youth aged 10 to 14 years, 15 to 19 years, and ≥20 years with type 1 diabetes mellitus was 2.7%, 17.1%, and 34.0%, respectively, and the prevalence in youth with type 2 diabetes mellitus was 5.5%, 16.4%, and 40.3%, respectively. Smoking was more likely in youth with annual family incomes <$50 000, regardless of diabetes mellitus type. Cigarette smoking was associated with higher odds of high triglyceride levels and physical inactivity in youth with type 1 diabetes mellitus. Less than 50% of youth aged 10 to 14 years (52.2% of participants) reported having ever been counseled by their healthcare provider to not smoke or to stop smoking. Conclusions

Tobacco use is prevalent in youth with diabetes mellitus. Aggressive tobacco prevention and cessation programs should be a high priority to prevent or delay the development of cardiovascular disease. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00223476 Note: A related J Pediatr editorial is not yet available online, but will be highlighted in a future MJU when published.

Laryngoscope - Ostrower Gene expression in the oropharynx of children exposed to secondhand smoke Laryngoscope. 2010 Dec;120(12):2467-72. Ostrower ST, Fischer TC, Smith RV, Belbin TJ, Bent JP, Parikh SR. Abstract OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To compare gene expression in oropharyngeal mucosa of children with (ex+) and without 8_19_2011

Page 10 (ex-) secondhand smoke exposure. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective case-control. METHODS: Forty-one age- and gender-matched children (2-6 years old) undergoing tonsillectomy for sleep disordered breathing at a tertiary care children's hospital were assessed for secondhand smoke exposure. Parental response to a validated questionnaire relating to secondhand smoke exposure governed inclusion. Sixteen samples were selected for microarray analysis (7 ex+, 9 ex-). Following tonsillectomy, ex vivo brushing of the mucosa isolated total RNA. Genomewide expression profiles were generated by comparing sample RNA to a reference of all samples, assessing 27,323 cDNA clones. Microarray clones were ranked according to their ability to distinguish between the two groups using a Student t test. RESULTS: A total of 318 cDNA clones distinguished the two groups (P < .01); 180 genes were overexpressed and 138 underexpressed in ex+ samples relative to the ex- group. Independent analysis of these two groups sorted genes into disease processes and molecular functional groups, including cancer (34 genes in the overexpressed group, 29 underexpressed, P < .05), cell cycle (14 and 10), and cell growth and proliferation (7 and 11). Two of the upregulated genes, LCN2 and IQGAP1, have been previously linked to inflammation in smokers and response/repair to cellular injury in bronchial epithelium. CONCLUSIONS: Findings in this pilot study support the hypothesis that secondhand smoke exposure seems to induce gene expression changes in the oropharyngeal mucosa of exposed children, which may have significant implications for current and future disease processes. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/lary.20897/abstra...

NBER - Werfel Induction and Evolution in the Origin of Inventions: Evidence from Smoking Cessation Products

NBER Working Paper No. 16543 Issued in November 2010 Seth H. Werfel, Adam B. Jaffe Abstract Neoclassical economic theory predicts that policies that discourage the consumption of a particular good will induce innovation in a socially desirable substitute. Evolutionary theory emphasizes the possibility of innovation waves associated with the identification of new dominant designs. We incorporate both of these possibilities in a model of the invention of new smoking cessation products, based on a new dataset of patents on such products from 1951-2004. We find that an increase in cigarette tax levels and smoking bans had no discernible impact on the industry-wide rate of invention in smoking cessation products. It does appear, however, that dominant designs did have substantial positive innovation effects. More specifically, the introduction of the nicotine gum and patch are estimated to have increased the rate of patenting activity in smoking cessation products by 60 and 79 percent, respectively, subject to a 10 percent rate of decay. Finally, these products had larger innovation effects at the firm level than among individual inventors. http://papers.nber.org/papers/w16543

N&TR - Asbridge/Evans The Relationship of Home Smoking Bans to the Physical and Mental Health of Smokers

Nicotine Tob Res ntq211 first published online December 1, 2010 Mark Asbridge and Jenny Cartwright Abstract Introduction: The aim of this study is to examine whether the adoption of home smoking bans is associated with the physical and mental health of smokers. Two potential pathways that link home smoking bans to smoker's health are analyzed. The first argues that home smoking bans are positively related to physical health by encouraging smoking cessation while reducing daily cigarette consumption. The second suggests that home smoking bans have a negative 8_19_2011

Page 11 relationship to smokers mental health by increasing marginalization and social isolation. Methods: Data on 28,887 Canadian smokers were analyzed from the Canadian Community Health Survey, a nationally representative sample of Canadians adults. Logistic regression models analyzed the impact of home smoking bans on subjective assessments of smoker's physical and mental health. Separate analyses were conducted on daily and occasional smokers, and additional analyses tested interactions between the presence of a home smoking ban and key socioeconomic (gender and low household income) and structural (dwelling ownership, living alone, and dwelling type) covariates. Results: Home smoking bans were not associated with smoker's physical health and were positively associated with smokers mental health. These findings were consistent for daily smokers and occasional smokers. No significant interactions between smoking bans and socioeconomic or structural covariates were observed. Conclusions: Findings are considered with respect to the internal and external constraints that shape smokers behavior, particularly the influence of social norms around environmental tobacco smoke exposure and good citizenship and the role of family relationships. The implications of study findings are considered with respect to public health policy. http://ntr.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2010/12/01/ntr.n... Also: The Smoking N-Back: A Measure of Biased Cue Processing at Varying Levels of Cognitive Load http://ntr.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2010/12/01/ntr.n...

N&TR - Cobb/Ellis Waterpipe Tobacco Smoking and Cigarette Smoking: A Direct Comparison of Toxicant Exposure and Subjective Effects

Nicotine Tob Res ntq212 first published online December 2, 2010 Caroline O. Cobb, Alan Shihadeh, Michael F. Weaver, and Thomas Eissenberg Abstract Introduction: Waterpipe tobacco smoking is increasing worldwide and is believed by many users to be less harmful and addictive than cigarette smoking. In fact, waterpipe tobacco and cigarette smoke contain many of the same chemicals, and users are exposed to the dependence-producing drug nicotine as well as other smoke toxicants. The subjective effect profile of these 2 tobacco use methods has not been compared directly, though this information is relevant to understanding the risk of dependence development. Methods: Fifty-four participants who reported waterpipe and cigarette smoking completed 2, 45-min, counter-balanced sessions in which they completed a waterpipe use episode (mean smoking time = 43.3 min) or a cigarette (mean = 6.1 min). Outcome measures included plasma nicotine, carboxyhemoglobin (COHb), and subjective effects, including those relevant to predicting dependence potential. Results: Mean (±SEM) peak plasma nicotine concentration did not differ by session (waterpipe = 9.8 ± 1.0 ng/ml; cigarette = 9.4 ± 1.0 ng/ml). Mean peak COHb concentration differed significantly (waterpipe = 4.5% ± 0.3%; cigarette = 1.2% ± 0.1%). Subjective effect changes for waterpipe and cigarette were comparable in magnitude but often longer lived for waterpipe. Conclusions: Relative to a cigarette, waterpipe tobacco smoking was associated with similar peak nicotine exposure, 3.75-fold greater COHb, and 56-fold greater inhaled smoke volume. Waterpipe and cigarette influenced many of the same subjective effect measures. These findings are consistent with the conclusion that waterpipe tobacco smoking presents substantial risk of dependence, disease, and death, and they can be incorporated into prevention interventions that might help deter more adolescents and young adults from experimenting with an almost certainly lethal method of tobacco use. http://ntr.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2010/12/02/ntr.n... Also: A Role for the DRD4 Exon III VNTR in Modifying the Association Between Nicotine Dependence and Neuroticism http://ntr.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2010/12/02/ntr.n...

Pediatr - de Leeuw 8_19_2011

Page 12 Association of Smoking Onset With R-Rated Movie Restrictions and Adolescent Sensation Seeking PEDIATRICS Published online December 6, 2010 Rebecca N. H. de Leeuw, MA, James D. Sargent, MD, Mike Stoolmiller, PhD, Ron H. J. Scholte, PhD, Rutger C. M. E. Engels, PhD, Susanne E. Tanski, MD, MPH Abstract OBJECTIVES In this study, we examined how often US youths reported having complete parental restrictions on watching R-rated movies. In addition, we assessed the relationship between parental R-rated movie restrictions and adolescents' sensation seeking and how this interplay is related to smoking onset. METHODS Data from a 4-wave longitudinal study of 6522 adolescents (1014 years of age) who were recruited through a random-digit-dial telephone survey were used. At baseline, subjects were nationally representative of the US population. Subjects were monitored for 2 years and queried about their smoking status, their sensation-seeking propensity, and how often they were allowed to watch R-rated movies. A cross-lagged model combined with survival analysis was used to assess the relationships between parental R-rated movie restrictions, sensation-seeking propensity, and risk for smoking onset. RESULTS Findings demonstrated that 32% of the US adolescents reported being completely restricted from watching Rrated movies by their parents. Model findings revealed that adolescents' sensation seeking was related to greater risk for smoking onset not only directly but also indirectly through their parents becoming more permissive of R-rated movie viewing. Parental R-rated movie restrictions were found to decrease the risk of smoking onset directly and indirectly by changing children's sensation seeking. CONCLUSIONS These findings imply that, beyond direct influences, the relationship between adolescents' sensation seeking and parental R-rated movie restrictions in explaining smoking onset is bidirectional in nature. Finally, these findings highlight the relevance of motivating and supporting parents in limiting access to R-rated movies. http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/p... http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/reprint/peds.2009-... Note: Full text PDF freely available from link immediately above.

Prev Med - Gallus Smoking in Italy 2008-2009: A rise in prevalence related to the economic crisis?

Preventive Medicine Article in Press, Accepted Manuscript Available online 2 December 2010. Silvano Gallus, Irene Tramacere, Roberta Pacifici, Piergiorgio Zuccaro, Paolo Colombo, Simone Ghislandi and Carlo La Vecchia Dear Editor, Self-reported smoking prevalence in Italy has been decreasing for both sexes combined since the late 1950s, mainly due to the halved smoking prevalence of males across the last 60 years (Tramacere et al., 2009A; Gallus et al., 2010). An acceleration of such a trend has been observed, both in males and females, after a comprehensive smoke-free legislation came into force in 2005 (Tramacere et al., 2009B; Gallus et al., 2010). It is important to provide updated self-reported data on adult smoking prevalence in order to evaluate and interpret differences on smoking behaviour from one year to the other, to recommend time by time the most effective anti-tobacco strategies and to select their key target population... The percent distribution of smoking habit within the Italian population aged 15 years or over in 2008 and 2009 is given in Table 1. Compared to 2008, in 2009 there was a significant increase in smoking prevalence, overall (25.4% in 2009 vs 22.0% in 2008, p<0.01), both among men (28.9% in 2009 vs 26.4% in 2008, p=0.13) and women (22.3% in 2009 vs 17.9% in 2008, p<0.01). The proportion of never smokers remained stable overall (60%), in males (50%) and in females (70%), whereas the proportion of ex-smokers decreased from 18% to 15% overall (p<0.01), from 24% to 19% in men (p<0.01), and from 13% to 11% in women (p=0.03). The number of cigarettes per day did not substantially change between 2008 and 2009... http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00917435 8_19_2011

Page 13

Soc Sci Med - Lightwood Effect of the Arizona Tobacco Control Program on Cigarette Consumption and Healthcare Expenditures

Social Science & Medicine Article in Press, Accepted Manuscript Available online 24 November 2010. James Lightwood and Stanton Glantz Abstract This research investigates the relationship between per capita tobacco control expenditures, cigarette consumption, and healthcare expenditures in the state of Arizona. Arizona's tobacco control program, which was established in 1994, concentrates on youth uptake of smoking and avoids public policy and commentary on the tobacco industry. We use a cointegrating time series analysis using aggregate data on healthcare and tobacco control expenditures, cigarette consumption and prices and other data. We find there is a strong association between per capita healthcare expenditure and per capita cigarette consumption. In the long run, a marginal increase in annual cigarette consumption of one pack per capita increases per capita healthcare expenditure by $19.5 (SE $5.45) in Arizona. A cumulative increase of $1.00 in the difference between control state and Arizona per capita tobacco control expenditures increases the difference in cigarette consumption by 0.190 (SE 0.0780) packs per capita. In 2004, the cumulative reduction between 1996 to 2004 in pre-tax cigarette sales revenue due to Arizona's tobacco control expenditures was $500 million (95% CI: $99.0 million, $896 million). The cumulative healthcare savings was $2.33 billion (95% CI $0.374 billion, $5.00 billion) and the cumulative reduction in cigarette consumption was 200 million packs (95% CI 39.0 million packs, 364 million packs). Arizona's tobacco control expenditures are associated with reduced cigarette consumption and healthcare expenditures, amounting to about 10 times the cost of the program through 2004. This return on investment, while large, was less than the more aggressive California program, which did not limit its focus to youth and included tobacco industry denomalization messages. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/02779536

Stroke - Goldstein/Lip Guidelines for the Primary Prevention of Stroke. A Guideline for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association

Stroke. 2010 Published online before print December 2, 2010. Larry B. Goldstein MD, FAHA, Chair; Cheryl D. Bushnell MD, MHS, FAHA, Co-Chair; Robert J. Adams MS, MD, FAHA; Lawrence J. Appel MD, MPH, FAHA; Lynne T. Braun PhD, CNP, FAHA; Seemant Chaturvedi MD, FAHA; Mark A. Creager MD, FAHA; Antonio Culebras MD, FAHA; Robert H. Eckel MD, FAHA; Robert G. Hart MD, FAHA; Judith A. Hinchey MD, MS, FAHA; Virginia J. Howard PhD, FAHA; Edward C. Jauch MD, MS, FAHA; Steven R. Levine MD, FAHA; James F. Meschia MD, FAHA; Wesley S. Moore MD, FAHA; J. V. (Ian) Nixon MD, FAHA; Thomas A. Pearson MD, FAHA; on behalf of the American Heart Association Stroke Council, Council on Cardiovascular Nursing, Council on Epidemiology and Prevention, Council for High Blood Pressure Research, Council on Peripheral Vascular Disease, and Interdisciplinary Council on Quality of Care and Outcomes Research Abstract

Background and PurposeThis guideline provides an overview of the evidence on established and emerging risk factors for stroke to provide evidence-based recommendations for the reduction of risk of a first stroke. MethodsWriting group members were nominated by the committee chair on the basis of their previous work in relevant topic areas and were approved by the American Heart Association (AHA) Stroke Council Scientific Statement Oversight Committee and the AHA Manuscript Oversight Committee. The writing group used systematic literature reviews (covering the time since the last review was published in 2006 up to April 2009), reference to previously published guidelines, personal files, and expert opinion to summarize existing evidence, indicate gaps in current knowledge, and when appropriate, formulate recommendations using standard AHA criteria (Tables 1 and 2). All members of the writing group 8_19_2011

Page 14 had the opportunity to comment on the recommendations and approved the final version of this document. The guideline underwent extensive peer review by the Stroke Council leadership and the AHA scientific statements oversight committees before consideration and approval by the AHA Science Advisory and Coordinating Committee. ResultsSchemes for assessing a person's risk of a first stroke were evaluated. Risk factors or risk markers for a first stroke were classified according to potential for modification (nonmodifiable, modifiable, or potentially modifiable) and strength of evidence (well documented or less well documented). Nonmodifiable risk factors include age, sex, low birth weight, race/ethnicity, and genetic predisposition. Well-documented and modifiable risk factors include hypertension, exposure to cigarette smoke, diabetes, atrial fibrillation and certain other cardiac conditions, dyslipidemia, carotid artery stenosis, sickle cell disease, postmenopausal hormone therapy, poor diet, physical inactivity, and obesity and body fat distribution. Less well-documented or potentially modifiable risk factors include the metabolic syndrome, excessive alcohol consumption, drug abuse, use of oral contraceptives, sleep-disordered breathing, migraine, hyperhomocysteinemia, elevated lipoprotein(a), hypercoagulability, inflammation, and infection. Data on the use of aspirin for primary stroke prevention are reviewed. ConclusionExtensive evidence identifies a variety of specific factors that increase the risk of a first stroke and that provide strategies for reducing that risk. Cigarette Smoking Summary and Gaps Cigarette smoking increases the risk of ischemic stroke and SAH, but the data on ICH are inconclusive. Epidemiological studies show a reduction in stroke risk with smoking cessation. Although effective programs to facilitate smoking cessation exist, data showing that participation in these programs leads to a long-term reduction in stroke are lacking. General measures are given in Table 7. Recommendations 1. Abstention from cigarette smoking by nonsmokers and smoking cessation by current smokers are recommended based on epidemiological studies showing a consistent and overwhelming relationship between smoking and both ischemic stroke and SAH (Class I; Level of Evidence B). 2. Although data are lacking that avoidance of environmental tobacco smoke reduces incident stroke, on the basis of epidemiological data showing increased stroke risk and the effects of avoidance on risk of other cardiovascular events, avoidance of exposure to environmental tobacco smoke is reasonable (Class IIa; Level of Evidence C). 3. The use of multimodal techniques, including counseling, nicotine replacement, and oral smoking-cessation medications, can be useful as part of an overall smoking-cessation strategy. Status of tobacco use should be addressed at every patient encounter (Class I; Level of Evidence B). http://stroke.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/STR.0b013... http://stroke.ahajournals.org/cgi/reprint/STR.0b013e3181fcb2... Note: Full text PDF freely available from link immediately above. Also: Identifying Patients at High Risk for Stroke Despite Anticoagulation: A Comparison of Contemporary Stroke Risk Stratification Schemes in an Anticoagulated Atrial Fibrillation Cohort http://stroke.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/41/12/273...

Tob Control - Bondy OPEN ACCESS

Non-smoking worksites in the residential construction sector: using an online forum to study perspectives and practices Tob Control Published Online First 29 November 2010 Susan J Bondy, Kim L Bercovitz Abstract 8_19_2011

Page 15 Objectives Blue-collar workers are a recognised priority for tobacco control. Construction workers have very high smoking rates and are difficult to study and reach with interventions promoting smoke-free workplaces and cessation. The objectives of this study were to explore the smoking-related social climate in the North American residential construction sector and to identify potential barriers and facilitators to creating smokefree worksites. Methods The data source used was a popular internet forum on home building. Participants included a broad and unselected population of employers, employees and freelance tradespersons working in residential construction. The forum archive contained 10 years of discourse on the subjects of smoking, workplace secondhand smoke and smoking restrictions on construction sites. Qualitative data analysis methods were used to describe major and minor discussion themes relevant to workplace smoking culture and policies in this sector. Results Participants described considerable tension between smoking and non-smoking tradespersons, but there was also much interpersonal support for cessation and support for non-smokers' rights. Employers and employees described efforts to make construction sites smoke free, and a movement towards preferential hiring of non-smoking tradespersons was discussed. Board participants wanted detailed scientific evidence on secondhand smoke exposure levels and risk thresholds, particularly in open-air workplaces. Conclusions Experience with success of smoking bans in other challenging workplaces can be applied to the construction sector. Potential movement of smokers out of the workforce represents a challenge for public health systems to ensure equitable access to cessation supports and services. http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/early/2010/11/29/tc.20... http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/early/2010/11/29/tc.20... Note: Full text PDF freely available from link immediately above.

Tob Control - Chaloupka Effectiveness of tax and price policies in tobacco control Tob Control Published Online First 29 November 2010 Frank J Chaloupka, Kurt Straif, Maria E Leon Abstract Objective Over 20 experts on economics, epidemiology, public policy and tobacco control were asked by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) to evaluate the strength of the available evidence on the effects of tax and price policies to prevent and reduce tobacco use. Methods Draft papers presenting and assessing the evidence on the following topics were developed by the experts in an 8-month period prior to the meeting: tobacco industry pricing strategies and tax related lobbying; tax, price and aggregate demand for tobacco; tax, price and adult tobacco use, use among young people and use among the poor; tax avoidance and tax evasion; and the economic and health impact of tobacco taxation. Subsequently, papers were peer reviewed, revised and resubmitted for final discussion at a 6-day meeting at IARC in Lyon, France, where a consensus evaluation of 18 concluding statements using the pre-established criteria of the IARC Cancer Prevention Handbooks took place. Studies published (or accepted for publication) in the openly available scientific literature were the main source of evidence for the review and evaluation; other types of publications were included when appropriate. Results In support of 12 of the 18 conclusions, the experts agreed that there was sufficient evidence of effectiveness of increased tobacco excise taxes and prices in reducing overall tobacco consumption and prevalence of tobacco use and improvement of public health, including by preventing initiation and uptake among young people, promoting cessation among current users and lowering consumption among those who continue to use. For the remaining six concluding statements the evidence was strong (four statements) or limited (two statements). Conclusions The evidence presented and assessed in IARC Handbook volume 14 documents the effectiveness of tax and price policies in the control of tobacco use and improvement of public health. http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/early/2010/11/29/tc.20... 8_19_2011

Page 16

Tob Control - Trtchounian Electronic nicotine delivery systems: is there a need for regulation? Tob Control Online First December 7,2010 Anna Trtchounian, Prue Talbot Abstract Purpose Electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) purport to deliver nicotine to the lungs of smokers. Five brands of ENDS were evaluated for design features, accuracy and clarity of labelling and quality of instruction manuals and associated print material supplied with products or on manufacturers websites. Methods ENDS were purchased from online vendors and analysed for various parameters. Results While the basic design of ENDS was similar across brands, specific design features varied significantly. Fluid contained in cartridge reservoirs readily leaked out of most brands, and it was difficult to assemble or disassemble ENDS without touching nicotine-containing fluid. Two brands had designs that helped lessen this problem. Labelling of cartridges was very poor; labelling of some cartridge wrappers was better than labelling of cartridges. In general, packs of replacement cartridges were better labelled than the wrappers or cartridges, but most packs lacked cartridge content and warning information, and sometimes packs had confusing information. Used cartridges contained fluid, and disposal of nicotine-containing cartridges was not adequately addressed on websites or in manuals. Orders were sometimes filled incorrectly, and safety features did not always function properly. Print and internet material often contained information or made claims for which there is currently no scientific support. Conclusions Design flaws, lack of adequate labelling and concerns about quality control and health issues indicate that regulators should consider removing ENDS from the market until their safety can be adequately evaluated. http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/early/recent

======================= Stan Shatenstein Coordinator, GLOBALink NIMI News & Information Monitoring Initiative shatensteins@sympatico.ca GLOBALink NIMI & MJU http://member.globalink.org/nimi/us =======================

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"GLOBALink HQ" <hq@globalink.org> "Ross-Viles, Sarah" <Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov> 12/6/2010 5:18:04 AM GLOBALink NIMI Index - Monday 6 December 2010

News & Information Monitoring Initiative - Index Monday 6 December 2010 Sonja Johnston
Cessation Brunei: NRT Products In Demand Since Cigarette Price Hike Health & Science Stroke: Lifestyle Key to Preventing Stroke, Guidelines Say
HealthDay Reuters Brudirect.com

Hum Reprod: Moms' smoking in pregnancy tied to girls' puberty Lawsuits US big tobacco contests 270-million-dollar suit US: NJ: Casino to pay $4.5M in smoking lawsuit Legislation & Politics Kenya: FCTC: Why we must rein in Big Tobacco to achieve MDGs Lebanon: MPs voice support for bill banning smoking in public
Yahoo The Courier Post

Daily Nation The Daily Star Kyiv Post

Ukraine: Tobacco lobby blocking government approval of list of warning images for cigarette packages Spain Raises Tobacco Tax, Sets Date for Pension Overhaul to Stem Contagion New Zealand: Tobacco giant's call on law stirs up Greens Secondhand Smoke Australia: NSW: Smokers fire up for cafe victory Australia: VIC: Outdoor smoking bans on agenda Smuggling Jamaica: Smoking debate: Cigarette imports up as ganja production drops Crim Just Stud: Tobacco ban blamed in prison violence Youth J Pediatr: Smoking Too Common Among Young Diabetes Patients
WebMD Houston Chronicle The Gleaner Brisbane Times The Age Stuff Bloomberg

This digest was brought to you by GLOBALink Lost password - Unsubscribe

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject: Attachments:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" sarah.rossviles@gmail.com 12/6/2010 6:19:00 PM FW: Proposed CAP changes for colleges work New CAP 11.23.10.doc Working.Cap.wKBeds..xls

From Joy: Point of Sale Objective -- Justification for Alternative Rating isn't quite right -- shouldn't say e-cigs and instead say Point of Sale for BOH vote in 6/11. Otherwise -- looks good. ______________________________________________ From: Greto, Lindsey Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2010 3:33 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: Re: CAP Update time - still manual So I noticed that in the last update, Objective 21 wasn't actually discussed. The update for Objective 20 (hospitals) was put into 21's list. Whoops. Fixed it all here.

Objective 9 (MH/SA): On track/possible delay in Milestone 7 Milestone 4 is complete. Milestone 5 is complete. 521 people completed the survey! Results are being assessed now. Milestone 6 is in progress. Some champions have already been identified through the CTCP program. The survey will be a source of information for agencies without already identified champs, but that information won't be known until the survey is fully analyzed. Chance that this process may extend past Q5, but can't be sure yet. Milestone 7 may be a bit behind schedule. MHCADSD is waiting on a model tobacco-free campus policy from us before they can move forward. They will pass that on to providers, but the actual contracts won't be changed until early 2012 (per the SOW and the annual contract schedule). They will have the policy, though, and have shared it with the agencies, so we can probably say that Milestone 7 is completed on time. Milestone 8 can account for the actual adoption of the policy by the agencies. Milestone 9 is in progress. The treatment model has been indentified (Learning About Healthy Living) and plans in the works for provider training on this. Jill Williams has agreed to provide training - will start in April, 2011 with additional dates to be added as needed. Milestone 10 is in progress. TA has been provided to all sites already (information about the forthcoming policy change, information about tobacco in CD/MH settings. Specialized TA will result from survey responses).

Objective 11 (Tobacco Free Schools): On track Milestone 3 is complete. Milestone 4 is complete. Milestone 5 is complete. Districts that agreed to participate are: Seattle, Auburn, Tukwila, Lake Washington, Mercer Island, Kent and Highline. Note that the Outcome objective says that 8 districts will participate - this is 7. We believe that at least one more district will be added as the project continues, but as of now can only confirm 7. One of the challenges was with the HEAL program requirements. Both Renton and Northshore planned to participate, but they dropped out recently, as they don't have the capacity for both tobacco and HEAL projects. Both are willing to participate later on, just not in the first year "pilot." By the end of the grant, we should have 8-9 districts participating,
8_19_2011

Page 2

at least. Milestone 6 is in progress, but needs to be extended through Q6 (as described in last month's update - difficulty finding a good and sustainable program). Milestone 7 depends on Milestone 6. We've extended through Q6 - this should be good.

Objective 13 (Youth Task Force): On track Milestone 5 is complete. Milestone 7 - meeting set with media team this month to discuss options.

Objective 20 (Hospitals): On track Milestone 3 is complete. Milestone 4 is complete. Milestone 5 is on track. Milestone 6 needs to be extended. The new target date for policy implementation at UWMC is May 31, 2011. It was pushed back to build in time for maximum staff buy-in and to ensure sustainability. A major reason is that staff discovered a few weeks ago that two of the smoking areas at the hospital aren't actually under hospital jurisdiction it's the University. The grantee is working with the University to implement a tobacco-free policy for those areas at the same time. Without this, the UWMC policy wouldn't be effective. This milestone should be extended through Q7. Milestones 7 and 8 are on track. Highline, Harborview and the Regional Respiratory Center are all going tobaccofree in 2011. Outreach to the last six will go through the year. Milestones 10, 11 and 14 are on track.

Objective 21 (Early Learning): On track, problem with Milestone 8 Milestone 3 is complete. Milestone 4 is complete. Milestone 5 is on track. Milestone 8 is at-risk due to the WAC change restrictions. A promotion plan will be created, but nothing can be done about it until 2012.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Bates, Amy" <Amy.Bates@kingcounty.gov> Date: 12/7/2010 7:11:00 PM RE: *** Reminder***[Draft for Review - Due Tuesday] Communities Putting Prevention to Work: Subject: Partner Update Oh boy! Too fast typing! Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

>_____________________________________________ >From: Bates, Amy >Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 10:39 AM >To: Ross-Viles, Sarah >Subject: RE: *** Reminder***[Draft for Review - Due Tuesday] Communities Putting Prevention to Work: Partner Update > >Cool! > >My name is now "May..." > >Thanks for your input! > >Amy > >Amy Bates >Coalition & Education Network Coordinator/Project Manager III >Public Health - Seattle & King County >401 5th Avenue >Seattle, WA 98104 >Phone: 206.263.9391 >Email: Amy.Bates@KingCounty.gov > > >_____________________________________________ >From: Ross-Viles, Sarah >Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 2:25 PM >To: Bates, Amy >Subject: RE: *** Reminder***[Draft for Review - Due Tuesday] Communities Putting Prevention to Work: Partner Update > >Hi May - I made changes on version on the shared drive. > >Sarah Ross-Viles >CPPW Tobacco Project Manager
8_19_2011

Page 2

>Public Health - Seattle & King County >Suite 900 401 5th Avenue >Seattle, WA 98102 >(206) 263-8211 > > >_____________________________________________ >From: Bates, Amy >Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 11:13 AM >To: Kellogg, Ryan; Ross-Viles, Sarah; Krieger, James; Valenzuela, Matias >Cc: Sadow-Hasenberg, Nicole; Huus, Kathie; Johnson, Gareth; Bates, Amy >Subject: *** Reminder***[Draft for Review - Due Tuesday] Communities Putting Prevention to Work: Partner Update >Importance: High > >[***Original Note Sent Thursday, December 2nd***] A draft of the CPPW Update is ready for review. Please review the document by Tuesday, December 7th for distribution on Wednesday, December 8th. Thank you. You may make your corrections to the attachment and return it or make them directly upon the draft with is housed in the EO updates file. (Path = Joint Implementation\Reporting and updates\EO Updates\EO Update for 113010\Final Draft for Editing.) Thank you. > << File: 113010 CPPW Update Editing.doc >> >Communities Putting Prevention to Work >Update for November 30, 2010 > >The following items are provided as an update for our CPPW partners. The items covered in this update include the following: > > >* CPPW “thumbs up” to child care providers combating obesity and to cooperative food purchasing efforts >* Sugar-loaded beverages on TV >* CPPW Calendar (Important Updates) > >CPPW “thumbs up” – > >Child care providers improving nutrition and physical activity >The Coalition for Safety and Health and Early Learning (C-SHEL) is working with child care centers run by the City of Seattle and the Seattle Housing Authority to adopt stricter standards for nutrition, physical activity and screen time. These child care providers have CPPW funds to make these changes. CSHEL is also looking best practices of other states, limiting juice intake, regulating screen time. The enhanced standards provide more detail about how to put together healthy meals for children in the child care centers. Right now the regulations are vague, requiring only that dairy, grain, and fruit and/or vegetable be served at every meal. CSHEL has been training staff to do further training with new staff. Seattle city is survey their staff to get sense of attitudes and thoughts around nutrition standards. > >Child care work group has been active, how do you revise regulations around healthy child care. City of Seattle aging disability is looking at farm to childcare, Puget Sound food network, working to link up farmer to childcare. Would like to serve healthier food but cost is a barrier learning ways to decrease the cost. > > >Seattle Churches Use CPPW Funds to Create a Legacy of Health >On Tuesday November 16th, church pastors from the 6 churches working on the CPPW project “Moving Together in Faith and Health”> met at the Douglass Truth Library in central Seattle. Churches funded through CPPW to promote the well being of their congregations by changing church policies, environments and systems include First
8_19_2011

Page 3

A.M.E., Tabernacle Missionary Baptist, Immaculate Conception, New> Direction Baptist, Goodwill Missionary Baptist, and Mt. Zion Baptist. These 6 churches serve mostly African American populations and a large percentage of persons from working class and fixed income backgrounds. > >Church pastors, church leaders, and Dr. Doris Boutain from the University of Washington’s School of Nursing collaboratively developed the idea to work directly with pastors, with “church change teams,” and with Schools of Nursing at the University of Washington, Seattle University, and Seattle Pacific University to implement policy, environment and systems change. Each church change team includes two youth, a lead from the health ministry, a lead cook/chef, and a lead from the children/youth program. Pastors provide leadership and encouragement to the church change teams by championing recommended changes. Pastors are also taking an active role in learning about and advocating for policy changes to promote health in underserved neighborhoods where their churches are located. Early significant accomplishments include two churches removing their soda machines within the first few months of grant implementation. Congratulations to Goodwill Missionary Baptist and New Direction Missionary Baptist! (For more information about this project please contact Dr. Doris Boutain at dboutain@u.washington.edu ) > >Joining together to make healthy food more affordable >Working with the state Office of Public Instruction (OSPI) on cooperative buying programs for fed school lunch working to be broader and expand to programs that are on the child and adult food care program to expand coop buying as there are more childcare sites than school sits. > >KC agricultural commission can be connected, Erin and Adrian and Kathie to meet and see how we can cooperative buying. St. Paul has a similar program regarding dairy management and regulation made into forms that is useable or something that children will eat. > >Board of Health will take up e-cigarettes >CPPW Tobacco prevention staff will be working with the King County Board of Health to look at the health effects of e-cigarettes, which are battery-operated devices that deliver vaporized nicotine instead of burning tobacco. These devices are currently under investigation with FDA, but they are available to buy online and at smoke shops. Will be on BOH agenda, restrict sale to adults 18 and older, prohibits free samples and blanket product restriction. Add ecigarettes to smoking in public paces code like regular cigarettes. > >Sugar Loaded Beverages on TV > >Dr Jim Krieger was on KIRO TV talking about the health impacts of consuming sugar in sodas, AKA sugar-loaded beverages. > >People in the United States now consume 200-300 more calories each day than we did 30 years ago, and more than half of these calories come from sugar-loaded beverages. >A sugar-loaded beverage (also known as a sugar-sweetened beverage) is a drink with sugar added such as soda, sports drinks, energy drinks and sweetened fruit drinks. Drinking sugar-loaded beverages contributes to more adults and children being overweight or obese and at serious risk for major health problems, such as Type 2 diabetes and high blood pressure. >Choose low-fat milk or water instead! > >Campaign materials, including a new video, are available at: www.kingcounty.gov/health/sugarydrinks > > >CPPW Calendar: > >“Chronic Disease Prevention Policy Collaboration Workshop” scheduled for November 19 - Public Health – Seattle & King County convened a "Chronic Disease Prevention Policy Collaboration Workshop" with support from stimulus funds from the Communities Putting Prevention to Work (CPPW) Initiative. The current challenges to public
8_19_2011

Page 4

health require strong cross-sector collaboration on public policy. The workshop engage>d a small number of organizations and advocates across multiple sectors to increase collaboration on policies related to chronic disease prevention. Results of this workshop will be featured in a future CPPW update.> > >Leadership Team Working Group Meeting - The Leadership Team Working Group, which meets monthly, met on November 30. The Working Group provides strategic advice for engaging the full Leadership Team members when there are specific actions they can take to support CPPW. The full Leadership Team including elected officials will meet next in March 10, 2011 with a second meeting planned for 30 September 2011. This schedule will give the RFP funded grants and health department staff time to structure those meetings as productively as possible. > >CPPW Coalition - The next CPPW Coalition meeting will be on January 25, 2011. Training on how to make policy, system and environment changes and how to talk to the media is planned, and specific break-out sessions on policy and system change topics will be offered, as well. > >Amy Bates >Coalition & Education Network Coordinator/Project Manager III >Public Health - Seattle & King County >401 5th Avenue >Seattle, WA 98104 >Phone: 206.263.9391 >Email: Amy.Bates@KingCounty.gov >

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Stan Shatenstein" <shatenstein@globalink.org> general@globalink.org 12/7/2010 4:34:35 PM Re: Appeals Court rules FDA cannot ban e-cigarettes as drug devices

General Messages by Stan Shatenstein
Go to other forums | Rate this article | Reply to author | Reply to all

Bill, You have every right to signal and celebrate a decision with which you agree but you are no oracle and do not have the right or authority to declare "a huge victory for public health and civil justice." I would venture to assume that far more members of GLOBALink think this a problematic ruling than a victory. Just today, an Open Access report by Trtchounian and Talbot has been posted on the Tobacco Control website and the authors are far less sanguine than you concerning the merits of e-cigarettes. I include the conclusions and a couple of excerpts below, along with the links. The authors have a cautionary tale to tell. As you have posted to General, I'm responding both here and on the E-Cigs list, but further discussion should be on the latter only, as it was intended for just such rulings and reports. Best wishes, Stan --------Stan Shatenstein Contributing Editor, Tobacco Control Coordinator, GLOBALink NIMI News & Information Monitoring Initiative shatensteins@sympatico.ca ======================= Electronic nicotine delivery systems: is there a need for regulation? Tob Control Published Online First 7 December 2010 Anna Trtchounian, Prue Talbot Conclusions Design flaws, lack of adequate labelling and concerns about quality control and health issues indicate that regulators should consider removing ENDS from the market until their safety can be adequately evaluated.

Truth in advertisement On both websites and in print material, we found numerous statements regarding ENDS that were not based on scientific findings and for which there is no rigorous supporting data. Examples of such statements include: Be careful to avoid inhaling any significant quantity of liquid. Although it gives you a slight tingling sensation, it is not harmful (Liberty Stix); Within 2 weeks, your lung capacity will increase by 30%. Your energy levels will increase. Your throat and lungs will feel markedly better! Wrinkles in your skin will become less noticeable and colour will return to your skin (Liberty Stix). One pack (Smoking Everywhere) was labelled Vitamin, although no indication of what this meant was given. 8_19_2011

Page 2 Discussion ...Used cartridges contained fluid after they ceased producing aerosol. Regulatory agencies need to address how to safely dispose of used cartridges and minimise introduction of nicotine into the environment. Studies documenting hazards associated with disposal of cigarette butts12 13 led to regulation of butt disposal in Australia, where fines are issued to those who do not deposit butts in valid receptacles.14 Residual nicotine in spent ENDS cartridges can leak onto surfaces where conversion to carcinogens could take place.6 Furthermore, as nicotine from used ENDS cartridges leaches into water supplies, it may directly affect aquatic life and could be propagated through the food chain. Proper disposal of ENDS cartridges should be addressed before spent cartridges present a serious health problem. Better regulation of ENDS sales and distribution is needed to protect children and adults from nicotine exposure and possible addiction. Our observations provide evidence that regulators should consider removing ENDS from the market until design features, quality control, labelling, disposal and safety issues have been adequately addressed. http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/early/2010/10/22/tc.20... http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/early/2010/10/22/tc.20...

----- Original Message ----From: Mr. Bill Godshall To: general@globalink.org Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 2:32 PM Subject: Appeals Court rules FDA cannot ban e-cigarettes as drug devices General Messages by Mr. Bill Godshall Go to other forums | Rate this article | Reply to author | Reply to all

The DC Court of Appeals has ruled against the FDA's attempt to ban e-cigarettes (by claiming they are unapproved drug devices). Decision is at: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/e-cigarette-news/9218... This is a huge victory for public health and civil justice. Its time for FDA officials to come to their senses by reclassifying and/or promulgating reasonable regulations for e-cigarettes as tobacco produces under the FSPTCA. FDA Loses Appeal, Can?t Regulate E-Cigarettes as Drug http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-12-07/fda-loses-appeal... Appeals Court: FDA Authority Over E-Cigarettes Is Limited http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/stock-market-news-story.aspx?stor... Bill Godshall Executive Director Smokefree Pennsylvania 1926 Monongahela Avenue Pittsburgh, PA 15218 412-351-5880 FAX 412-351-5881 smokefree@compuserve.com Contact GLK | Netiquette | Report abuse | Unsubscribe Mr. Bill Godshall has declared no competing interest.

8_19_2011

Page 3 If you are new to GLOBALink, please make yourself familiar with GLOBALink Netiquette before posting. Please keep in mind that there is no place for engaging in hate speech on GLOBALink forums. GLOBALink membership is subject to suspension and expulsion if rules are violated.
Contact GLK | Netiquette | Report abuse | Unsubscribe
Stan Shatenstein has declared no competing interest. If you are new to GLOBALink, please make yourself familiar with GLOBALink Netiquette before posting. Please keep in mind that there is no place for engaging in hate speech on GLOBALink forums. GLOBALink membership is subject to suspension and expulsion if rules are violated.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Neal, Scott" To: "Ryan, Molly" <Molly.Ryan@kingcounty.gov> "Ross-Viles, Sarah" <Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov> "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> "Pearson, Anne" <Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov> Date: 12/7/2010 3:59:54 PM Subject: RE: Appeals Court rules FDA cannot ban e-cigarettes as drug devices
ut oh

From: Ryan, Molly Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 11:40 AM To: Neal, Scott; Ross-Viles, Sarah; Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne Subject: FW: Appeals Court rules FDA cannot ban e-cigarettes as drug devices If you haven't seen this....

Molly Ryan, MPH Tobacco Prevention Program Public Health - Seattle & King County Ph: (206) 263-8241 Fax: (206) 296-0177

From: Mr.Bill Godshall [mailto:godshall@globalink.org] Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 11:32 AM To: general@globalink.org Subject: Appeals Court rules FDA cannot ban e-cigarettes as drug devices

General Messages by Mr. Bill Godshall
Go to other forums | Rate this article | Reply to author | Reply to all

The DC Court of Appeals has ruled against the FDA's attempt to ban e-cigarettes (by claiming they are unapproved drug devices). Decision is at: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/e-cigarette-news/9218... This is a huge victory for public health and civil justice. Its time for FDA officials to come to their senses by reclassifying and/or promulgating reasonable regulations for e-cigarettes as tobacco produces under the FSPTCA. FDA Loses Appeal, Can?t Regulate E-Cigarettes as Drug http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-12-07/fda-loses-appeal... Appeals Court: FDA Authority Over E-Cigarettes Is Limited http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/stock-market-news-story.aspx?stor...
8_19_2011

Page 2

Bill Godshall Executive Director Smokefree Pennsylvania 1926 Monongahela Avenue Pittsburgh, PA 15218 412-351-5880 FAX 412-351-5881 smokefree@compuserve.com
Contact GLK | Netiquette | Report abuse | Unsubscribe
Mr. Bill Godshall has declared no competing interest. If you are new to GLOBALink, please make yourself familiar with GLOBALink Netiquette before posting. Please keep in mind that there is no place for engaging in hate speech on GLOBALink forums. GLOBALink membership is subject to suspension and expulsion if rules are violated.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Ryan, Molly" <Molly.Ryan@kingcounty.gov> "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> "Pearson, Anne" <Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov> "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> Date: 12/7/2010 4:40:00 PM Subject: RE: Appeals Court rules FDA cannot ban e-cigarettes as drug devices
Is anyone on the e-cigs list for globallink?

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Ryan, Molly Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 12:09 PM To: Neal, Scott; Pearson, Anne; Ross-Viles, Sarah; Hamilton, Joy Subject: FW: Appeals Court rules FDA cannot ban e-cigarettes as drug devices FYI - response to previous posting + info re: new e-cig report released today. Molly Ryan, MPH Tobacco Prevention Program Public Health - Seattle & King County Ph: (206) 263-8241 Fax: (206) 296-0177

From: Stan Shatenstein [mailto:shatenstein@globalink.org] Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 12:03 PM To: general@globalink.org Subject: Re: Appeals Court rules FDA cannot ban e-cigarettes as drug devices

General Messages by Stan Shatenstein
Go to other forums | Rate this article | Reply to author | Reply to all

Bill, You have every right to signal and celebrate a decision with which you agree but you are no oracle and do not have the right or authority to declare "a huge victory for public health and civil justice." I would venture to assume that far more members of GLOBALink think this a problematic ruling than a victory. Just today, an Open Access report by Trtchounian and Talbot has been posted on the Tobacco Control website and the authors are far less sanguine than you concerning the merits of e-cigarettes. I include the conclusions and a couple of excerpts below, along with the links. The authors have a cautionary tale to tell. 8_19_2011

Page 2 As you have posted to General, I'm responding both here and on the E-Cigs list, but further discussion should be on the latter only, as it was intended for just such rulings and reports. Best wishes, Stan --------Stan Shatenstein Contributing Editor, Tobacco Control Coordinator, GLOBALink NIMI News & Information Monitoring Initiative shatensteins@sympatico.ca ======================= Electronic nicotine delivery systems: is there a need for regulation? Tob Control Published Online First 7 December 2010 Anna Trtchounian, Prue Talbot Conclusions Design flaws, lack of adequate labelling and concerns about quality control and health issues indicate that regulators should consider removing ENDS from the market until their safety can be adequately evaluated.

Truth in advertisement On both websites and in print material, we found numerous statements regarding ENDS that were not based on scientific findings and for which there is no rigorous supporting data. Examples of such statements include: ‘Be careful to avoid inhaling any significant quantity of liquid. Although it gives you a slight tingling sensation, it is not harmful’ (Liberty Stix); ‘Within 2 weeks, your lung capacity will increase by 30%. Your energy levels will increase. Your throat and lungs will feel markedly better! Wrinkles in your skin will become less noticeable and colour will return to your skin’ (Liberty Stix). One pack (Smoking Everywhere) was labelled ‘Vitamin’, although no indication of what this meant was given. Discussion ...Used cartridges contained fluid after they ceased producing aerosol. Regulatory agencies need to address how to safely dispose of used cartridges and minimise introduction of nicotine into the environment. Studies documenting hazards associated with disposal of cigarette butts12 13 led to regulation of butt disposal in Australia, where fines are issued to those who do not deposit butts in valid receptacles.14 Residual nicotine in spent ENDS cartridges can leak onto surfaces where conversion to carcinogens could take place.6 Furthermore, as nicotine from used ENDS cartridges leaches into water supplies, it may directly affect aquatic life and could be propagated through the food chain. Proper disposal of ENDS cartridges should be addressed before spent cartridges present a serious health problem. Better regulation of ENDS sales and distribution is needed to protect children and adults from nicotine exposure and possible addiction. Our observations provide evidence that regulators should consider removing ENDS from the market until design features, quality control, labelling, disposal and safety issues have been adequately addressed. http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/early/2010/10/22/tc.20... http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/early/2010/10/22/tc.20...

----- Original Message ----From: Mr. Bill Godshall To: general@globalink.org Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 2:32 PM 8_19_2011

Page 3 Subject: Appeals Court rules FDA cannot ban e-cigarettes as drug devices General Messages by Mr. Bill Godshall Go to other forums | Rate this article | Reply to author | Reply to all

The DC Court of Appeals has ruled against the FDA's attempt to ban e-cigarettes (by claiming they are unapproved drug devices). Decision is at: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/e-cigarette-news/9218... This is a huge victory for public health and civil justice. Its time for FDA officials to come to their senses by reclassifying and/or promulgating reasonable regulations for e-cigarettes as tobacco produces under the FSPTCA. FDA Loses Appeal, Can?t Regulate E-Cigarettes as Drug http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-12-07/fda-loses-appeal... Appeals Court: FDA Authority Over E-Cigarettes Is Limited http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/stock-market-news-story.aspx?stor... Bill Godshall Executive Director Smokefree Pennsylvania 1926 Monongahela Avenue Pittsburgh, PA 15218 412-351-5880 FAX 412-351-5881 smokefree@compuserve.com Contact GLK | Netiquette | Report abuse | Unsubscribe Mr. Bill Godshall has declared no competing interest. If you are new to GLOBALink, please make yourself familiar with GLOBALink Netiquette before posting. Please keep in mind that there is no place for engaging in hate speech on GLOBALink forums. GLOBALink membership is subject to suspension and expulsion if rules are violated.
Contact GLK | Netiquette | Report abuse | Unsubscribe
Stan Shatenstein has declared no competing interest. If you are new to GLOBALink, please make yourself familiar with GLOBALink Netiquette before posting. Please keep in mind that there is no place for engaging in hate speech on GLOBALink forums. GLOBALink membership is subject to suspension and expulsion if rules are violated.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Krieger, James" To: "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> "Johnson, Gareth" <Gareth.Johnson@kingcounty.gov> Date: 12/7/2010 8:02:29 PM Subject: RE: BOH Staff Report: E-Cigs
Given the proposed regulation focuses on e-cigs as nicotine delivery devices/electronic smoking devices, does this present a problem in light of the US Appeals ruling? James Krieger, MD, MPH Chief, Chronic Disease and Injury Prevention Section Public Health - Seattle and King County Chinook Building, Suite 900 401 5th Ave Seattle, WA 98104 voice: 206-263-8227 fax: 206 205 0525 email: james.krieger@kingcounty.gov

From: Neal, Scott Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 1:04 PM To: Johnson, Gareth Cc: Krieger, James; Allis, Donna; Hamilton, Joy; Wood, Maria; Pearson, Anne; Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: BOH Staff Report: E-Cigs Importance: High Gary, Attached are the final BOH staff report with attachements. Given our situation with the PAO, Maria thought it thought it would be a good idea to send this to Jane so she has it ahead of time and maybe explain that it is possible she may be called to answer questions about her review on this proposed regulation. It would be very helpful to be able to prepare for additional questions we may get after her response to any questions. Also a late breaking development...the U.S. Court of appeals has just ruled against the FDA in the E-Cigarette case. We haven't had a chance to read through the decision in its entirety yet, but it appears the court decided that the e-cigs are tobacco products. I'm not yet sure if that means they said they are "modified risk" or just "tobacco products" and whether or not that has much bearing on us locally given the differrent federal and state definitions for "tobacco products." Scott

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Pearson, Anne" To: "Krieger, James" <James.Krieger@kingcounty.gov> "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> "Johnson, Gareth" <Gareth.Johnson@kingcounty.gov> Date: 12/7/2010 8:06:08 PM Subject: RE: BOH Staff Report: E-Cigs Attachments: RE: BOH Staff Report: E-Cigs.msg
Hi Jim, I'm attaching an email I drafted a few minutes ago with my analysis of the court decision, as well as TFK's analysis. As you'll see, I don't think this affects our ability to move forward. Let me know if you have any questions.

Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov

From: Krieger, James Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 4:02 PM To: Neal, Scott; Johnson, Gareth Cc: Allis, Donna; Hamilton, Joy; Wood, Maria; Pearson, Anne; Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: RE: BOH Staff Report: E-Cigs Given the proposed regulation focuses on e-cigs as nicotine delivery devices/electronic smoking devices, does this present a problem in light of the US Appeals ruling? James Krieger, MD, MPH Chief, Chronic Disease and Injury Prevention Section Public Health - Seattle and King County Chinook Building, Suite 900 401 5th Ave Seattle, WA 98104 voice: 206-263-8227 fax: 206 205 0525 email: james.krieger@kingcounty.gov

From: Neal, Scott Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 1:04 PM To: Johnson, Gareth Cc: Krieger, James; Allis, Donna; Hamilton, Joy; Wood, Maria; Pearson, Anne; Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: BOH Staff Report: E-Cigs Importance: High Gary, Attached are the final BOH staff report with attachements. Given our situation with the PAO, Maria thought it thought it would be a good idea to send this to Jane so she has it ahead of time and maybe explain that it is possible she may be 8_19_2011

Page 2 called to answer questions about her review on this proposed regulation. It would be very helpful to be able to prepare for additional questions we may get after her response to any questions. Also a late breaking development...the U.S. Court of appeals has just ruled against the FDA in the E-Cigarette case. We haven't had a chance to read through the decision in its entirety yet, but it appears the court decided that the e-cigs are tobacco products. I'm not yet sure if that means they said they are "modified risk" or just "tobacco products" and whether or not that has much bearing on us locally given the differrent federal and state definitions for "tobacco products." Scott

From: "Pearson, Anne" To: "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> "Wood, Maria" <Maria.Wood@kingcounty.gov> Date: Subject: RE: BOH Staff Report: E-Cigs I just read the opinion. I also communicated with Eric Lindblom, the general counsel for TFK, who shared with me his analysis which I have pasted below. In reading the opinion it is important to remember that there are a large number and variety of e-cigarettes. Some of them (such as the product at issue in the litigation) market themselves only "for smoking pleasure" and make no health related claims. Some brands market themselves as having a therapeutic use (e.g. to treat nicotine addiction). And other brands market themselves as harm reduction products. Today's decision concluded that e-cigarettes that make no health-related claims should be regulated at the federal level as tobacco products. To the extent that these products make no health claims, it is unlikely that they will be defined as modified risk tobacco products and will be regulated as traditional tobacco products. As you know, localities are not preempted from regulating the sale of traditional tobacco products in the ways proposed by our regulation. It may well be the case that some brands of e-cigarettes will eventually be determined to be modified risk tobacco products or drug/delivery devices over which we have limited jurisdiction. That does not eliminate the need -- or affect our local authority -- to regulate those e-cigarettes that are likely to be treated at the federal level as ordinary tobacco products.

Eric Lindblom's analysis: In a nutshell, the case finds that e-cigarettes with nicotine derived from tobacco fall under the definition of tobacco product in the FDA tobacco law and may only be regulated by FDA under that law – unless the e-cigarettes are marketed or labeled with therapeutic claims, in which case they fall under FDA's jurisdiction over drugs and devices. Court says FDA has not established that the e-cigarettes in the case were marketed or labeled with any therapeutic claims – but notes that FDA might be able to do so at some point, in which case it could assert jurisdiction using its authority over drugs and devices.

So FDA could simply acknowledge the court's ruling but say it has little impact beyond the e-cigarettes in the case, itself, because virtually all (or maybe all) other e-cigarettes are marketed with therapeutic claims. And FDA could make clear that its current restrictions regarding e-cigarettes, while blocked by the court in regard to the e-cigarettes in that case (at least until FDA establishes they are marketed with therapeutic claims), still remain in full force and
8_19_2011

Page 3

effect in regards to the many other brands of e-cigarettes with therapeutic claims.

In any case, I don't think the ruling does anything to suggest that states and localities do not still need to take aggressive action against e-cigarettes to stop their sale to kids, tax them, and/or ban them if not approved by FDA (either through its drug and device jurisdiction or its tobacco product jurisdiction).

_____ From: Neal, Scott Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 1:21 PM To: Wood, Maria Cc: Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne; Johnson, Gareth Subject: RE: BOH Staff Report: E-Cigs

thanks Maria...we'll be in touch ASAP _____ From: Wood, Maria Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 1:20 PM To: Neal, Scott Cc: Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne; Johnson, Gareth Subject: RE: BOH Staff Report: E-Cigs

Please let me know as soon as you can if we need to change anything in the staff report in light of this decision. I have just given the clerk's office a heads up that I will be delayed in getting the packet to them and will submit tomorrow, so that buys us some time if we need it. Thanks, Maria

_____ From: Neal, Scott Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 1:04 PM To: Johnson, Gareth Cc: Krieger, James; Allis, Donna; Hamilton, Joy; Wood, Maria; Pearson, Anne; Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: BOH Staff Report: E-Cigs Importance: High

Gary, Attached are the final BOH staff report with attachements. Given our situation with the PAO, Maria thought it
8_19_2011

Page 4

thought it would be a good idea to send this to Jane so she has it ahead of time and maybe explain that it is possible she may be called to answer questions about her review on this proposed regulation. It would be very helpful to be able to prepare for additional questions we may get after her response to any questions. Also a late breaking development...the U.S. Court of appeals has just ruled against the FDA in the E-Cigarette case. We haven't had a chance to read through the decision in its entirety yet, but it appears the court decided that the ecigs are tobacco products. I'm not yet sure if that means they said they are "modified risk" or just "tobacco products" and whether or not that has much bearing on us locally given the differrent federal and state definitions for "tobacco products." Scott

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject: Attachments: Here it is…I got this from an e-cig forum

"Neal, Scott" "Pearson, Anne" <Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov> 12/7/2010 4:13:53 PM FDA Appeals court ruling FDA Appeals Court Decision.pdf

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject: Attachments:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Mahoney, Maggie" <maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu> 12/7/2010 6:29:00 PM Wrapping up Contract Seattle King County & TCLC- Scope of Work Revised 11.16.10 mm.doc TCLC- budget 12 7 10 (2).xls

Hi Maggie, While I am waiting for the letter from our contracts office, I would like to make sure we are ready to get the contract in the our system. I accepted the changes to the last revised scope, and have attached a budget with a guesstimated 3 year spread. Depending on the COI letter, we may not be able to start until January (as the scope currently says). In which case, we will change the budget. Hopefully, we will be instead changing the scope and getting your help with some items this month. So, please take a look at these documents and let me know if they look fine except for having the actual start date. When I get the draft letter I will send it right along. Hopefully you can confirm it and we can execute this one. Sound like a plan? please let me know of any questions. Thanks, Sarah From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2010 2:34 PM To: 'Mahoney, Maggie' Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Hi Maggie, Our compliance and contracts had some issues with this draft and our taking the opportunity to craft their own draft, which I will forward when I obtain it. Sarah Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 10:35 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Thanks for checking on this Sarah. I’ve attached a draft letter to address the conflict issue. Do you want to see whether that’s sufficient? Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 8_19_2011

Page 2 www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 6:19 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Maggie- My understanding is that budgeting into calendar years is something we must do on our end, even if we expect we may amend them. Mark - is that correct? Or is there a way to do a consulting contract in amount only? Sarah

From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 3:05 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Great, thanks Sarah. I will put together a letter that copies the language of the contract and send it to you for review. A December 1 start date sounds good, and I look forward to wrapping up the contracting process, as I know you do, too! In the meantime, I accepted the changes in the draft scope of work, with one exception. I thought, based on our exchange from last week, that we weren’t going to allocate time to particular time periods so that we had flexibility throughout the remaining 15 months, since it would be hard to predict the ebb and flow of work. If that is still okay with you, I deleted the table in the draft scope of work because it just allocated funding over the life of the project and replaced it with a simple paragraph explaining that we’ll invoice you and you’ll pay us, as the contract says, that our fee is $175 per hour, up to a maximum of $25,000 total. I’ve attached it for your review. After I did that, I opened the budget document and see that the template had a lot of stuff that doesn’t apply to this contract (e.g., supplies, fringe benefits, etc.). I simplified it to match the content that is in the scope of work. I’ve attached it for your review. Please let me know how those two things look and, as I said, I’ll draft a letter to match the contract language concerning the conflict issue. Thanks! Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 2:59 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation 8_19_2011

Page 3 Hi Maggie - I have the go-ahead that the letter can copy the language of the contract. I do not think it needs to contain much more than that. Thus, it looks like we are in the home stretch. Are you able to put that together to have in hand while we process the contract? The changes to the scope of work look fine to me, I made changes to the budget as discussed. I put December 1 as a start date. A contractor can begin work they will bill for as soon as we have an agreed upon scope of work. I chose the 1st to allow time to put the decision-making safeguards in place. I do know we will want your help in December in preparing for the leg session. Does this work for you? I am also attaching the template we use for contract budgets. I was not sure if you had other expenses besides the hourly fee. Please populate this template as part of the contract. If you need any assistance, Lauren Holt (cc'd above) is an ace. We will start processing the contract - getting Department and County approval - when we finalize these pieces. I will work on the safeguards. Thanks for bearing with us, Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 10:16 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: FW: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Hi Sarah, This reminded me to ask you whether we should touch base on the contract. Is there anything else you need from me at this point? I have some time available this week to connect via phone, if you’d like. Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 10:51 AM To: Schaibley, David Cc: Armstrong, Kate; Cork, Kerry; Mahoney, Maggie; Blanke, Doug Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Many, many thanks to all of you at TCLC! I really appreciate having so many sets of wonderful eyes to review our draft 8_19_2011

Page 4 and to provide such helpful input. I am incorporating many of your comments, and will send a draft off to our county prosecutor's office this morning. This item will go to a vote by our Board of Health on December 16. I'll keep you posted on our progress. Thanks again!! Anne Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov

From: Schaibley, David [mailto:David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 12:59 PM To: Pearson, Anne Cc: Armstrong, Kate; Cork, Kerry; Mahoney, Maggie; Blanke, Doug Subject: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation

Dear Anne: Attached please find our thoughts on Seattle/King County’s proposed e-cigarette regulation. We hope these thoughts are helpful. Please let us know if you are in need of any assistance in the future. Sincerely, Dave

David J. Schaibley |Public Health Law Center Staff Attorney, Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 651-695-7611 | Fax: 651-290-7515 david.schaibley@wmitchell.edu 875 Summit Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 www.TCLConline.org The Tobacco Control Legal Consortium provides information and technical assistance on issues related to tobacco and public health. The Consortium does not provide legal representation or advice. This e-mail should not be considered legal advice or a substitute for obtaining legal advice from an attorney who can represent you. If you have specific legal questions, we recommend that you consult with an attorney familiar with the laws of your jurisdiction.

From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 10:13 AM To: Schaibley, David; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation Great! Thanks so much. Anne Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov 8_19_2011

Page 5

From: Schaibley, David [mailto:David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 7:24 AM To: Pearson, Anne; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation

Hi Anne: Just a quick update to let you know that we’ll have our input to you today. Dave
From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 8:41 AM To: Schaibley, David; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation We would like to send a draft to our Prosecuting Attorneys Office by Monday or Tuesday of next week. If we could incorporate your comments before sending, that would be ideal. But if that's too tight, we can still fold in your comments after we send it to her. Thanks!

From: Schaibley, David [David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 4:04 AM To: Pearson, Anne; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation Hello Anne: Thanks for forwarding it; we'll share our thoughts. When we spoke last week you mentioned a relatively tight time frame for this effort...can you let us know when you need our input by? Enjoy your long weekend, Dave From: Pearson, Anne [Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 6:55 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie; Schaibley, David Subject: Draft E-cigarette regulation Hi Maggie and David, I hope you are both well. I was wondering if you might have the time to review a draft regulation restricting the sale of eproducts (attached). Our Board of Health is not proposing to go so far as to prohibit their sale entirely, but is interested in restricting their availability to youth. If you have a chance to take a look, I would love to hear your thoughts. I'll be out of the office for the rest of the week but back on Monday. All the best, Anne

8_19_2011

Page 6

______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:
Thanks Sue,

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Susan Zbikowski" <Susan.Zbikowski@freeclear.com> 12/8/2010 7:41:00 PM RE: E-cigarettes ruling

We have been following this case, and were a little surprised by the ruling. It does not look like it will affect the local regulation the Board of Health will look at next week. It does pose the questions in the article. Part of my reaction is disappointment that e-cigarettes will now face no pressure to apply to the FDA to be a legitimate cessation device. My recollection is that the nicotine inhaler is very effective for those who use it, but is prescription only, expensive and uncomfortable to use. There are some issues with a cessation product that looks just like a cigarette, but I hope conversation will continue around how a safe and effective product that operates like an e-cigarette could be the next good cessation pharmacotherapy. Any reactions on your end? Thanks, Sarah Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Susan Zbikowski [mailto:Susan.Zbikowski@freeclear.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2010 10:22 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: RE: E-cigarettes ruling

Hi Sarah, I thought you might be interested in the following article. Did you see this yesterday? Sue

______________________________________________ Susan M Zbikowski, PhD l Vice President, Clinical and Behavioral Sciences FREE & CLEAR l 999 Third Ave l Suite 2100 l Seattle, WA 98104 D 206.876.2211 l F 206.876.2101 l www.freeclear.com ü Please consider the environment before printing this email.
This electronic message may contain confidential information that is protected by state and/or federal law. This information is solely for the use of the individual(s) and entity(s) named as recipients in this message. You may be exposed to legal liability if you disclose this information to another person. You are obligated to maintain this information in a safe and secure manner. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or other use of the contents of the (e-mailed) information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and delete this message.

From: Mona Deprey Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2010 7:19 AM To: Susan Zbikowski Subject: 8_19_2011

Page 2

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40552565/ns/health-addictions/ E-cigs are going to be regulated like cigarettes and not devices just out.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Stan Shatenstein" <shatenstein@globalink.org> mju@globalink.org 12/8/2010 7:17:02 PM GLOBALink MJU: 368th Edition: 9-December-2010

Medical Journal Update 368th Edition 9-December-2010 Dear readers, Please make PDF requests by sending journal and author name information (e.g. AJPH - Cook) to shatensteins@sympatico.ca. Please also include your own e-mail address in every request message. Click on links to access papers freely available to all, but feel free to ask for these if you have a problem opening the PDFs. Do not send back full abstracts or MJU editions, just the journal and author names and, if you can, the number of the edition in which they appear. Studies are listed below by alphabetical order of journal names. Stan Shatenstein

In this edition: Addiction - Smit/Minami The role of desire, duty and intention in predicting attempts to quit smoking

Addiction Accepted Article (Accepted, unedited articles published online for future issues) Accepted manuscript online: 2 DEC 2010 Eline Suzanne Smit, Jennifer Anne Fidler, Robert West Abstract Aims: Motivation to quit smoking predicts quit attempts, though little is known about the role played by its different aspects. This study assessed the predictive value of desire, duty and intention to quit, three different aspects of motivation. Design: A longitudinal study was conducted involving a nationally representative sample of smokers assessed at baseline and three and six months later. Baseline assessment took place by face-to-face computer-assisted interviews; follow-up assessments by postal questionnaires. Setting: England. Participants: From April 2008 to June 2009, a total of 5593 adult smokers were recruited; 1263 were followed up at 3 months and 1096 at 6 months. Measurements: Three dichotomous measures of motivation to quit (wanting to quit, believing one ought to quit, intention to quit soon) were taken at baseline. Whether a subsequent quit attempt was made was recorded at three- and six-month follow-up. Findings: More smokers believed they ought to quit smoking than wanted to or intended to soon (38,9%, 29,4% and 23,5% respectively). Desire and intention were independent predictors of quit attempts at both follow-ups, whereas combining them did not add predictive value and duty was not a predictor. While the predictive value of desire or intention alone disappeared when accompanied by duty, their combination was robust against its negative effect. Conclusion: Desire and intention independently positively predict quit attempts while duty appears to mitigate their effect. It would be worth monitoring all three aspects of motivation when evaluating the impact of smoking cessation interventions on motivation to quit. 8_19_2011

Page 2 http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2010.... Also: An Ecological Momentary Assessment Analysis of Relations among Coping, Affect, and Smoking During a Quit Attempt http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2010....

AJE - Baer Risk Factors for Mortality in the Nurses' Health Study: A Competing Risks Analysis Am J Epidemiol. 2010 Dec 6. [Epub ahead of print] Baer HJ, Glynn RJ, Hu FB, Hankinson SE, Willett WC, Colditz GA, Stampfer M, Rosner B.

Abstract Few studies have examined multiple risk factors for mortality or formally compared their associations across specific causes of death. The authors used competing risks survival analysis to evaluate associations of lifestyle and dietary factors with all-cause and cause-specific mortality among 50,112 participants in the Nurses' Health Study. There were 4,893 deaths between 1986 and 2004: 1,026 from cardiovascular disease, 931 from smoking-related cancers, 1,430 from cancers not related to smoking, and 1,506 from all other causes. Age, body mass index at age 18 years, weight change, height, current smoking and pack-years of smoking, glycemic load, cholesterol intake, systolic blood pressure and use of blood pressure medications, diabetes, parental myocardial infarction before age 60 years, and time since menopause were directly related to all-cause mortality, whereas there were inverse associations for physical activity and intakes of nuts, polyunsaturated fat, and cereal fiber. Moderate alcohol consumption was associated with decreased mortality. A model that incorporated differences in the associations of some risk factors with specific causes of death had a significantly better fit compared with a model in which all risk factors had common associations across all causes. In the future, this new model may be used to identify individuals at increased risk of mortality. http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2010/12/06/aje.k...

AJPM - Hebert Current Major Depression Among Smokers Using a State Quitline Am J Prev Med (2011) Online Early December 7, 2010. Kiandra K. Hebert, PhD, Sharon E. Cummins, PhD, Sandra Hernández, BS, Gary J. Tedeschi, PhD, Shu-Hong Zhu, PhD Abstract Background: Smokers seeking treatment to quit smoking are generally not assessed for current depression, yet depression among smokers may influence quitting outcome. Purpose: This study aims to formally assess current major depression among smokers calling a state tobacco quitline. Methods: A total of 844 smokers calling the California Smokers Helpline in 2007 were screened for depression by the mood module of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). The Social Functioning Questionnaire (SFQ) also was administered to these callers. Two months after the screening, follow-up evaluations were conducted to assess cessation outcome. Results: In all, 24.2% of smokers met criteria for current major depression and 16.5% reported symptoms indicating mild depression. Callers with current major depression were more likely to be heavy smokers and on Medicaid. Moreover, 74.0% of smokers with current major depression had substantial social and occupational functioning defıcits. Two months later, those with major depression at baseline were signifıcantly less likely to have quit smoking (18.5% vs 28.4%). Conclusions: Almost one in four smokers who called the California Smokers Helpline met criteria for current major 8_19_2011

Page 3 depression. More than 400,000 smokers call state quitlines in the U.S. for help with quitting each year, which means that as many as 100,000 smokers with serious depressive symptoms are using these services annually. The large number of depressed smokers who seek help suggests a need to develop appropriate interventions to help them quit successfully. http://www.ajpm-online.net/webfiles/images/journals/amepre/A... Note: Full text PDF freely available from link immediately above.

APAM - Hamer Objectively Measured Secondhand Smoke Exposure and Mental Health in Children Evidence From the Scottish Health Survey Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. Published online December 6, 2010. doi:10.1001/archpediatrics.2010.243 Mark Hamer, PhD; Tamsin Ford, PhD; Emmanuel Stamatakis, PhD; Samantha Dockray, PhD; G. David Batty, PhD Abstract Objective To examine the association between objectively assessed secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure and mental health in a representative sample of British children. Design Cross-sectional study. Setting Community-based population sample from the 2003 Scottish Health Survey. Participants Nine hundred one nonsmoking children (mean [SD] age, 8.3 [2.5] years). Main Exposure Exposure to SHS was determined from salivary cotinine level and self-report. Main Outcome Measure Psychological distress assessed using the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ). Results Forty percent of the sample demonstrated high SHS exposure (cotinine level >0.70 ng/mL). Children with higher cotinine levels were more likely to live in areas of greater socioeconomic deprivation. Participants in the highest cotinine quartile (>0.70 ng/mL) had significantly higher total SDQ scores compared with those in the lowest quartile (age- and sexadjusted mean difference = 2.8; 95% confidence interval, 1.6 to 3.9). There was evidence of a dose-response effect across the cotinine group (P trend = .001). Of the SDQ subscales, the strongest associations with cotinine levels emerged for hyperactivity and conduct disorder. These associations remained statistically significant after adjustment for possible confounders including social deprivation, single-parent status, body mass index, chronic illness, and physical activity. Conclusion Objectively assessed SHS exposure was associated with poorer mental health among children. http://archpedi.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/archpediat...

Arthritis Care Res - Hudson Modeling smoking in systemic sclerosis: A comparison of different statistical approaches Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2010 Dec 6. [Epub ahead of print] Hudson M, Lo E, Baron M, Steele R; Canadian Scleroderma Research GroupInvestigators of the Cana.... Abstract BACKGROUND: We sought to determine the effect of different methods of modelling smoking on vascular outcomes in rheumatic diseases. METHODS: Data from the Canadian Scleroderma Research Group Registry was used. Patients self-reported their smoking history. Vascular outcomes were severity of Raynaud's phenomenon, presence of finger ulcers and severity of finger ulcers. Several models were developed to capture the experience of smoking: (1) ever compared to never smoking; (2) current and past smoking compared to never smoking; (3) never, past and current smoking compared using polynomial contrasts; (4) smoking intensity, duration and time since cessation assessed separately; and, (5) smoking modeled using the Comprehensive Smoking Index (CSI), which integrates intensity, duration and time since cessation 8_19_2011

Page 4 into a single covariate. RESULTS: This study included 606 patients, of which 16% were current, 42% past and 42% never smokers. Current and past smokers smoked a mean of 25 (±17) and 17 (±18) pack-years, respectively. Smoking duration was shorter in past compared to current smokers (18.3 vs. 31.7 years, respectively). Past smokers reported having stopped smoking approximately 16 (±12) years prior, although this ranged from 1 to 50 years. Smoking had no effect on vascular outcomes in the simplest model comparing ever to never smokers. Models that isolated past smokers revealed the presence of a healthy smoker bias in that group. The model using the CSI demonstrated a strong negative effect of smoking on vascular outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Proper modeling of the effect of smoking is essential in studies of vascular outcomes of rheumatic diseases. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/acr.20416/abstrac...

BMJ - Fagerström/Lancaster OPEN ACCESS

Stopping smokeless tobacco with varenicline: randomised double blind placebo controlled trial BMJ 2010; 341:c6549 doi: 10.1136/bmj.c6549 (Published 6 December 2010) Karl Fagerström, director, Hans Gilljam, professor, Michael Metcalfe, senior medical manager, Serena Tonstad, head consultant, Michael Messig, primary care statistics Abstract Objective To assess the efficacy and safety of varenicline (a licensed cigarette smoking cessation aid) in helping users of smokeless tobacco to quit. Design Double blind, placebo controlled, parallel group, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Setting Medical clinics (mostly primary care) in Norway and Sweden. Participants Men and women aged ≥18 who used smokeless tobacco at least eight times a day, with no abstinence period over three months within one year before screening, who wanted to quit all tobacco use. Participants were excluded if they used any other form of tobacco (except smokeless tobacco) or medication to stop smoking within three months of screening or had any pre-existing medical or psychiatric condition. Interventions Varenicline 1 mg twice daily (titrated during the first week) or placebo for 12 weeks, with 14 weeks followup after treatment. Main outcome measures The primary end point was the four week continuous abstinence rate at the end of treatment (weeks 9-12) confirmed with cotinine concentration. A secondary end point was continuous abstinence rate for weeks 926. Safety and tolerability were also evaluated. Results 431 participants (213 varenicline; 218 placebo) were randomised and received at least one dose of study drug. Participants demographics and baseline use of smokeless tobacco were similar (89% (189) and 90% (196), respectively, were men; mean age in both groups was 43.9; participants used smokeless tobacco products about 15 times a day, and about 80% first used smokeless tobacco within 30 minutes after awakening). Continuous abstinence rate at week 9-12 was higher in the varenicline group than the placebo group (59% (125) v 39% (85); relative risk 1.60, 95% confidence interval 1.32 to 1.87, P<0.001; risk difference 20%; number needed to treat 5). The advantage of varenicline over placebo persisted through 14 weeks of follow-up (continuous abstinence rate at week 9-26 was 45% (95) v 34% (73); relative risk 1.42, 1.08 to 1.79, P=0.012; risk difference 11%; number needed to treat 9). The most common adverse events in the varenicline group compared with the placebo group were nausea (35% (74) v 6% (14)), fatigue (10% (22) v 7% (15)), headache (10% (22) v 9% (20)), and sleep disorder (10% (22) v 7% (15)). Few adverse events led to discontinuation of treatment (9% (19) and 4% (9), respectively), and serious adverse events occurred in two (1%) and three (1%) participants, respectively. Conclusion Varenicline can help people to give up smokeless tobacco and has an acceptable safety profile. The response rate in the placebo group in this study was high, suggesting a population less resistant to treatment than smokers. 8_19_2011

Page 5 Trial Registration NCT00717093. http://www.bmj.com/content/341/bmj.c6549.abstract http://www.bmj.com/content/341/bmj.c6549.full.pdf+html Note: Full text PDF freely available from link immediately above. Related BMJ Editorial: Drug treatment for users of smokeless tobacco http://www.bmj.com/content/341/bmj.c6598.extract

Eur J Risk Reg - Alemanno Intellectual Property: The Case of Plain Packaging of Cigarettes European Journal of Risk Regulation 3/2010: pp. 268-270 Alberto Alemanno and Enrico Bonadio

Abstract In a bid to reduce smoking rates, Australia is set to become the first country in the world to introduce legislation requiring plain packaging for cigarettes. Plain packaging (also known as generic packaging) means that all forms of tobacco branding are required to be labelled exclusively with simple unadorned text. This means that trademarks, graphics and logos are removed from cigarette packs with the exception of the brand name which is displayed in a standard font. http://www.lexxion.de/en/verlagsprogramm-shop/details/1846/6... http://academia.edu.documents.s3.amazonaws.com/1073182/EJRR_... Note: Full text PDF freely available from link immediately above. Related blog & profile: Alberto Alemanno: The Law and Science of Plain Tobacco Packaging http://albertoalemanno.eu/articles/the-law-and-science-of-pl... Enrico Bonadio http://abertay.academia.edu/EnricoBonadio

IJC - Foy/Becher/Ferlay A smoking-based carcinogenesis model for lung cancer risk prediction International Journal of Cancer Accepted Article (Accepted, unedited articles published online for future issues) Accepted manuscript online: 7 DEC 2010 Millennia Foy PhD, Margaret R. Spitz MD, MPH, Marek Kimmel PhD, Olga Y. Gorlova PhD Abstract Lung cancer is the leading cancer killer for both men and women worldwide. Over 80% of lung cancers are attributed to smoking. In this analysis, the authors propose to use a two-stage clonal expansion (TSCE) model to predict an individual's lung cancer risk based on gender and smoking history. The TSCE model is traditionally fitted to prospective cohort data. Here, the authors describe a new method that allows for the reconstruction of cohort data from the combination of risk factor data obtained from a case-control study, and tabled incidence/mortality rate data, and discuss alternative approaches. The method is applied to fit a TSCE model based on smoking. The fitted model is validated 8_19_2011

Page 6 against independent data from the control arm of a lung cancer chemoprevention trial, CARET, where it accurately predicted the number of lung cancer deaths observed. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ijc.25834/abstrac... IJC Correspondence & Referenced study: Lung cancer mortality in Sub-Saharan Africa http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ijc.25796/abstrac... Response to Drs Becher and Winkler http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ijc.25805/abstrac... Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: GLOBOCAN 2008 http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ijc.25516/abstrac...

Int J Nurs Pract - Merrill Smoking prevalence, attitudes, and perceived smoking prevention and control responsibilities and practices among nurses in Amman, Jordan

International Journal of Nursing Practice Volume 16, Issue 6, pages 624632, December 2010 Article first published online: 3 DEC 2010 Ray M Merrill PhD MPH, Hala Madanat PhD, Alan T Kelley BA Abstract This study assesses smoking prevalence, attitudes, and perceived patient counselling responsibilities among practicing nurses in Amman, Jordan. It also identifies whether their smoking status or training in counselling patients about smoking is associated with their smoking-related attitudes and counselling practices. Data were collected through a crosssectional survey of 266 (n = 266) nurses at four public and private hospitals in Amman. Smoking prevalence was 42% for male nurses and 13% for female nurses. Nurses strongly favoured enforcement of anti-smoking policy, but did not strongly agree that nurses should be involved in counselling patients about smoking. Approximately 41% of nurses indicated that they had received training on counselling patients about smoking. Nurse training with respect to counselling patients about smoking was positively associated with the nurses belief that their counselling could help patients stop or never start smoking. In addition, nurses with counselling training about smoking felt significantly better prepared to assist patients to quit smoking. Nurses who smoked were significantly less likely to believe their counselling of patients about smoking could be effective. Finally, smoking status was not significantly associated with how well prepared the nurses felt to assist patients to quit smoking. These findings identify a need for more extensive and better-tailored training programmes for nurses on patient counselling about smoking. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1440-172X.2010....

Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci - Hafezi Letters Tobacco Smoking and Its Impact on Corneal Biomechanics Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2010 Dec;51(12):6892. Hafezi F. In their excellent study, Sahin et al.1 investigated the effect of diabetes mellitus on various corneal biomechanical parameters, as measured by the Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA; Reichert, Inc., Depew, NY). The rationale of their study is very interesting. To my surprise, the authors showed a decrease in corneal hysteresis (CH) rather than the expected increase. Several factors suggest that diabetes mellitus would actually enhance corneal biomechanics by an increase in the crosslinking rate:.. Similar to diabetes, tobacco smoking represents a source of AGEs, and moreover, by-products of cigarette smoke, such as nitrogen oxides, nitrite, and formaldehyde, induce cross-links between collagen fibers.57 A recent epidemiologic study showed that the incidence of keratoconus in smokers is considerably lower than in the nonsmoking population,6 and we have recently performed a 8_19_2011

Page 7 prospective comparative case series to investigate the effect of chronic tobacco smoking on corneal biomechanics using the ORA. Our results showed that chronic smoking increases corneal rigidity in a statistically significant manner.8... I therefore suggest that Sahin et al.1 determine the smoking status of their patients and perform the statistical analysis in light of their findings http://www.iovs.org/content/51/12/6892.1.full.pdf+html Referenced IOVS study: Corneal Biomechanical Changes in Diabetes Mellitus and Their Influence on Intraocular Pressure Measurements http://www.iovs.org/content/50/10/4597.abstract

JAH - Hawkins Increased Tobacco Exposure in Older Children and Its Effect on Asthma and Ear Infections Journal of Adolescent Health Online Early December 7, 2010 Summer S. Hawkins, Ph.D., and Lisa Berkman, Ph.D. Abstract Purpose: To examine selected social determinants of childrens exposure to household tobacco use and smoking inside the home and to assess the effect of second-hand smoke exposure on asthma and ear infections across childrens age groups. Methods: A total of 90,961 parents of children aged 017 years from the 2007 National Survey of Childrens Health were included in the study. Results: In all, 26.2% of parents reported that anyone in the household used tobacco products. Parents of children aged 611 and 1217 years were 1.97 (adjusted OR; 95% CI, 1.652.36) and 2.93 (2.463.49) times more likely, respectively, to report that someone smoked inside the house than parents of younger children. Second-hand smoke exposure varied by childrens race/ethnicity, and children from more disadvantaged circumstances were more likely to be exposed. For all children, they were more likely to ever have asthma if someone in their household used tobacco. Although young childrens likelihood of recurrent ear infections did not increase with household tobacco use, children aged 1217 were 1.67 (1.022.72) times more likely to have recurrent ear infections if someone smoked inside their home. Conclusion: Family members are increasingly likely to smoke indoors as children age, which may increase adolescents vulnerability to ear infections. Parents and health professionals should monitor second-hand smoke exposure at home and encourage a smoke-free environment. http://jahonline.org/webfiles/images/journals/jah/hawkins.pd... Note: Full text PDF freely available from link immediately above.

JAN - Kim Lifestyle advice for Korean Americans and native Koreans with hypertension

Journal of Advanced Nursing Early View (Articles online in advance of print) Article first published online: 16 NOV 2010 Mi Ja Kim, Suk Jeong Lee, Yang-Heui Ahn, Hyeonkyeong Lee Abstract Aim.  This paper is a report of a comparison of advice on lifestyle given by healthcare providers and subsequent action by 8_19_2011

Page 8 recipients between Korean Americans and native Koreans with hypertension. Background.  High blood pressure is controllable by having a healthy lifestyle, such as weight control, dietary change, exercise, low-sodium diet, alcohol restriction and smoking cessation, and by taking medication. Healthcare providers play an important role in teaching individuals with hypertension on healthy lifestyles. Method.  This descriptive comparative study was conducted with a convenience sample of 100 Korean Americans and 100 native Koreans with hypertension. They were interviewed between May 2003 and June 2004 on the advice they received from healthcare providers on lifestyle and their subsequent action in terms of taking medication, weight control, dietary change, exercise, low-sodium diet, smoking cessation, alcohol restriction and tension reduction. Nutrient profiles were examined using the 24-hour dietary recall method. Findings.  Korean Americans received advice on lifestyle less than did native Koreans, but more Korean Americans followed healthy lifestyle advice on dietary change and exercise than did native Koreans (P < 0·001). Weight control was the least adhered to behaviour among the Korean Americans, although almost two-thirds of them were overweight or obese. Both groups exceeded the Dietary Reference Intakes of sodium, but perceived their sodium consumption as low. Conclusion.  Native Korean participants need to pay closer attention to carrying out the advice, whereas healthcare providers to Korean Americans need to give more advice on culturally acceptable healthy lifestyles, particularly on dietary changes and weight control. Both groups need to monitor their sodium intake more realistically. It is not only advice from healthcare providers that is integral to control of hypertension, but also that patients should follow that advice. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2010....

JAANP - Van Nes Improving cardiovascular health with motivational interviewing: A nurse practitioner perspective

Journal of the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners Volume 22, Issue 12, pages 654660, December 2010 Article first published online: 5 NOV 2010 Abstract Purpose: The purpose of this article is to provide nurse practitioners (NPs) with an evidence-based counseling strategy for motivating patients to adopt healthier cardiovascular lifestyles and reduce their cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. A comprehensive overview of motivational interviewing (MI), framed within the context of the transtheoretical model of change (TTM), demonstrates how primary care NPs can utilize this counseling approach to optimize cardiovascular outcomes in their patients. Data sources: Published original research and review articles in scholarly journals on the following topics: MI; advice giving; counseling techniques; TTM; CVD; quality NP care. Conclusions: Although the major risk factors for CVD are largely preventable, CVD rates are increasing to epidemic proportions. Traditional advice giving to decrease CVD risk is minimally effective. MI combined with TTM is an effective counseling technique, which motivates patients who are resistant and ambivalent to change. MI is an appropriate, evidence-based strategy to promote cardiovascular health. Implications for practice: NPs working in primary care can integrate MI with TTM into ongoing patient encounters to facilitate positive behavior changes in their patients over time. Thus, NPs can play a key role in decreasing the growing burden of CVD in North America. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1745-7599.2010....

JAMA - McFall/Prochaska/Brent Integrating Tobacco Cessation Into Mental Health Care for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder A Randomized Controlled Trial JAMA. 2010;304(22):2485-2493. doi: 10.1001/jama.2010.1769 8_19_2011

Page 9 Miles McFall, PhD; Andrew J. Saxon, MD; Carol A. Malte, MSW; Bruce Chow, MS; Sara Bailey, PhD; Dewleen G. Baker, MD; Jean C. Beckham, PhD; Kathy D. Boardman, RPh; Timothy P. Carmody, PhD; Anne M. Joseph, MD, MPH; Mark W. Smith, PhD; Mei-Chiung Shih, PhD; JJJ Lu, PhD; Mark Holodniy, MD; Philip W. Lavori, PhD for the CSP 519 Study Team Abstract Context Most smokers with mental illness do not receive tobacco cessation treatment. Objective To determine whether integrating smoking cessation treatment into mental health care for veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) improves long-term smoking abstinence rates. Design, Setting, and Patients A randomized controlled trial of 943 smokers with military-related PTSD who were recruited from outpatient PTSD clinics at 10 Veterans Affairs medical centers and followed up for 18 to 48 months between November 2004 and July 2009. Intervention Smoking cessation treatment integrated within mental health care for PTSD delivered by mental health clinicians (integrated care [IC]) vs referral to Veterans Affairs smoking cessation clinics (SCC). Patients received smoking cessation treatment within 3 months of study enrollment. Main Outcome Measures Smoking outcomes included 12-month bioverified prolonged abstinence (primary outcome) and 7- and 30-day point prevalence abstinence assessed at 3-month intervals. Amount of smoking cessation medications and counseling sessions delivered were tested as mediators of outcome. Posttraumatic stress disorder and depression were repeatedly assessed using the PTSD Checklist and Patient Health Questionnaire 9, respectively, to determine if IC participation or quitting smoking worsened psychiatric status. Results Integrated care was better than SCC on prolonged abstinence (8.9% vs 4.5%; adjusted odds ratio, 2.26; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.30-3.91; P = .004). Differences between IC vs SCC were largest at 6 months for 7-day point prevalence abstinence (78/472 [16.5%] vs 34/471 [7.2%], P < .001) and remained significant at 18 months (86/472 [18.2%] vs 51/471 [10.8%], P < .001). Number of counseling sessions received and days of cessation medication used explained 39.1% of the treatment effect. Between baseline and 18 months, psychiatric status did not differ between treatment conditions. Posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms for quitters and nonquitters improved. Nonquitters worsened slightly on the Patient Health Questionnaire 9 relative to quitters (differences ranged between 0.4 and 2.1, P = .03), whose scores did not change over time. Conclusion Among smokers with military-related PTSD, integrating smoking cessation treatment into mental health care compared with referral to specialized cessation treatment resulted in greater prolonged abstinence. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00118534 http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/304/22/2485.abstract Related JAMA Editorial: Integrating Tobacco Treatment Into Mental Health Settings http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/304/22/2534.extract JAMA Patient Page: Smoking Cessation http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/304/22/2548.extract JAMA Book Review: Tobacco or Health? Physiological and Social Damages Caused by Tobacco Smoking http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/304/21/2419.full Note: This book was featured recently in MJU and all chapters are still available, in three groups of 5 chapters. See Table of Contents: http://www.springerlink.com/content/978-3-540-87576-5/conten...

JCCP - Hettema Motivational interviewing for smoking cessation: A meta-analytic review 8_19_2011

Page 10 Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, Vol 78(6), Dec 2010, 868-884. Hettema, Jennifer E.; Hendricks, Peter S. Abstract Objective: Motivational interviewing (MI) is a treatment approach that has been widely examined as an intervention for tobacco dependence and is recommended in clinical practice guidelines. Previous reviews evaluating the efficacy of MI for smoking cessation noted effects that were modest in magnitude but included few studies. The current study is a comprehensive meta-analysis of MI for smoking cessation. Method: The meta-analysis included 31 controlled trials with an abstinence outcome variable. Studies with nonpregnant (N = 23) and pregnant samples (N = 8) were analyzed separately. Results: For nonpregnant samples, combined results suggest that MI significantly outperformed comparison conditions at long-term follow-up points (dc = .17). The magnitudes of this result represented a 2.3% difference in abstinence rates between MI and comparison groups. All analyses investigating the impact of moderating participant, intervention, and study design characteristics on outcome were nonsignificant, with the exception of studies including international, non-U.S. samples, which had larger effects overall. Several subgroups of studies had significant combined effect sizes, pointing to potentially promising applications of MI, including studies that had participants with young age, medical comorbidities, low tobacco dependence, and, consistent with clinical practice guidelines, low motivation or intent to quit. Effects were smaller among pregnant samples. In addition, significant combined effect sizes were observed among subgroups of studies that administered less than 1 hr of MI and among studies that reported high levels of treatment fidelity. Conclusions: The results are interpreted in light of other behavioral approaches to smoking cessation, and the public health implications of the findings are discussed. http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/ccp/78/6/868/

JCCP - Wagener Risk perception in smokers with children with asthma

Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, Vol 78(6), Dec 2010, 980-985. Wagener, Theodore L.; Gregor, Kristin L.; Busch, Andrew M.; McQuaid, Elizabeth L.; Borrelli, Belinda Abstract Objective: No studies have examined the relationship between caregiver beliefs about the risks of smoking to their own health and caregiver beliefs about the effect of their smoking on their child's health. In the current study, we investigated our proposed risk congruence hypothesis among caregivers who smoke. Specifically, we investigated whether caregivers' self-perceived risk of smoking is directly associated with their perception of the risks of smoking to their child. Method: The sample consisted of 271 regular smokers (≥3 cigarettes per day; Mage = 32.9 years; 214 women) who were caregivers of children with asthma (Mage = 4.9 years) who had a recent visit to the emergency room for their asthma. Three constructs of perceived risk were measured via self-report questionnaires assessing both caregiver perception of smoking risk to self and to child: Precaution Effectiveness, Optimistic Bias, and Perceived Vulnerability. Child asthmarelated functional morbidity and home and child secondhand smoke exposure were also assessed. Results: Consistent with our risk congruence hypothesis, self-perceived risk of smoking was significantly associated with perceived risk to child, over and above the child's secondhand smoke exposure and caregiver report of child's asthma symptoms (i.e., asthma-related functional morbidity). Conclusions: These findings should be considered in the design of clinical interventions seeking to influence risk of caregiver behavior on child health. http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/ccp/78/6/980/

J Relig Health - Singh Differences in Health and Religious Beliefs About Tobacco Use Among Waterpipe Users in the Rural Male Population of Egypt J Relig Health. 2010 Dec 2. [Epub ahead of print] Singh PN, Neergaard J, Job JS, Setouhy ME, Israel E, Mohammed MK, Loffredo CA. 8_19_2011

Page 11 Abstract Waterpipe use is a highly prevalent form of tobacco use in the Eastern Mediterranean Region that is rooted in long-held cultural traditions that predate the use of cigarettes and present a particular challenge for tobacco control efforts. We did a stratified sampling of 4,994 Egyptian men from rural households of Egypt in order to conduct an interviewer-administered prevalence survey to identify differences in attitudes and beliefs toward smoking and smoking cessation between waterpipe users, cigarette smokers, mixed users (cigarette + waterpipe), and non-smokers. We found that cigarette smokers, mixed users, and/or non-smokers were (1) two- to ninefold more likely to believe that smoking decreased adult life expectancy and harmed a fetus than waterpipe users, (2) significantly more likely to believe that smoking is a sin ("haram") than were waterpipe users. Among tobacco users, we found that cigarette smokers and/or mixed users were significantly more likely to indicate pre-contemplation, contemplation, or intention to quit tobacco than waterpipe users. Our findings from rural Egyptian men indicate that waterpipe users are distinct from cigarette smokers in their perception that their form of tobacco use is less harmful and/or less subject to religious proscription. These beliefs may explain why waterpipe users seem less inclined to quit their tobacco habit and need to be considered in the design of tobacco cessation and prevention methods in Egypt and the region. http://www.springerlink.com/content/104938/

J Rheumatol - Verstappen Disease Activity, Smoking, and Reproductive-related Predictors of Poor Prognosis in Patients with Very Early Inflammatory Polyarthritis J Rheumatol. 2010 Dec 1. [Epub ahead of print] Verstappen SM, McCoy MJ, Roberts C, Dale NE, Hassell AB, Symmons DP. Abstract OBJECTIVE: To identify disease activity, smoking, and reproductive-related predictors of a poor prognosis in patients with very early inflammatory polyarthritis (IP). METHODS: Patients with very early IP (symptom duration 4-11 weeks) included in our study were participants in the STIVEA (Steroids In Very Early Arthritis) randomized placebo-controlled trial. At baseline, disease-related variables were measured and patients were asked to complete a questionnaire covering smoking status and reproductive questions. Baseline predictors of poor prognosis [i.e., the need to start disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) therapy by 6 months or the clinical diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) at 12 months] were identified, applying logistic regression analyses adjusted for treatment group. RESULTS: Rheumatoid factor (RF) positivity was one of the strongest clinical predictors of a poor prognosis: OR for DMARD therapy at 6 months, 4.00 (95% CI 2.00-8.00) and OR for a diagnosis of RA at 12 months, 9.48 (95% CI 4.4820.07). There was a significant association between current smoking at baseline compared to never smoking and a diagnosis of RA at 12 months (OR 3.15, 95% CI 1.16-8.56). CONCLUSION: About 6 in 7 patients with very early RF-positive IP were diagnosed with RA 1 year later. In addition, 1 in 4 IP patients who smoke will develop RA later. It is recommended to treat RF-positive patients who have IP with DMARD at presentation and to advise patients to stop smoking. http://jrheum.org/content/early/2010/11/25/jrheum.100756.abs...

Mil Med - Cohen Veteran tobacco use, low-density lipoprotein, and glycated hemoglobin levels Mil Med. 2010 Nov;175(11):835-40. Cohen SM, Bellucci E. Abstract The deidentified electronic medical records of 1,452 veterans with a history of smoking and assigned to an outpatient Department of Veteran Affairs Medical Center were examined. Descriptive statistics and two repeated measures ANCOVA were performed to determine the demographic characteristics of the sample and the relationships between the independent variable of tobacco use group on the dependent variables of LDL cholesterol and HbA1c levels, during the years 2003 through 2007. There was no statistically significant relationship between tobacco use and LDL levels when 8_19_2011

Page 12 controlling for weight. There was a statistically significant difference in the tobacco use groups and HbA1c levels. Current smokers had higher HbA1c levels than did former smokers throughout the observational period, but the difference was statistically significant only for the years 2003 and 2007. Thus health care providers are challenged to monitor for cardiovascular risk factors, assist patients with smoking cessation, and prevent tobacco use. http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/amsus/zmm/2010/0000017...

N&TR - Balmford Adherence to and Reasons for Premature Discontinuation From Stop-Smoking Medications: Data From the ITC Four-Country Survey

Nicotine Tob Res (2010) doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntq215 First published online: December 8, 2010 James Balmford, Ph.D., Ron Borland, Ph.D., David Hammond, Ph.D. and K. Michael Cummings, Ph.D., M.P.H. Abstract Introduction: Nicotine replacement therapies (NRTs) have been demonstrated to be effective in clinical trials but may have lower efficacy when purchased over-the-counter (OTC). Premature discontinuation and insufficient dosing have been offered as possible explanations. The aims are to (a) investigate the prevalence of and reasons for premature discontinuation of stop-smoking medications (including prescription only) and (b) how these differ by type, duration of use, and source (prescription or OTC). Methods: The sample includes 1,219 smokers or recent quitters who had used medication in the last year (80.5% NRT, 19.5% prescription only). Data were from Waves 5 and 6 of the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Four-Country Survey. Results: Most of the sample (69.1%) discontinued medication use prematurely. This was more common among NRT users (71.4%) than in users of bupropion and varenicline (59.6%). OTC NRT users were particularly likely to discontinue (76.3%). Relapse back to smoking was the most common reason for discontinuation of medication reported by 41.6% of respondents. Side effects (18.3%) and believing that the medication was no longer needed (17.1%) were also commonly reported. Of those who completed treatment, 37.9% achieved 6-month continuous abstinence compared with 15.6% who discontinued prematurely. Notably, 65.6% who discontinued because they believed the medication had worked were abstinent. Conclusions: Premature discontinuation of stop-smoking medications is common but is not a plausible reason for poorer quit outcomes for most people. Encouraging persistence of medication use after relapse or in the face of minor side effects may help increase long-term cessation outcomes. http://ntr.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2010/12/08/ntr.n...

Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf - Log The association between smoking and subsequent repeated use of prescribed opioids among adolescents and young adults-a population-based cohort study Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2010 Dec 1. [Epub ahead of print] Log T, Hartz I, Handal M, Tverdal A, Furu K, Skurtveit S. Abstract BACKGROUND: The use of prescribed opioids for chronic non-cancer pain is increasing in many countries. It is, therefore, important to investigate predictors for repeated use of opioids in young non-cancer patients. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate adolescent smoking and its association with repeated use of prescription opioids in adolescents/young adults without cancer. METHODS: The study population consisted of 11,809 15-16 year old participants (86% participation rate) in the Norwegian Youth Health Surveys carried out in 2000-2003. The exposure variable, self reported smoking status, was registered in the youth surveys along with potential confounders. Repeated use of opioids, defined as 4+ prescriptions 8_19_2011

Page 13 recorded in the nationwide Norwegian Prescription Database during 2004-2008, was used as outcome measure. RESULTS: Among the participants included in our study, 161 had redeemed 4+ prescriptions for opioids. Daily adolescent smoking was associated with repeated use of opioids with an adjusted OR of 2.2 (95% CI 1.3-3.5). CONCLUSIONS: Daily smoking at 15-16 years of age was associated with increased risk of incident repeated use of prescribed opioids later in life. Our study suggests that smoking dependence in adolescents may predict longer lasting and/or higher levels of opioid use. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pds.2066/abstract

PLoS Med - Land A Longitudinal Study of Medicaid Coverage for Tobacco Dependence Treatments in Massachusetts and Associated Decreases in Hospitalizations for Cardiovascular Disease

PLoS Med 7(12): e1000375. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000375 Thomas Land, Nancy A. Rigotti, Douglas E. Levy, Mark Paskowsky, Donna Warner, Jo-Ann Kwass, LeAnn Wetherell, Lois Keithly

Abstract Background Insurance coverage of tobacco cessation medications increases their use and reduces smoking prevalence in a population. However, uncertainty about the impact of this coverage on health care utilization and costs is a barrier to the broader adoption of this policy, especially by publicly funded state Medicaid insurance programs. Whether a publicly funded tobacco cessation benefit leads to decreased medical claims for tobacco-related diseases has not been studied. We examined the experience of Massachusetts, whose Medicaid program adopted comprehensive coverage of tobacco cessation medications in July 2006. Over 75,000 Medicaid subscribers used the benefit in the first 2.5 years. On the basis of earlier secondary survey work, it was estimated that smoking prevalence declined among subscribers by 10% during this period. Methods and Findings Using claims data, we compared the probability of hospitalization prior to use of the tobacco cessation pharmacotherapy benefit with the probability of hospitalization after benefit use among Massachusetts Medicaid beneficiaries, adjusting for demographics, comorbidities, seasonality, influenza cases, and the implementation of the statewide smoke-free air law using generalized estimating equations. Statistically significant annualized declines of 46% (95% confidence interval 2%70%) and 49% (95% confidence interval 6%72%) were observed in hospital admissions for acute myocardial infarction and other acute coronary heart disease diagnoses, respectively. There were no significant decreases in hospitalizations rates for respiratory diagnoses or seven other diagnostic groups evaluated. Conclusions Among Massachusetts Medicaid subscribers, use of a comprehensive tobacco cessation pharmacotherapy benefit was associated with a significant decrease in claims for hospitalizations for acute myocardial infarction and acute coronary heart disease, but no significant change in hospital claims for other diagnoses. For low-income smokers, removing the barriers to the use of smoking cessation pharmacotherapy has the potential to decrease short-term utilization of hospital services. http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fj... Note: Full text PDF freely available from link immediately above.

PLoS Med - Lee Association of Secondhand Smoke Exposure with Pediatric Invasive Bacterial Disease and Bacterial Carriage: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis 8_19_2011

Page 14 PLoS Med 7(12): e1000374. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000374 Chien-Chang Lee, Nicole A. Middaugh, Stephen R. C. Howie, Majid Ezzati Abstract Background A number of epidemiologic studies have observed an association between secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure and pediatric invasive bacterial disease (IBD) but the evidence has not been systematically reviewed. We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis of SHS exposure and two outcomes, IBD and pharyngeal carriage of bacteria, for Neisseria meningitidis (N. meningitidis), Haemophilus influenzae type B (Hib), and Streptococcus pneumoniae (S. pneumoniae). Methods and Findings Two independent reviewers searched Medline, EMBASE, and selected other databases, and screened articles for inclusion and exclusion criteria. We identified 30 case-control studies on SHS and IBD, and 12 cross-sectional studies on SHS and bacterial carriage. Weighted summary odd ratios (ORs) were calculated for each outcome and for studies with specific design and quality characteristics. Tests for heterogeneity and publication bias were performed. Compared with those unexposed to SHS, summary OR for SHS exposure was 2.02 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.522.69) for invasive meningococcal disease, 1.21 (95% CI 0.692.14) for invasive pneumococcal disease, and 1.22 (95% CI 0.931.62) for invasive Hib disease. For pharyngeal carriage, summary OR was 1.68 (95% CI, 1.192.36) for N. meningitidis, 1.66 (95% CI 1.332.07) for S. pneumoniae, and 0.96 (95% CI 0.481.95) for Hib. The association between SHS exposure and invasive meningococcal and Hib diseases was consistent regardless of outcome definitions, age groups, study designs, and publication year. The effect estimates were larger in studies among children younger than 6 years of age for all three IBDs, and in studies with the more rigorous laboratory-confirmed diagnosis for invasive meningococcal disease (summary OR 3.24; 95% CI 1.726.13). Conclusions When considered together with evidence from direct smoking and biological mechanisms, our systematic review and meta-analysis indicates that SHS exposure may be associated with invasive meningococcal disease. The epidemiologic evidence is currently insufficient to show an association between SHS and invasive Hib disease or pneumococcal disease. Because the burden of IBD is highest in developing countries where SHS is increasing, there is a need for highquality studies to confirm these results, and for interventions to reduce exposure of children to SHS. http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fj... Note: Full text PDF freely available from link immediately above.

PHN - Cramer/Grossmann Landlord Attitudes and Behaviors Regarding Smoke-Free Policies: Implications for Voluntary Policy Change

Public Health Nursing Early View (Articles online in advance of print) Article first published online: 25 OCT 2010 Mary E. Cramer, Sara Roberts, Elizabeth Stevens Abstract Objective: The study purpose was to describe multiunit landlord attitudes and behaviors toward smoke-free policies. Design and Sample: This was a descriptive, cross-sectional survey of multiunit landlords in Douglas County (N=392). Measures: A 25-item survey was developed and pilot tested. It was administered by telephone (n=143) and mail (n=249) to multiunit landlords. Results: Combined response rate was 30.1% (81/143 telephone, 37/249 mail) representing 24,080 units on 974 properties 8_19_2011

Page 15 with 34,399 tenants. Most respondents (73.7%) allowed smoking. Reasons for not implementing smoke-free policies were potential enforcement problems (57.0%), tenant objections (43.0%), loss of market share (39.5%). Respondents without smoke-free policies expected vacancy (53.6%) and turnover (50.0%) rates to increase, which was significantly different (p <.0001) than respondents with smoke-free policies where only 10.7% reported increased vacancy and only 3.7% reported increased turnover. Conclusions: Expected adverse impacts of smoke-free policies do not reflect real experiences of smoke-free policy implementation. Public health advocates can use these study findings to develop community-based education and social marketing messages directed at voluntary smoke-free policy changes. Respondents without smoke-free policies expressed interest at the end of the survey in learning how to implement smoke-free policies indicating a readiness for change. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1525-1446.2010.... Also: Self-Reported Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Immigrants and Swiss Nationals http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1525-1446.2010....

Respirol - Lawson Relationship of endotoxin and tobacco smoke exposure to wheeze and diurnal peak expiratory flow variability in children and adolescents

Respirology Accepted Article (Accepted, unedited articles published online for future issues) Accepted manuscript online: 8 DEC 2010 Joshua A. Lawson, James A. Dosman, Donna C. Rennie, Jeremy Beach, Stephen C. Newman, Ambikaipakan Senthilselvan Abstract Background and objective: The relationship between endotoxin exposure and asthma severity (wheeze and airways obstruction) is not well described. The effects of endotoxin and tobacco smoke exposure on self- reported wheeze and diurnal PEF variability (DV-PEF) were examined in children aged 6-18 years with asthma or wheeze. Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed in a rural area. From this study, children who reported wheeze in the previous 12 months or a physician diagnosis of asthma (n= 98) were selected for a case-control study. These cases, who were the basis for the present analysis, completed a) a home environmental assessment, including dust collection to measure endotoxin levels, b) a clinic visit, including saliva collection to measure cotinine levels, and c) two-week monitoring of twice daily symptom records, including wheeze, and PEF to calculate DV-PEF. Results: Among these children, 22.4% reported wheeze during the monitoring period. Greater DV-PEF was associated with higher endotoxin loads in play areas (P < 0.05). The association between salivary cotinine levels and high DV-PEF was modified by gender. In females, higher cotinine levels were associated with an increased risk of high DV-PEF compared with lower cotinine levels (P < 0.05), but this was not observed among males. Conclusions: Higher endotoxin exposure was associated with greater DV-PEF among children with asthma or wheeze. While previous studies have suggested that endotoxin exposure protects against the development of asthma, individuals with the disease should avoid high exposure levels to limit exacerbations. The effect of tobacco smoke exposure on lung health may differ between male and female children.

SUMMARY AT A GLANCE Associations between domestic endotoxin exposures and wheezing symptoms and diurnal peak flow variation were examined among children with reported asthma or wheeze. The association between endotoxin exposure and exacerbations in children with asthma has been infrequently studied and the findings suggest that endotoxin exposure may worsen asthma in this group. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1440-1843.2010....

======================= 8_19_2011

Page 16 Stan Shatenstein Coordinator, GLOBALink NIMI News & Information Monitoring Initiative shatensteins@sympatico.ca GLOBALink NIMI & MJU http://member.globalink.org/nimi/us =======================

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"GLOBALink HQ" <hq@globalink.org> "Ross-Viles, Sarah" <Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov> 12/8/2010 5:26:26 AM GLOBALink NIMI Index - Wednesday 8 December 2010

News & Information Monitoring Initiative - Index Wednesday 8 December 2010 Sonja Johnston
Advertising & Sponsorship Pediatr: Leniency on R-rated movies linked to kids' smoking Eur J Risk Reg: Plain Tobacco Packaging 'Risks A Price War'
Reuters Medical News Today Bloomberg

US: Diseased-Lung Images May Not Deter Smoking, Study for FDA Shows Cessation

JAMA: Including smoking cessation program with treatment for PTSD shows higher rate of quitting Health & Science Br J Cancer: Fruit and vegetables do not reduce overall cancer risk, review concludes
The Guardian

EurekAlert!

Tob Control: e-Cigarettes Warning: Safety Evaluation Urgently Needed, Researchers Say Philippines: Baguio to show graphic images of cancer illness to discourage smoking Malaysia: Smoking Roll-Your-Own Jakok Is More Harmful Than Smoking Cigarettes Industry & Products US: Smokeless tobacco picking up steam Lawsuits India: Ciggy biggys smokescreen in landmark cancer case US: DC: E-Cigarettes Win Court Ruling
The New York Times CBC News Mumbai Mirror Chicago Tribune

Medical News Today

Philippine Daily Inquirer Bintulu.Org

US: NC: Chewing tobacco death leads to $5M settlement US: MA: Jury watches a dying smoker Legislation & Politics
The Boston Globe

Czech Republic: Cigarette, alcohol consumption lower in 2009

Prague Daily Monitor The Indian Express

India: Scarier pictorial images on cigarette packs deferred by a year India: Gutkha not to be sold in plastic pouches
Hindustan Times

Canada: $3.6-million anti-smoking campaign went up in smoke US: PA: Runyan funded by oil and tobacco interests in election win Secondhand Smoke

The Montreal Gazette The Philadelphia Inquirer

Uganda: Law against smoking in public places needs to be enforced Japan Smoking Ban: Wheres the Fire? Smuggling Canada: Wake up to contraband tobacco Youth Malta: Smoking by girls in Malta among Europe's highest
The Vancouver Sun The Wall Street Journal

The New Vision

Times of Malta

8_19_2011

Page 2 This digest was brought to you by GLOBALink Lost password - Unsubscribe

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Hamilton, Joy" "Ross-Viles, Sarah" <Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov> 12/9/2010 4:59:10 PM How about this?

At the December 16th King County Board of Health meeting, the board will be considering regulations related to electronic cigarettes. These regulations will help protect youth from starting to use electronic cigarettes and will reduce enforcement challenges for the smoking in public places and places of employment law. For more information, please see the staff report . Also on the agenda will be a Resolution calling on the state of Washington to provide dedicated and long-term financing so local public health jurisdictions can protect and improve the health of all community residents. Dr. David Fleming, the director of Public Health Seattle-King County will also give his annual report. There is an opportunity to make a public comment about the proposed regulations and resolution. Comments can be made in person at the beginning of the meeting or submitted in written form. For more details, please consult the Board of Health website . The Board of Health meeting will be at 9:30 am on December 16th in the King County Council Chambers (10th floor of the King County Courthouse, 516 3rd Avenue, Room 1001).

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject: I like it. Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> 12/9/2010 7:38:00 PM RE:

>_____________________________________________ >From: Hamilton, Joy >Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 3:30 PM >To: Ross-Viles, Sarah >Subject: > Next Thursday, December 16th, the King County Board of Health will have its monthly meeting. This is a fantastic opportunity to practice your advocacy skills and make your voice heard in a public meeting. The agenda for the meeting includes several items of interest to CPPW grantees: >1. Regulations relating to electronic smoking devices (also known as e-cigarettes) and unapproved nicotine delivery products. These regulations will help protect youth from starting to use electronic cigarettes and will reduce enforcement challenges for the smoking in public places and places of employment law. >2. A resolution calling on the state of Washington to provide dedicated and long-term financing so local public health jurisdictions can protect and improve the health of all community residents. >3. An annual report for Public Health Seattle-King County presented by the director, Dr. David Fleming > >For more information about any of these items, please see the meeting packet. . > >Comments can be made in person at the beginning of the meeting or submitted in written form. For more details, please consult the Board of Health website . > >The Board of Health meeting will be at 9:30 am on December 16th in the King County Council Chambers (10th floor of the King County Courthouse, 516 3rd Avenue, Room 1001). > Maybe who to go to with questions?

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross, Kathryn" To: "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> "Apa, James" <James.Apa@kingcounty.gov> "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> "Wood, Maria" <Maria.Wood@kingcounty.gov> Date: 12/10/2010 8:09:46 PM Subject: RE: Board of Health approves blueprint for a healthy King County Attachments: E Cig Rude Q.doc Here's a start to the Tough Questions doc - the questions are there, but we're working on the answers. Please let me know if you have any additions to the list of questions. Thanks! Katie -----Original Message----From: Neal, Scott Sent: Friday, December 10, 2010 4:05 PM To: Apa, James; Hamilton, Joy; Wood, Maria; Ross, Kathryn Cc: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: RE: Board of Health approves blueprint for a healthy King County thanks for the update James! ________________________________________ From: Apa, James Sent: Friday, December 10, 2010 4:03 PM To: Hamilton, Joy; Neal, Scott; Wood, Maria; Ross, Kathryn Cc: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: RE: Board of Health approves blueprint for a healthy King County Thanks, Joy. This is a great start, and I’ll review them over the weekend. I haven’t heard back from Bud, but P-I is going to delay the story until Tuesday, so we should be able to connect them on Monday. Katie will send around a rough Q& A shortly. _____________________________________________ From: Hamilton, Joy Sent: Friday, December 10, 2010 2:59 PM To: Apa, James; Neal, Scott; Wood, Maria; Ross, Kathryn Cc: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: RE: Board of Health approves blueprint for a healthy King County Here's some quick talking points: • E-cigarettes contain nicotine which is the same highly addictive substance in cigarettes. Even when marketed as not containing nicotine, FDA testing detected nicotine in all samples, except for one. • These products have a high appeal to youth. They are sold in convenience stores and mall kiosks and come in candy flavors. The FDA has warned that e cigarettes can increase nicotine addiction among young people and may lead youth to try conventional tobacco products. • Product testing by the FDA has also found detectable levels of known carcinogens and toxic chemicals to which users could potentially be exposed.
8_19_2011

Page 2

• E-cigarettes have made the Smoking in Public Places law difficult to enforce because of their resemblance to cigarettes. This has become a problem for business owners and several have contacted the health department with questions about how to handle this. • Public Health inspectors have observed use of electronic cigarettes in public can increase the likelihood that people will break the law by lighting up cigarettes because they see what appears to be someone smoking. I'm also including the addendum that Anne put together earlier this week in light of the latest court ruling. << File: Recent Federal Court Decision Regarding One E.doc >> Please let me know if you need anything else. Joy _____________________________________________ From: Apa, James Sent: Friday, December 10, 2010 2:03 PM To: Hamilton, Joy; Neal, Scott; Wood, Maria; Ross, Kathryn Subject: RE: Board of Health approves blueprint for a healthy King County I think a draft “ta da” by Tuesday would be OK. Right now, could you take a first shot at 3 - 5 top level talking points on the proposed regulation that Bud could use this afternoon or Monday. One we’ve already discussed is the “reasonable regulation to protect kids now, even as FDA looks at further regulation” Katie will work up some tough questions that we can flesh out answers for early next week. _____________________________________________ From: Hamilton, Joy Sent: Friday, December 10, 2010 1:13 PM To: Apa, James; Neal, Scott; Wood, Maria; Ross, Kathryn Subject: RE: Board of Health approves blueprint for a healthy King County When do you need the "ta da" press release draft? _____________________________________________ From: Apa, James Sent: Friday, December 10, 2010 1:07 PM To: Neal, Scott; Hamilton, Joy; Wood, Maria; Ross, Kathryn Subject: RE: Board of Health approves blueprint for a healthy King County Hi, all. To follow up, I’ll be issuing the BOH release today. Vanessa Ho from the P-I has already found it on our web site, so we should expect this to spin up fast. I’m going to call her back a little later today and see where she’s at. Ideally, we could push toward Monday and have Bud talk with her then, but if she’s determined to roll this out today, it’s in our best interest to have him available now. Maria – do you have his phone number? I haven’t had time to work on the tough questions, but will send some around later today. -James

_____________________________________________ From: Apa, James Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 6:23 PM
8_19_2011

Page 3

To: Neal, Scott; Hamilton, Joy; Wood, Maria; Ross, Kathryn Subject: FW: Board of Health approves blueprint for a healthy King County Hi, Scott, Joy and Maria. Thanks for the meeting today. To recap tasks for next week, here’s what I have: • Draft media release – thanks for taking the first cut, Joy and Scott. AS a template, below is a recent example of a “ta da” release from the Board. • Talking points/Q&A – I’ll send you some draft questions • Lead when I’m out -- Katie will be point from Tuesday on next week. Please include her in our e-mail loops. • Staff report – thanks for sending to me. • Heads up to Exec and Mayor – Mayor through Jerry, I’ll notify Frank and Christine. • Bud as media lead – He’s a go. Thanks for contacting him, Maria. • E-cigarettes props – program working to get them • Recruiting and coordinating testimony from local partners – program working on it

Am I missing anything? Thanks, -James

_____________________________________________ From: King County Council Communications Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 4:14 PM Subject: Board of Health approves blueprint for a healthy King County << OLE Object: Picture (Metafile) >> Contact: Julia Patterson 206-296-1005 julia.patterson@kingcounty.gov

September 16, 2010 Board of Health approves blueprint for a healthy King County Guidelines seen as outline to assist communities in land use and transportation planning decisions The King County Board of Health today passed a resolution approving and supporting the 2010 Board of Health Guidelines: Planning for Healthy Communities, intended to inform land use and transportation planning decisions to
8_19_2011

Page 4

promote healthy living throughout King County. “Our environment, such as our roads, walking paths and economic infrastructure, has a significant impact on the physical, mental and social well-being of the people in our communities” said Julia Patterson, Chair of the King County Board of Health. “These guidelines are intended to help local jurisdictions ensure that their land use planning decisions do not compromise the public’s health, and to serve as a reminder that planning issues remain at the root of some of the most widespread public health problems like obesity and substance abuse.” The Board of Health has been actively promoting the goals of healthy eating and active living since 2005 with the King County Overweight Prevention Initiative and other efforts, after an increasing body of evidence has shown that effective land use and transportation planning decisions can help create environments that allow people to be physically active, eat healthy food, and live in safe and healthy places. The Board’s planning for Healthy Communities guidelines are intended to inform land use and transportation planners working at regional, county, and city levels of actions. The guidelines include: • Physical Activity: Residents in all communities in King County have access to safe and convenient opportunities for physical activity and exercise. • Nutrition: Residents in all communities in King County have access to healthy, affordable foods. • Harmful Environmental Exposures: Residents in all communities in King County are protected from exposure to harmful environmental agents and infectious diseases. • Injury: o Residents in all communities in King County use transportation systems designed to prevent driver, bicyclist and pedestrian injuries. o Residents in all communities in King County live in safe communities free from violence and fear of violence. • Tobacco Use: Residents in all communities in King County are protected from involuntary exposure to second hand tobacco smoke and children cannot access tobacco products. • Alcohol Use: Residents in all communities in King County are protected from negative impacts of alcohol. • Mental Health and Well-being: Residents in all communities in King County benefit from community design that maximizes opportunities for social connectivity and stress reduction. • Access to Health Care: Residents in all communities in King County have local access to health care services. Urban planning and public health have been linked for nearly a century, starting from the need to prevent infectious disease outbreaks in the early 1900’s. More recently public health agencies, including the King County Board of Health, have returned to a focus on urban design as it becomes more apparent that “place” does matter and that the leading causes of death and disability are linked to the environments where we live, work, learn and play. In 2008, the Puget Sound Regional Council adopted VISION 2040, the growth management, environmental, economic, and transportation strategy for the Central Puget Sound Region which contains strategies for promoting the well-being of people and communities, economic vitality, and a healthy environment. Within VISION 2040, the Built Environment and Health section includes broad goal and policies to serve as a platform for counties and cities as they continue to integrate knowledge of public health impacts into their planning activities.
8_19_2011

Page 5

The Board of Health, based on its function to promote and improve public health for all King County residents, determined this an opportune time to provide additional guidance and detail as jurisdictions work to include the VISION 2040 policies on the built environment and health into their planning processes. The Board of Health supports the reintegration of public health into planning decisions as an important strategy to ensure that all people and communities have the opportunity to make healthy choices regardless of their income, education or ethnic background.

###

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> 12/10/2010 6:51:00 PM RE: Can you guys check this website?

Joy and I just talked about talking points. Did not know it was specific to SIPP. Joy - can you elaborate that point to include 1) Difficulty for business owners and the fact that we have received questions about it and 2) Observation that when someone "lights" an e-cig, people smoking cigarettes gather around/ Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211 -----Original Message----From: Neal, Scott Sent: Friday, December 10, 2010 2:37 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Can you guys check this website? thanks. FYI..I just spoke with James Apa...apparently Seattle PI (Vanessa) has contacted him about the E-cig BOH regulations...specifically about the public places restrictions. Sounds like I might be talking with her today or possibly James will, but I told him I'm available by phone. I'll update you if I do. Scott ________________________________________ From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Friday, December 10, 2010 2:32 PM To: Neal, Scott Subject: FW: Can you guys check this website? Multiple reports saying nothing doing. Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

______________________________________________ From: Holt, Lauren Sent: Friday, December 10, 2010 2:13 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Brawley, Karen; Greto, Lindsey; Ryan, Molly Subject: RE: Can you guys check this website?
8_19_2011

Page 2

Nope, not on my end at least.

_____________________________________________ From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Friday, December 10, 2010 2:11 PM To: Holt, Lauren; Brawley, Karen; Greto, Lindsey; Ryan, Molly Subject: Can you guys check this website?

Please DO NOT TAKE ACTION. But, can you check this site and let me know if you see it mysteriously prepopulated with Joy's info? http://action.tobaccofreekids.org/site/R?i=cDDFBafvkz2-u_g-4ftlkQ AGAIN - DO NOT TAKE ACTION.

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Sadow-Hasenberg, Nicole" <Nicole.Sadow-Hasenberg@kingcounty.gov> "Krieger, James" <James.Krieger@kingcounty.gov> "Kellogg, Ryan" <Ryan.Kellogg@kingcounty.gov> Date: 12/14/2010 10:19:57 PM Subject: RE: Healthy King County Newsletter Hi all, Love the new look! One fact-check:- while there are 11 packs in the Break Free Campaign, only 10 of them feature cities (so need to change 10 other cities to 9 other cities). Looking forward to the release, Sarah ________________________________________ From: Sadow-Hasenberg, Nicole Sent: Monday, December 13, 2010 6:03 PM To: Krieger, James; Kellogg, Ryan; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Valenzuela, Matias; Ross, Kathryn Subject: FW: Healthy King County Newsletter Please send comments our way by 10 am on Wednesday! Sorry for the duplicate emails. Thanks! Nicole ________________________________ From: Ross, Kathryn Sent: Monday, December 13, 2010 6:01 PM To: Sadow-Hasenberg, Nicole Subject: Healthy King County Newsletter Having trouble viewing this email? Click here

Healthy King County Newsletter Communities Putting Prevention to Work December 2010

Welcome to the inaugural edition of the Healthy King County newsletter. Each month, we'll provide you updates on the good work of CPPW-funded projects across King County, as well as policy updates related to tobacco and obesity prevention, local education campaigns and links to recent news articles. Please share with your colleagues and let us know if you have any feedback or suggestions.

Camel uses Seattle to sell cigarettes

8_19_2011

Page 2

Camel brand cigarettes, which is owned by RJ Reynolds (RJR), has launched a new marketing campaign to recruit young smokers that exploits the image and vitality of the Seattle area to sell a highly addictive, deadly product. [https://origin.ih.constantcontact.com/fs018/1104013503905/img/7.png] Camel's Seattle cigarette pack depicts iconic sites including Pike Place Market & Mt. Rainier.

Cause for concern This "Break Free Adventure" campaign is using iconic images from Seattle and 10 other cities to sell their cigarettes. The campaign exploits our city's vibrant and alternative culture in an attempt to make Camel cigarettes appear cool, fun and rebellious - themes which resonate with youth.

Exposure to campaigns like this increases the chance that a young person will start smoking. This poses a significant threat to our local and national tobacco prevention efforts.

"We've cut the smoking rate in half in just the last decade in King County, and it has proved its worth in lives and money saved. We can't take a step backward by allowing predatory marketing campaigns to lure kids into tobacco addiction," said King County Board of Health Chair Julia Patterson.

Advocates call on RJR to end campaign Many tobacco prevention and control groups and organizations, as well as elected officials, are outraged by this campaign and are demanding that RJR end this promotion immediately. In their statement, the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids describes this campaign as evidence that RJR "has not changed" and "is continuing its longstanding efforts to make the Camel brand appealing to youth." In a letter sent directly to RJR, the National Association of Attorney Generals asks that the campaign be terminated immediately "out of concern for America's youth."

Local and state officials also voiced opposition to this campaign. Governor Christine Gregoire released a statement calling on RJR to "halt their cynical campaign and not use our local landmarks for their gain." Other political leaders including King County Executive Dow Constantine and Board of Health Chair Julia Patterson released statements echoing her sentiments.

Public Health - Seattle & King County demands that Camel end this campaign immediately. We invite our community partners to join us in this effort and speak out against this atrocity. Ways to take action include: * Write a letter directly to R.J. Reynolds * Educate others about the dangers of this type of campaign via letters to the editor, op-eds, blogs, etc. * Sign this petition.

Sugar-loaded beverages campaign

[https://origin.ih.constantcontact.com/fs018/1104013503905/img/2.png]
8_19_2011

Page 3

Public Health has recently launched a new campaign to educate county residents about the health impacts of consuming sugar-loaded beverages. And we need your help getting the word out!

The new education campaign is aimed at parents and features local online ads, a new video in English and Spanish, and downloadable posters in seven languages. The campaign builds on materials developed in New York City.

What can you do to help spread the word? Share the video with your friends and families via email or Facebook. Reach out to your friends and colleagues who work in schools, physician's offices, day care centers or other places with lots of kids to make sure they've seen the downloadable posters. Let your friends and neighbors know about the new campaign.

Sugar-loaded beverages are exactly what they sound like: drinks with added sugars such as soda pop, energy drinks and sweetened fruit drinks. These sugars translate into "empty" calories without any nutritional value that our bodies don't need. These calories can lead to weight gain and long-term health problems, including Type 2 diabetes and high blood pressure.

Nearly one in three children in middle and high school in King County is overweight or obese. Sugar-loaded beverages pose potential health risks for kids, including overweight and obesity, tooth decay, and osteoporosis and brittle bones.

What should people drink instead? Public Health recommends water adn 1% or non-fat milk.

Click here for more information.

Seattle churches use CPPW funds to create a legacy of health

Pastors are taking an active role learning about and advocating for policy changes to promote health in their churches.

On Tuesday, Nov. 16, pastors from the six churches working on the CPPW project "Moving Together in Faith and Health" met at the Douglass Truth Library in central Seattle. Churches funded through CPPW to promote the well being of their congregations include First A.M.E., Tabernacle Missionary Baptist, Immaculate Conception, New Direction Baptist, Goodwill Missionary Baptist and Mt. Zion Baptist. These six churches serve mostly African American populations and a large percentage of persons from working class and fixed-income backgrounds.

Church pastors, church leaders and Dr. Doris Boutain from the University of Washington's School of Nursing collaboratively developed the idea to work directly with pastors, "church change teams," and Schools of Nursing at
8_19_2011

Page 4

the University of Washington, Seattle University, and Seattle Pacific University. The goal is to implement policy, environment and systems change. Each church change team includes two youth, a lead from the health ministry, a lead cook/chef, and a lead from the children/youth program. Pastors provide leadership and encouragement to the church change teams by championing recommended changes. [https://origin.ih.constantcontact.com/fs018/1104013503905/img/1.jpg] Dr. Jim Kreiger, Public Health, addresses change teams

Early accomplishments of this CPPW project include two churches removing soda machines within the first few months of grant implementation. Congratulations to Goodwill Missionary Baptist and New Direction Missionary Baptist! For more information about this project please contact Dr. Doris Boutain.

CPPW projects hard at work to improve nutrition and physical activity at child care centers

[https://origin.ih.constantcontact.com/fs018/1104013503905/img/4.gif]A CPPW-funded project through the Coalition for Safety and Health and Early Learning (C-SHEL) is working to adopt stricter standards for nutrition, physical activity and screen time with child-care centers run by the City of Seattle and the Seattle Housing Authority. The enhanced standards will provide more detail about how to put together healthy meals for children in child-care centers. Right now the regulations are vague, requiring only that dairy, grain, and fruit and/or vegetables be served at every meal.

The City of Seattle is also surveying their staff about attitudes and thoughts around nutrition standards. C-SHEL has been training staff to help train others. C-SHEL is also looking best practices in other states, limiting juice intake, and regulating screen time.

Further, the CPPW child care work group has been active, currently thinking about how to revise regulations for healthy child-care settings.

CPPW in King County Communities Putting Prevention to Work (CPPW) is a national initiative to prevent chronic disease and promote health through policy, systems and environment changes.

In spring 2010, Public Health - Seattle & King County was awarded two CPPW grants, one for
8_19_2011

Page 5

tobacco prevention ($9.9 million)and the other for obesity prevention ($15.5 million). Obesity and tobacco use contribute to the leading causes of death in our region. Public Health awarded most of the CPPW dollars to external partners, such as school districts, media organizations, community-based agencies, and local governments. Our partners are implementing long lasting changes that improve nutrition and physical activity and decrease tobacco use and exposure. Ultimately, these changes will make King County a place where the healthy choice is the easy one, and the unhealthy one difficult. This will reduce chronic diseases and potentially millions of dollars in medical spending. The focus is on the communities with the greatest needs.

Get Connected

[https://origin.ih.constantcontact.com/fs018/1104013503905/img/5.png] HealthyKingCounty.org is a new online tool provided by Public Health - Seattle & King County for CPPW partners to network, share resources and calendars and stay up-to-date on current CPPW work.

Through the new website, you can find out about CPPW projects throughout King County, identify who is working on similar issues, and discuss ideas and challenges. You'll also find a range of resources.

Need some expert assistance with your CPPW project? Check out the CPPW Technical Assistance Guide to find out what help is available to you. Want posters in Chinese from the sugar-loaded beverage campaign? They are available in six languages in the Resources section. Even better, share some of the work you're doing by posting to the site or uploading materials that you've developed.

Join us for a webinar on Thursday, Jan. 6, 2011 from 10-11 a.m. for additional training on using the site. You can access the webinar from any location where there's a phone and online access. For more information, contact Meredith Li-Vollmer.

[http://img.constantcontact.com/letters/images/1101093164665/jmml_opgr1_img1.gif] Board of Health to consider e-cigarette regulations

[https://origin.ih.constantcontact.com/fs018/1104013503905/img/3.gif] On Thursday, Dec. 16, the King County Board of Health will consider electronic cigarette regulations.

Electronic cigarettes are battery-operated devices that deliver vaporized nicotine instead of burning tobacco. These products are available to buy online, at smoke shops and at mall kiosks.
8_19_2011

Page 6

The Board of Health will consider several regulations including prohibiting sales to minors, prohibiting free samples, and prohibiting the use of these products in places where smoking is prohibited by law.

This proposal is being brought to the board on behalf of the Tobacco Policy Committee, which is supported by CPPW Tobacco Prevention staff. In the news

Has your CPPW project been in the news lately? Send us the clip.

Sugar-loaded beverages Sweetened beverages target of health campaign, KPLU, Nov. 29

Tobacco Prevention Walk a mile for a Camel? Not in my state, Gregoire says, Seattle P-I, Nov. 30 Cigarette campaign draws fire from Washington leaders, KPLU, Dec. 1

Forward email [https://imgssl.constantcontact.com/letters/images/safe_unsubscribe_logo.gif] This email was sent to kathryn.ross@kingcounty.gov by kathryn.ross@kingcounty.gov. Update Profile/Email Address | Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe™ | Privacy Policy. Email Marketing by [https://imgssl.constantcontact.com/letters/images/cc-logo-color-sm.gif] Public Health - Seattle & King County | 401 5th Ave., Ste. 1300 | CNK-PH-1300 | Seattle | WA | 98104

THIS IS A TEST EMAIL ONLY.
8_19_2011

Page 7

This email was sent by the author for the sole purpose of testing a draft message. If you believe you have received the message in error, please contact the author by replying to this message. Constant Contact takes reports of abuse very seriously. If you wish to report abuse, please forward this message to abuse@constantcontact.com.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> 12/16/2010 8:25:00 PM RE: Clarizen

Yes, let's. Want to find a time after I am back - or on the phone while I am gone? Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

>_____________________________________________ >From: Hamilton, Joy >Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2010 3:55 PM >To: Ross-Viles, Sarah >Subject: RE: Clarizen > >Sarah, >I know I'm kind of the odd woman out on this one. A lot of my work is related to the CAP but isn't in Clarizen yet. I'm planning to prioritize the youth access campaign plan now that I'm done with e-cigs and that will eventually be put into Clarizen but, as we've seen, things change a lot and often. > >Should we sit down and figure this out? > >Joy > >_____________________________________________ >From: Ross-Viles, Sarah >Sent: Monday, December 13, 2010 11:58 AM >To: Brawley, Karen; Moreno, Emma; Greto, Lindsey; Ryan, Molly >Cc: Hamilton, Joy; Holt, Lauren >Subject: Clarizen > >Hi Folks > >Thanks for all the work you have done in Clarizen to date! I have been pulling all the projects into A big Tobacco CAP project and it is really great to line all the projects up and see status in one place. If you have not finished entering your projects - please do so this week. Let me know if you need support meeting this deadline. > >Thanks, >Sarah > >Sarah Ross-Viles >CPPW Tobacco Project Manager >Public Health - Seattle & King County >Suite 900 401 5th Avenue >Seattle, WA 98102
8_19_2011

Page 2

>(206) 263-8211 >

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:
Hi Sarah,

"Mahoney, Maggie" <maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu> "Ross-Viles, Sarah" <Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov> 12/16/2010 5:48:13 PM RE: Wrapping up Contract

Is there anything I can do on my end to help with this process? Just so you know, our offices are closed the last week of December, so hopefully we can wrap things up next week! Im hopeful! J Thanks, Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Mahoney, Maggie Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2010 9:47 AM To: 'Ross-Viles, Sarah' Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Wrapping up Contract That all looks fine, Sarah. Thanks. Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 4:26 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: Wrapping up Contract Hi Maggie, While I am waiting for the letter from our contracts office, I would like to make sure we are ready to get the contract in the our system. I accepted the changes to the last revised scope, and have attached a budget with a guesstimated 3 year spread. Depending on the COI letter, we may not be able to start until January (as the scope currently says). In which case, we will change the budget. Hopefully, we will be instead changing the scope and getting your help with some items this month. So, please take a look at these documents and let me know if they look fine except for having the actual start date. When I get the draft letter I will send it right along. Hopefully you can confirm it and we can execute this one. 8_19_2011

Page 2 Sound like a plan? please let me know of any questions. Thanks, Sarah From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2010 2:34 PM To: 'Mahoney, Maggie' Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Hi Maggie, Our compliance and contracts had some issues with this draft and our taking the opportunity to craft their own draft, which I will forward when I obtain it. Sarah Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 10:35 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Thanks for checking on this Sarah. Ive attached a draft letter to address the conflict issue. Do you want to see whether thats sufficient? Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 6:19 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Maggie- My understanding is that budgeting into calendar years is something we must do on our end, even if we expect we may amend them. Mark - is that correct? Or is there a way to do a consulting contract in amount only? Sarah

8_19_2011

Page 3

From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 3:05 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Great, thanks Sarah. I will put together a letter that copies the language of the contract and send it to you for review. A December 1 start date sounds good, and I look forward to wrapping up the contracting process, as I know you do, too! In the meantime, I accepted the changes in the draft scope of work, with one exception. I thought, based on our exchange from last week, that we werent going to allocate time to particular time periods so that we had flexibility throughout the remaining 15 months, since it would be hard to predict the ebb and flow of work. If that is still okay with you, I deleted the table in the draft scope of work because it just allocated funding over the life of the project and replaced it with a simple paragraph explaining that well invoice you and youll pay us, as the contract says, that our fee is $175 per hour, up to a maximum of $25,000 total. Ive attached it for your review. After I did that, I opened the budget document and see that the template had a lot of stuff that doesnt apply to this contract (e.g., supplies, fringe benefits, etc.). I simplified it to match the content that is in the scope of work. Ive attached it for your review. Please let me know how those two things look and, as I said, Ill draft a letter to match the contract language concerning the conflict issue. Thanks! Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 2:59 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Hi Maggie - I have the go-ahead that the letter can copy the language of the contract. I do not think it needs to contain much more than that. Thus, it looks like we are in the home stretch. Are you able to put that together to have in hand while we process the contract? The changes to the scope of work look fine to me, I made changes to the budget as discussed. I put December 1 as a start date. A contractor can begin work they will bill for as soon as we have an agreed upon scope of work. I chose the 1st to allow time to put the decision-making safeguards in place. I do know we will want your help in December in preparing for the leg session. Does this work for you? I am also attaching the template we use for contract budgets. I was not sure if you had other expenses besides the hourly fee. Please populate this template as part of the contract. If you need any assistance, Lauren Holt (cc'd above) is an ace. We will start processing the contract - getting Department and County approval - when we finalize these pieces. I will work on the safeguards.

8_19_2011

Page 4 Thanks for bearing with us, Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 10:16 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: FW: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Hi Sarah, This reminded me to ask you whether we should touch base on the contract. Is there anything else you need from me at this point? I have some time available this week to connect via phone, if youd like. Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 10:51 AM To: Schaibley, David Cc: Armstrong, Kate; Cork, Kerry; Mahoney, Maggie; Blanke, Doug Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Many, many thanks to all of you at TCLC! I really appreciate having so many sets of wonderful eyes to review our draft and to provide such helpful input. I am incorporating many of your comments, and will send a draft off to our county prosecutor's office this morning. This item will go to a vote by our Board of Health on December 16. I'll keep you posted on our progress. Thanks again!! Anne Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov

8_19_2011

Page 5 From: Schaibley, David [mailto:David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 12:59 PM To: Pearson, Anne Cc: Armstrong, Kate; Cork, Kerry; Mahoney, Maggie; Blanke, Doug Subject: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation

Dear Anne: Attached please find our thoughts on Seattle/King Countys proposed e-cigarette regulation. We hope these thoughts are helpful. Please let us know if you are in need of any assistance in the future. Sincerely, Dave

David J. Schaibley |Public Health Law Center Staff Attorney, Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 651-695-7611 | Fax: 651-290-7515 david.schaibley@wmitchell.edu 875 Summit Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 www.TCLConline.org The Tobacco Control Legal Consortium provides information and technical assistance on issues related to tobacco and public health. The Consortium does not provide legal representation or advice. This e-mail should not be considered legal advice or a substitute for obtaining legal advice from an attorney who can represent you. If you have specific legal questions, we recommend that you consult with an attorney familiar with the laws of your jurisdiction.

From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 10:13 AM To: Schaibley, David; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation Great! Thanks so much. Anne Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov

From: Schaibley, David [mailto:David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 7:24 AM To: Pearson, Anne; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation

Hi Anne: Just a quick update to let you know that well have our input to you today. Dave
From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 8:41 AM To: Schaibley, David; Mahoney, Maggie 8_19_2011

Page 6 Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation We would like to send a draft to our Prosecuting Attorneys Office by Monday or Tuesday of next week. If we could incorporate your comments before sending, that would be ideal. But if that's too tight, we can still fold in your comments after we send it to her. Thanks!

From: Schaibley, David [David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 4:04 AM To: Pearson, Anne; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation Hello Anne: Thanks for forwarding it; we'll share our thoughts. When we spoke last week you mentioned a relatively tight time frame for this effort...can you let us know when you need our input by? Enjoy your long weekend, Dave From: Pearson, Anne [Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 6:55 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie; Schaibley, David Subject: Draft E-cigarette regulation Hi Maggie and David, I hope you are both well. I was wondering if you might have the time to review a draft regulation restricting the sale of eproducts (attached). Our Board of Health is not proposing to go so far as to prohibit their sale entirely, but is interested in restricting their availability to youth. If you have a chance to take a look, I would love to hear your thoughts. I'll be out of the office for the rest of the week but back on Monday. All the best, Anne

______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________
8_19_2011

Page 7

This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject: Attachments:
Hi Mike,

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Waldmiller, J. Mike \(CDC/ONDIEH/NCCDPHP\)" <aii3@cdc.gov> 12/17/2010 4:46:00 PM Follow-ups from Call SeaKing.Tob.CAP.16.doc

Here is the press release on the e-cig regulation. I am also attaching the updated Obj. 16 College Dissemination Milestones. Thanks, Sarah

From: Ross, Kathryn Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2010 5:34 PM Subject: Media Release: Board of Health approves electronic cigarette regulations

cid:image001.png@01CB9D41.1CE250A0

Contact: Julia Patterson 206-296-1005, julia.patterson@kingcounty.gov December 16, 2010

Board of Health approves electronic cigarette regulations
Regulations will limit sales to adults only, prohibit free samples, and restrict use in public places and places of employment

King County, WA—The King County Board of Health passed regulations today to protect King County youth from electronic smoking devices and unregulated nicotine delivery devices. The Board of Health voted unanimously to: restrict the sales of e-cigarettes or any other unapproved nicotine delivery devices only to people 18 and older; prohibit free or highly discounted electronic smoking devices or unapproved nicotine delivery products; prohibit the use of e-cigarette devices in places where smoking is prohibited by law. “I am pleased that the Board of Health acted today to prohibit the sale of e-cigarettes to youth and to restrict their use in public spaces,” said Board of Health Chair Julia Patterson. “Ecigarettes are used as a means to encourage people, especially our youth, to begin smoking. Their safety and long-term health impacts are untested and unknown. The Board of Health’s responsibility is to create policies that foster the health and well being of our community, and today’s action will help achieve that objective.” Electronic smoking devices, commonly known as “e-cigarettes,” are battery-operated devices designed to look like and to be used in the same manner as conventional cigarettes. E-cigarettes use cartridges to deliver vaporized nicotine, the same highly addictive drug that’s in tobacco.
8_19_2011

Page 2

The FDA is investigating e-cigarettes, but the products are currently unregulated at the federal level. “This Board of Health proposal is a reasonable step to protect youth immediately in King County while federal authorities continue to look into these products,” said Dr. David Fleming, Director and Health Officer for Public Health – Seattle & King County. “Through this regulation, young people in King County have one less opportunity to get hooked on nicotine.” E-cigarettes have a high appeal to youth. They are sold in convenience stores and mall kiosks and come in candy flavors including chocolate, vanilla and mint. The FDA has warned that ecigarettes can increase nicotine addiction among young people and may lead youth to try conventional tobacco products. "The Board of Health's action will help protect our youth from the addictive effects of nicotine," said Boardmember Dr. Bud Nicola. “The Board of Health heard from a number of people who use these as an alternative to real cigarettes, and there may be a harm-reduction role,” said Boardmember and Seattle City Councilmember Sally Clark. “But nicotine remains addictive, and the steps we took today are about protecting youth.” As these products have become more widely available, public use has also increased. Ecigarettes mimic the appearance of regular cigarettes because the user exhales a smoke-like vapor similar in appearance to the exhaled smoke from a cigarette. Their use is virtually indistinguishable from the use of traditional tobacco products in public, which leads to confusion and prompts people to light and smoke traditional tobacco products. “No matter how it’s delivered, nicotine is highly addictive. We took an important step today to keep these unknown products out of the hands of kids in King County,” said Boardmember and Lake Forest Park Mayor David Hutchinson. The Board of Health convened a Tobacco Policy committee in June 2010 to review the evidence and develop new tobacco policies that respond to current policy opportunities and disparities in King County. Today’s regulations were endorsed by the committee members. Several other jurisdictions across the nation have created similar regulations related to ecigarettes but it is believed that King County’s regulations are the most comprehensive in the nation. The King County Board of Health sets county-wide public health policy, enacts and enforces local public health regulations, and carries out other duties of local boards of health specified in state law. These duties include enforcing state public health statutes, preventing and controlling the spread of infectious disease, abating nuisances, and establishing fee schedules for licenses, permits and other services. ###

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Bud Nicola" <bnicola@u.washington.edu> "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> Date: 12/17/2010 3:24:00 PM Subject: RE: Hot topics webinar
Thanks Bud and Scott - You can keep myself and Joy on this email chain for Sarah's communications in January and we will pick-up if Scott is out being a new dad. Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Bud Nicola [mailto:bnicola@u.washington.edu] Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 10:35 AM To: Neal, Scott Cc: Sarah Paliulis; Ross-Viles, Sarah; Hamilton, Joy Subject: Hot topics webinar

Thanks, Scott, and congratulations on the new baby! He or she will certainly keep you busy. The date of the webinar is February 22nd from noon to 1 pm. We have the speaker sign in at 11:30 am to test the system and hang on for a few minutes afterward to evaluate how it went. It is ideal if we can get slides for the session 3 weeks in advance (Feb 1) so the NW Center instructional designer can help adapt them for webinar interaction. We usually also have an orientation to the i-link webinar system about a week before the webinar. Sarah Paliulis helps coordinate everything. Sarah or I will be back in touch in January with more information. Bud bnicola@uw.edu via Blackberry
From: Neal, Scott [mailto:Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 08:08 AM To: Bud Nicola Subject: RE: E-cig media call Hi Bud, Yes, we are definitely fighting what seems to be a loosing battle over funding, but that being said, I think we could commit to helping out. I say we because I'm not sure I can commit personally given my wife and I are expecting a baby Jan. 28th, so I may not be very available through February. But I'm sure that if I can't do this, I would highly recommend Sarah or Joy as alternates and I would imagine both would be happy to help. I will talk with both of them today about this and we'll get back with you to confirm. Thanks Scott

From: Bud Nicola [mailto:bnicola@u.washington.edu] Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2010 4:07 PM To: Neal, Scott 8_19_2011

Page 2 Subject: RE: E-cig media call Scott, You’re welcome. And thanks for the great work that you and your staff do. On a different topic – I moderate a monthly webinar for the Northwest Center for Public Health Practice called “Hot Topics in Preparedness” although we cover many different areas of public health. Would you be willing to help out on a session in February related to an update on issues related to tobacco? I think our work today will be of interest to other health departments. I’m also trying to find someone from another state in this region since the webinar is regional and am sending a query to health dept friends in Montana. It’s probably not fair to ask you since the program’s funding is up in the air – so I would certainly understand if you can’t commit. Bud Bud Nicola bnicola@uw.edu

From: Neal, Scott [mailto:Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2010 3:40 PM To: Bud Nicola; Ross, Kathryn Cc: Wood, Maria Subject: RE: E-cig media call Hi Bud, Thanks for taking that interview and for all your work and support on this issue over the past several months (especially the past week!). Scott

From: Bud Nicola [mailto:bnicola@u.washington.edu] Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2010 3:38 PM To: Ross, Kathryn Cc: Neal, Scott; Wood, Maria Subject: RE: E-cig media call Fyi - I talked to Matt Lube at the Stranger and am not expecting a very supportive story. Bud Nicola bnicola@uw.edu

From: Ross, Kathryn [mailto:Kathryn.Ross@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2010 12:51 PM To: Bud Nicola Subject: E-cig media call Importance: High Hi Bud, Are you able to give the Stranger a call this afternoon re: the e-cigarette regulation? The reporter's name is Matt Lube 206-323-7101 x3016. His question is, "what's the rationale for the ban." Please let me know if you're not able to do this, and I'll check in w/ Julia's office. Thank you! Katie Ross 206-263-8781

8_19_2011

Page 3

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Jenna Mandel-Ricci" <jricci@health.nyc.gov> "Brawley, Karen" <Karen.Brawley@kingcounty.gov> Date: 12/17/2010 6:04:00 PM Subject: RE: NYC-Seattle call today 10am/1pm Attachments: 8063_Final_07_03.rtf Report 9_5_08.doc ResidentSurvey.SSHP.doc FINAL KCHA One pager 10.19.06.doc Survey.6.09.doc Guardian.pdf Portland-Vancouver Metro Area Smokefree Housing Project Evaluation[1].pdf 2010.2.18.BOH.Tobacco.ppt
Hi Jenna and Vicky So lovely to talk to you today. I am attaching some of the documents we discussed, First, I am attaching the results of our survey with KCHA and with King County renters, along with survey instruments. I am also attaching the reduced survey instrument we currently recommend when asked. Also attached is Portland/Vancouver's eval of their smoke-free housing program (I haven't yet read it) and an article on the evaluation of Guardian's policy change. Lastly, attached is the staff presentation to the Board of Health on yesterday's e-cig ordinance. Let me know if I missed anything, Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Jenna Mandel-Ricci [mailto:jricci@health.nyc.gov] Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 7:26 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Brawley, Karen Cc: Victoria Grimshaw Subject: NYC-Seattle call today 10am/1pm Sarah and Karen, We are looking forward to our call later today. In the hopes that it is helpful, below is a list of things we were hoping to talk through with you: · Overall approach to smoke-free housing · Work with public housing authority staff · Work with public housing authority tenants · Work with other tenant groups · Work with other government agencies that provide rent subsidies for tenants or tax/development subsidies for developers · Work with private developers, landlords, etc. · Any experience with disclosure laws · New ordinance prohibiting use of e-cigarettes where regular cigarettes are prohibited 8_19_2011

Page 2 Shall we call you or would you like to call us? If you’d like to call us the number is 212-676-8304. Thanks in advance, Jenna Jenna Mandel-Ricci Deputy Director, Bureau of Tobacco Control NYC Department of Health and Mental Hygiene 2 Lafayette, 21st Floor (212) 676-8360 jricci@health.nyc.gov

********************************************************************** The New York City Department of Health & Mental Hygiene is now offering information important for the health of all New Yorkers. To sign up for these new and valuable updates, log-on to our website at http://www.nyc.gov/health/email and select the NYC DOHMH updates you'd like to receive. IMPORTANT NOTICE: This email is meant only for the use of the intended recipient. It may contain confidential information that is legally privileged or otherwise protected by law. If you have received this communication in error, please notify me immediately by replying to this message and please delete it from your computer. Thank you for your cooperation.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Jenna Mandel-Ricci" <jricci@health.nyc.gov> "Brawley, Karen" <Karen.Brawley@kingcounty.gov> Date: 12/17/2010 1:10:00 PM Subject: RE: NYC-Seattle call today 10am/1pm
And we look forward to speaking with you. We will call you at the number you provided.

From: Jenna Mandel-Ricci [mailto:jricci@health.nyc.gov] Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 7:26 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Brawley, Karen Cc: Victoria Grimshaw Subject: NYC-Seattle call today 10am/1pm Sarah and Karen, We are looking forward to our call later today. In the hopes that it is helpful, below is a list of things we were hoping to talk through with you: · Overall approach to smoke-free housing · Work with public housing authority staff · Work with public housing authority tenants · Work with other tenant groups · Work with other government agencies that provide rent subsidies for tenants or tax/development subsidies for developers · Work with private developers, landlords, etc. · Any experience with disclosure laws · New ordinance prohibiting use of e-cigarettes where regular cigarettes are prohibited Shall we call you or would you like to call us? If you’d like to call us the number is 212-676-8304. Thanks in advance, Jenna Jenna Mandel-Ricci Deputy Director, Bureau of Tobacco Control NYC Department of Health and Mental Hygiene 2 Lafayette, 21st Floor (212) 676-8360 jricci@health.nyc.gov

********************************************************************** The New York City Department of Health & Mental Hygiene is now offering information important for the health of all New Yorkers. To sign up for these new and valuable updates, log-on to our website at http://www.nyc.gov/health/email and select the NYC DOHMH updates you'd like to receive. IMPORTANT NOTICE: This email is meant only for the use of the intended recipient. It may contain confidential information that is legally privileged or otherwise protected by law. If you have received this communication in error, please notify me immediately by replying to this message and please delete it from your computer. Thank you for your cooperation.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Ross-Viles, Sarah" <Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov> 12/17/2010 6:45:00 PM RE: One-on-One Meeting

Are you able to do 4:30? The Grinch has stolen this meeting time. Ok, the e-cig debrief meeting. Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

>_____________________________________________ >From: Robles, Richard On Behalf Of Ross-Viles, Sarah >Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 9:38 AM >To: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Greto, Lindsey >Subject: One-on-One Meeting >When: Monday, December 20, 2010 3:00 PM-3:30 PM (GMT-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada). >Where: Room 1030 > >

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Greto, Lindsey" <Lindsey.Greto@kingcounty.gov> 12/17/2010 6:52:00 PM RE: One-on-One Meeting

You know what - I have a whole webinar on my calendar on Monday. Would between 12 and 1:30 work? I am protecting today for budget work. Sarah Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

>_____________________________________________ >From: Greto, Lindsey >Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 2:48 PM >To: Ross-Viles, Sarah >Subject: RE: One-on-One Meeting > >Silly outlook. > >I can, but would really like not to… I am trying to make boot camp class on Mondays, so need to leave on the 4:35 bus to do so… any chance we can not do it then? If that's it, then it's fine… or we could do this afternoon? > >-->Lindsey Greto, MPA >Tobacco Prevention Program >Public Health - Seattle & King County >Ph: (206) 263-9410 Fax: (206) 296-0177 > > >_____________________________________________ >From: Ross-Viles, Sarah >Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 2:47 PM >To: Greto, Lindsey >Subject: FW: One-on-One Meeting > > >Hmm, this went back to me instead of to you. Oh, Outlook, you trickster. > > >______________________________________________ >From: Ross-Viles, Sarah >Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 2:42 PM >To: Ross-Viles, Sarah >Subject: RE: One-on-One Meeting
8_19_2011

Page 2

> >Are you able to do 4:30 on Monday? The Grinch has stolen this meeting time. Ok, the e-cig debrief meeting. > >Sarah Ross-Viles >CPPW Tobacco Project Manager >Public Health - Seattle & King County >Suite 900 401 5th Avenue >Seattle, WA 98102 >(206) 263-8211 > > >_____________________________________________ >From: Robles, Richard On Behalf Of Ross-Viles, Sarah >Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 9:38 AM >To: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Greto, Lindsey >Subject: One-on-One Meeting >When: Monday, December 20, 2010 3:00 PM-3:30 PM (GMT-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada). >Where: Room 1030 > >

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Greto, Lindsey" <Lindsey.Greto@kingcounty.gov> 12/17/2010 6:49:00 PM FW: One-on-One Meeting

Hmm, this went back to me instead of to you. Oh, Outlook, you trickster.

>______________________________________________ >From: Ross-Viles, Sarah >Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 2:42 PM >To: Ross-Viles, Sarah >Subject: RE: One-on-One Meeting > >Are you able to do 4:30 on Monday? The Grinch has stolen this meeting time. Ok, the e-cig debrief meeting. > >Sarah Ross-Viles >CPPW Tobacco Project Manager >Public Health - Seattle & King County >Suite 900 401 5th Avenue >Seattle, WA 98102 >(206) 263-8211 > > >_____________________________________________ >From: Robles, Richard On Behalf Of Ross-Viles, Sarah >Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 9:38 AM >To: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Greto, Lindsey >Subject: One-on-One Meeting >When: Monday, December 20, 2010 3:00 PM-3:30 PM (GMT-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada). >Where: Room 1030 > >

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Brandie Flood" <Brandie.Flood@cschc.org> "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> Date: 12/17/2010 4:38:00 PM Subject: RE: Public Hearing

Wow - Brandie! Thanks for sharing. Sorry you got targeted - a creepier side to Facebook for sure. I find the assumptions folks ma about funding and motivation for tobacco control work disappointing and odd. Is it so far fetched that we are just concerned with public health? Thanks for saying things so well yesterday. Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Brandie Flood [mailto:Brandie.Flood@cschc.org] Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 11:34 AM To: Neal, Scott; Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: FW: Public Hearing Importance: High

Hey Scott,

I got this ugly message about my comments at the hearing yesterday from some guy on facebook. I just thought you shoul know in case you get the same message. I blocked him from my facebook and its private anyway so he won’t be able to se my pictures or anything.

Brandie Flood, MSW Center for MultiCultural Health 1120 East Terrace St., Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98122 206-461-6910 ext. 203 From: Facebook [mailto:notification+kbsb4byr@facebookmail.com] Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2010 7:16 PM To: Brandie Flood Subject: Gregory Conley sent you a message on Facebook...

8_19_2011

Page 2

facebook
Gregory sent you a message. Gregory ConleyDecember 16, 2010 at 10:15pm Subject: Electronic cigarette Ms. Flood, I listened to the audio from today's King County Board of Health meeting and was shocked to hear you say, "We don't know what's in [electronic cigarettes]." How could you attend the meting, listen to the presentations, and then say such a thing? We know what is in the ecigarette; propoylene glycol and nicotine. PG is safe for human inhalation, and nicotine is not a burning, combustible toxin like the 40 individual types of carcinogens in tobacco cigarettes that are released into the air in the form of second-hand smoke. Does the organization you work for publicly reveal its funding sources? I'd be interested to know how much comes from pharmaceutical companies that have smoking aids out on the market. Please see below. http://www.facebook.com/l/95699whc6BS2KgtOf8zCRMeT5oA;www.healthnz.co.nz/DublinEcigBenchtopHandout.pdf http://www.facebook.com/l/95699rwokbqI3AcxhPgV_dpd2bQ;www.casaa.org/files/Study_TSN...NJOY_Vapor.pdf http://www.facebook.com/l/95699fy8Yy7o28woWS2W1jJPs6Q;sph.bu.edu/insider/index.php/Recent-News/evidencesuggests-e-cigs-safer-than-cigarettes-researcher-claims.html

To reply to this message, follow the link below: http://www.facebook.com/n/? inbox%2Freadmessage.php&t=1553352636956&mid=374d314G4000e7e2G2128b84G0&n_m=brandie.flood%40cschc.org

This message was intended for brandie.flood@cschc.org. If you do not wish to receive this type of email from Facebook in the future, please follow the link below to unsubscribe. http://www.facebook.com/o.php? k=ab26ff&u=1073801186&mid=374d314G4000e7e2G2128b84G0 Facebook, Inc. P.O. Box 10005, Palo Alto, CA 94303

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Rosalind Sciammas" <Rosalind.Sciammas@gmmb.com> 12/20/2010 9:06:00 PM RE: January meeting

Ros - How about noon to one on Monday the 3rd (your email says the 2nd, but I trust we will all be out!). If that time works, feel fre to send a meeting request. Thanks, Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Rosalind Sciammas [mailto:Rosalind.Sciammas@gmmb.com] Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2010 2:49 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Apa, James; Neal, Scott; Melissa Simpson Subject: RE: January meeting

Hi Sarah, Would any time on Mon., Jan. 2 or Thu., Jan. 6, anywhere between 11:30 a.m. – 2 p.m. or 3:30 – 5 p.m. work? It was great seeing you too. Congratulations to you and your team for the BOH’s approval of legislation on e-cigarette use restrictions today. This must bode well for the BOH’s adoption of your upcoming youth access bill.

We’d be happy to get started on drafting an op-ed from Dr. Fleming on the youth access bill, as long as this is still an appropriate earned media tactic for January. We’ve discussed the idea briefly and could probably start drafting this after w get a chance to review proposed legislation from ACS, as well as any other message mandates. Just let us know if we can b helpful to your team before our meeting in the new year. Thanks for getting this on everyone’s calendars. Roz

Rosalind Sciammas Vice President 206.352.8598 | office +gmmb cause the effect

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2010 3:45 PM To: Rosalind Sciammas Cc: Apa, James; Neal, Scott Subject: January meeting 8_19_2011

Page 2 Hi Ros Good to see you today. Not to lose track of other follow-up, I have been tracking down times for GMMB to follow up with myself, Scott and James on tobacco media and communications for the next 18 months. Due to vacations, are earliest dates are the first week of January. However, we have a lot of availability at that time. Can you send some times that would work for you doing that week and I will match to our calendars? Thanks, Sarah Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

Confidentiality Notice: This email and all attachments are intended solely for the named person or entity to w hich it is addressed and contains information tha may be privileged, confidential or copyrighted under applicable law . Any review , distribution, dissemination or copying of this email or the information herein anyone other than the intended recipient, or an agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, is strictly prohibited. If you have recei this email in error, please immediately notify the sender or contact the offices of GMMB Inc. at 202-572-2818.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Smyser, Mike" <Mike.Smyser@kingcounty.gov> 12/22/2010 1:54:55 PM RE: cross-walk with CAPS Objectives by Thur

Hi Mike - The more recently modified version is fine (but the modifications are only in comments, not in substance). Did I include an e-cigarette use question on the original crosswalk? Thanks, Sarah ________________________________________ From: Smyser, Mike Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 8:30 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: RE: cross-walk with CAPS Objectives by Thur Hi Sarah, I see 2 documents: SeaKing tobacco CAP 11.5.2010 kb edits.xls.xlsx (last modified 11/29/2010) SeaKing Tobacco CAP 11.5.2010.xls (last modified 11/5/2010) Should I be looking at the 11/29 or the 11/5 modified document? Thanks again, - Mike -----Original Message----From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 8:15 PM To: Smyser, Mike Subject: RE: cross-walk with CAPS Objectives by Thur Hi Mike - I am traveling without VPN, but you can find the most recent CAP in Prevention and Wellness -> Tobacco -> CAP -> FInal CAP Sheets -> Updated > file with a November date. Thanks, Sarah ________________________________________ From: Smyser, Mike Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 3:28 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: FW: cross-walk with CAPS Objectives by Thur Sarah, Could you send me a copy of the Tobacco CAPS you were working form. I’m concerned that the version I have is not the most up-to-date. Thanks, - Mike ________________________________
8_19_2011

Page 2

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 2:08 PM To: Chan, Nadine; Kellogg, Ryan; Krieger, James; Shumann, Amy Cc: Smyser, Mike Subject: RE: cross-walk with CAPS Objectives by Thur Hi folks, here is the tobacco crosswalk. It is a a two-tab spreadsheet. The first page just looks at whether an objective is reflected in the selection of questions, the BRFSS tab links the items to objectives, explains how we will use the data, and has a list of comments on items. I just finished this and need some time to process it myself, but wanted to give you all a peak as well. Sarah ________________________________ From: Chan, Nadine Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2010 10:10 AM To: Kellogg, Ryan Cc: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Smyser, Mike Subject: cross-walk with CAPS Objectives by Thur Importance: High Hi Ryan, Could you (or Erin) help cross-walk the BRFSS HEAL questions with the HEAL CAPS Objectives? We currently have too many HEAL questions and need to prioritize.

1. Identify which CAP each question is related to 2. Identify who, when, and how we will use the results for each question 3. Add any missing questions to monitor or inform future work related to CAPS objectives 4. Drop any redundant (in this BRFSS, in Greenberg Survey, or in the CPPW BRFSS that is already in the field) Sarah is doing this for tobacco. I think she said she could share what she’s done (when she’s done) with you if it would help. We’re looking to have this by Thursday. Is this possible? Thanks, -Nadine

********************************************************** Nadine L Chan PhD MPH | Assistant Chief Assessment, Policy Development, and Evaluation Public Health - Seattle and King County w: 206.263.8784 e: nadine.chan@kingcounty.gov Note: I telecommute on Wednesdays and can be reached via email or on my cell phone: 206-853-4877. ________________________________
8_19_2011

Page 3

From: Smyser, Mike Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 5:14 PM To: Valenzuela, Matias; Beebe, Alanna; Sadow-Hasenberg, Nicole; Ta, Myduc; Magbanua, Arsenia Claire; Kellogg, Ryan; Ross-Viles, Sarah; Oberg, Donna; Solet, David; Chan, Nadine; Krieger, James; Laurent, Amy Subject: Local CPPW BRFSS survey meeting (12/7, 10-11am, rm 918) Attached is a revised questionnaire summary for our meeting tomorrow. The priorities for the Tobacco (i.e., 1=1st, 2=2nd) questions came from Sarah. The demographic and especially HEAL prioritization could use a lot more input. I’ve also included a tab with just the Greenberg questions (from the version I received from Matías before Thanksgiving). The other tabs are a more extensive list of potential questions. Hopefully you’ll be able to attend the meeting, but if not please give me your feedback as soon as you can (no later than Thursday morning). Thanks! Mike Smyser, Epidemiologist Assessment, Policy Development & Evaluation (APDE) Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 Fifth Avenue, CNK-PH-1300 Seattle, WA 98104 Phone: 206-263-8780; Fax: 206-296-0166 Email: Mike.Smyser@kingcounty.gov ________________________________ From: Smyser, Mike Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 5:33 PM To: Valenzuela, Matias; Beebe, Alanna; Sadow-Hasenberg, Nicole; Ta, Myduc; Magbanua, Arsenia Claire; Kellogg, Ryan; Ross-Viles, Sarah; Oberg, Donna; Solet, David; Chan, Nadine; Krieger, James Subject: Brainstorm CPPW BRFSS questions Attached is an Excel file that subsets questions that might be relevant for Tobacco and HEAL assessment purposes. Questions are sorted by topic (35 demographic questions, then 81 tobacco and 244 HEAL). We need to pare this down to about 25 demographic, 60 tobacco and 40 HEAL questions in our meeting on Monday. Unfortunately, I have not had the time to refine the subtopic areas more and there may be some duplication of questions. Hopefully on Monday we can go through this quickly to remove non-relevant topics or series that are clearly too long. If you’re not able to attend the meeting, then it would be helpful if you could put a “y” in the “Include?” column and send the file back to me. Thanks for everyone’s help on this! Mike Smyser, Epidemiologist Assessment, Policy Development & Evaluation (APDE) Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 Fifth Avenue, CNK-PH-1300 Seattle, WA 98104 Phone: 206-263-8780; Fax: 206-296-0166 Email: Mike.Smyser@kingcounty.gov
8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Mahoney, Maggie" <maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu> 12/22/2010 5:05:18 PM RE: Wrapping up Contract

Hi Maggie- how about 11:30 CST, 12: 30 EST tomorrow? I think just the two of us will be fine for a check-in. Is 651-290-7514 the best number to reach you with? Thanks, Sarah ________________________________________ From: Mahoney, Maggie [maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 12:39 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Wrapping up Contract

Whoops! I am available from 11:30-2 and 3-4 Central tomorrow. So, that's 12:30-3 and 4-5 EST and 9:30-12 and 1-2 Pacifi Do any of those times work? Maggie

-----Original Message----From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 2:22 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Wrapping up Contract

Sorry, Maggie. I was in transit and missed this email. I am on the east coast at present - so just ahead of you. I have a call fro Thanks. ________________________________________ From: Mahoney, Maggie [maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 10:55 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Wrapping up Contract Can we talk at 2:00 my time, 12:00 your time (one hour from now)? Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu
8_19_2011

Page 2

Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 12:04 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Wrapping up Contract Hi Maggie,

Are you able to talk on the phone this afternoon or tomorrow? Unfortunately, I have one more chapter to add to our never-en Sarah ________________________________ From: Mahoney, Maggie [maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 4:04 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Wrapping up Contract Hi Sarah,

I just thought I’d check in and let you know that we are working on figuring out our projects for the new year. It’d be helpful t

Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-2907514[ Fax: 651-2907515[ www.TCLConline.org

From: Mahoney, Maggie Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2010 3:48 PM To: 'Ross-Viles, Sarah' Cc: 'Hamilton, Joy' Subject: RE: Wrapping up Contract Hi Sarah,

Is there anything I can do on my end to help with this process? Just so you know, our offices are closed the last week of Dece
8_19_2011

Page 3

Thanks,

Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-2907514[ Fax: 651-2907515[ www.TCLConline.org

From: Mahoney, Maggie Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2010 9:47 AM To: 'Ross-Viles, Sarah' Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Wrapping up Contract That all looks fine, Sarah. Thanks.

Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-2907514[ Fax: 651-2907515[ www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 4:26 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: Wrapping up Contract Hi Maggie,

While I am waiting for the letter from our contracts office, I would like to make sure we are ready to get the contract in the ou Sound like a plan? please let me know of any questions.
8_19_2011

Page 4

Thanks, Sarah ________________________________ From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2010 2:34 PM To: 'Mahoney, Maggie' Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Hi Maggie,

Our compliance and contracts had some issues with this draft and our taking the opportunity to craft their own draft, which I w Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 2638211[

________________________________ From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 10:35 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Thanks for checking on this Sarah. I’ve attached a draft letter to address the conflict issue. Do you want to see whether that’s

Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-2907514[ Fax: 651-2907515[ www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 6:19 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation
8_19_2011

Page 5

Maggie- My understanding is that budgeting into calendar years is something we must do on our end, even if we expect we m Sarah

________________________________ From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 3:05 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Great, thanks Sarah. I will put together a letter that copies the language of the contract and send it to you for review. A Dece

In the meantime, I accepted the changes in the draft scope of work, with one exception. I thought, based on our exchange from

After I did that, I opened the budget document and see that the template had a lot of stuff that doesn’t apply to this contract (e

Please let me know how those two things look and, as I said, I’ll draft a letter to match the contract language concerning the c Thanks!

Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-2907514[ Fax: 651-2907515[ www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 2:59 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Hi Maggie - I have the go-ahead that the letter can copy the language of the contract. I do not think it needs to contain much

The changes to the scope of work look fine to me, I made changes to the budget as discussed. I put December 1 as a start dat

I am also attaching the template we use for contract budgets. I was not sure if you had other expenses besides the hourly fee.
8_19_2011

Page 6

We will start processing the contract - getting Department and County approval - when we finalize these pieces. I will work o Thanks for bearing with us, Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 2638211[

________________________________ From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 10:16 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: FW: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Hi Sarah,

This reminded me to ask you whether we should touch base on the contract. Is there anything else you need from me at this p

Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-2907514[ Fax: 651-2907515[ www.TCLConline.org

From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 10:51 AM To: Schaibley, David Cc: Armstrong, Kate; Cork, Kerry; Mahoney, Maggie; Blanke, Doug Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation

Many, many thanks to all of you at TCLC! I really appreciate having so many sets of wonderful eyes to review our draft and t

I am incorporating many of your comments, and will send a draft off to our county prosecutor's office this morning. This item Thanks again!!
8_19_2011

Page 7

Anne

Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 2639411[ anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov

________________________________ From: Schaibley, David [mailto:David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 12:59 PM To: Pearson, Anne Cc: Armstrong, Kate; Cork, Kerry; Mahoney, Maggie; Blanke, Doug Subject: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Dear Anne:

Attached please find our thoughts on Seattle/King County’s proposed e-cigarette regulation. We hope these thoughts are help Sincerely, Dave

David J. Schaibley |Public Health Law Center Staff Attorney, Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 651-6957611[ | Fax: 651-2907515[ david.schaibley@wmitchell.edu 875 Summit Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 www.TCLConline.org

The Tobacco Control Legal Consortium provides information and technical assistance on issues related to tobacco and public

From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 10:13 AM To: Schaibley, David; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation Great! Thanks so much. Anne

Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County
8_19_2011

Page 8

401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 2639411[ anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov

________________________________ From: Schaibley, David [mailto:David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 7:24 AM To: Pearson, Anne; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation Hi Anne: Just a quick update to let you know that we’ll have our input to you today. Dave From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 8:41 AM To: Schaibley, David; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation

We would like to send a draft to our Prosecuting Attorneys Office by Monday or Tuesday of next week. If we could incorpor Thanks! ________________________________ From: Schaibley, David [David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 4:04 AM To: Pearson, Anne; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation Hello Anne:

Thanks for forwarding it; we'll share our thoughts. When we spoke last week you mentioned a relatively tight time frame for th Enjoy your long weekend, Dave ________________________________ From: Pearson, Anne [Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 6:55 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie; Schaibley, David Subject: Draft E-cigarette regulation Hi Maggie and David,

I hope you are both well. I was wondering if you might have the time to review a draft regulation restricting the sale of e-prod

If you have a chance to take a look, I would love to hear your thoughts. I'll be out of the office for the rest of the week but ba All the best, Anne
8_19_2011

Page 9

______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Mahoney, Maggie" <maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu> 12/22/2010 4:22:26 PM RE: Wrapping up Contract

Sorry, Maggie. I was in transit and missed this email. I am on the east coast at present - so just ahead of you. I have a call fro Thanks. ________________________________________ From: Mahoney, Maggie [maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 10:55 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Wrapping up Contract Can we talk at 2:00 my time, 12:00 your time (one hour from now)? Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 12:04 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Wrapping up Contract Hi Maggie,

Are you able to talk on the phone this afternoon or tomorrow? Unfortunately, I have one more chapter to add to our never-en Sarah ________________________________ From: Mahoney, Maggie [maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 4:04 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Wrapping up Contract Hi Sarah,

I just thought I’d check in and let you know that we are working on figuring out our projects for the new year. It’d be helpful t
8_19_2011

Page 2

Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-2907514[ Fax: 651-2907515[ www.TCLConline.org

From: Mahoney, Maggie Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2010 3:48 PM To: 'Ross-Viles, Sarah' Cc: 'Hamilton, Joy' Subject: RE: Wrapping up Contract Hi Sarah,

Is there anything I can do on my end to help with this process? Just so you know, our offices are closed the last week of Dece Thanks,

Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-2907514[ Fax: 651-2907515[ www.TCLConline.org

From: Mahoney, Maggie Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2010 9:47 AM To: 'Ross-Viles, Sarah' Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Wrapping up Contract That all looks fine, Sarah. Thanks. Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director
8_19_2011

Page 3

Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-2907514[ Fax: 651-2907515[ www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 4:26 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: Wrapping up Contract Hi Maggie,

While I am waiting for the letter from our contracts office, I would like to make sure we are ready to get the contract in the ou Sound like a plan? please let me know of any questions. Thanks, Sarah ________________________________ From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2010 2:34 PM To: 'Mahoney, Maggie' Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Hi Maggie,

Our compliance and contracts had some issues with this draft and our taking the opportunity to craft their own draft, which I w Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 2638211[

________________________________ From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 10:35 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah
8_19_2011

Page 4

Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Thanks for checking on this Sarah. I’ve attached a draft letter to address the conflict issue. Do you want to see whether that’s

Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-2907514[ Fax: 651-2907515[ www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 6:19 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation

Maggie- My understanding is that budgeting into calendar years is something we must do on our end, even if we expect we m Sarah

________________________________ From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 3:05 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Great, thanks Sarah. I will put together a letter that copies the language of the contract and send it to you for review. A Dece

In the meantime, I accepted the changes in the draft scope of work, with one exception. I thought, based on our exchange from

After I did that, I opened the budget document and see that the template had a lot of stuff that doesn’t apply to this contract (e

Please let me know how those two things look and, as I said, I’ll draft a letter to match the contract language concerning the c Thanks! Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium
8_19_2011

Page 5

875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-2907514[ Fax: 651-2907515[ www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 2:59 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Hi Maggie - I have the go-ahead that the letter can copy the language of the contract. I do not think it needs to contain much

The changes to the scope of work look fine to me, I made changes to the budget as discussed. I put December 1 as a start dat

I am also attaching the template we use for contract budgets. I was not sure if you had other expenses besides the hourly fee.

We will start processing the contract - getting Department and County approval - when we finalize these pieces. I will work o Thanks for bearing with us, Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 2638211[

________________________________ From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 10:16 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: FW: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Hi Sarah,

This reminded me to ask you whether we should touch base on the contract. Is there anything else you need from me at this p Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director
8_19_2011

Page 6

Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-2907514[ Fax: 651-2907515[ www.TCLConline.org

From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 10:51 AM To: Schaibley, David Cc: Armstrong, Kate; Cork, Kerry; Mahoney, Maggie; Blanke, Doug Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation

Many, many thanks to all of you at TCLC! I really appreciate having so many sets of wonderful eyes to review our draft and t

I am incorporating many of your comments, and will send a draft off to our county prosecutor's office this morning. This item Thanks again!! Anne

Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 2639411[ anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov

________________________________ From: Schaibley, David [mailto:David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 12:59 PM To: Pearson, Anne Cc: Armstrong, Kate; Cork, Kerry; Mahoney, Maggie; Blanke, Doug Subject: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Dear Anne:

Attached please find our thoughts on Seattle/King County’s proposed e-cigarette regulation. We hope these thoughts are help Sincerely, Dave

David J. Schaibley |Public Health Law Center Staff Attorney, Tobacco Control Legal Consortium
8_19_2011

Page 7

651-6957611[ | Fax: 651-2907515[ david.schaibley@wmitchell.edu 875 Summit Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 www.TCLConline.org

The Tobacco Control Legal Consortium provides information and technical assistance on issues related to tobacco and public

From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 10:13 AM To: Schaibley, David; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation Great! Thanks so much. Anne

Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 2639411[ anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov

________________________________ From: Schaibley, David [mailto:David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 7:24 AM To: Pearson, Anne; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation Hi Anne: Just a quick update to let you know that we’ll have our input to you today. Dave From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 8:41 AM To: Schaibley, David; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation

We would like to send a draft to our Prosecuting Attorneys Office by Monday or Tuesday of next week. If we could incorpor Thanks! ________________________________
8_19_2011

Page 8

From: Schaibley, David [David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 4:04 AM To: Pearson, Anne; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation Hello Anne:

Thanks for forwarding it; we'll share our thoughts. When we spoke last week you mentioned a relatively tight time frame for th Enjoy your long weekend, Dave ________________________________ From: Pearson, Anne [Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 6:55 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie; Schaibley, David Subject: Draft E-cigarette regulation Hi Maggie and David,

I hope you are both well. I was wondering if you might have the time to review a draft regulation restricting the sale of e-prod

If you have a chance to take a look, I would love to hear your thoughts. I'll be out of the office for the rest of the week but ba All the best, Anne

______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses.
8_19_2011

Page 9

______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:
Hi Maggie,

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Mahoney, Maggie" <maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu> 12/22/2010 2:03:44 PM RE: Wrapping up Contract

Are you able to talk on the phone this afternoon or tomorrow? Unfortunately, I have one more chapter to add to our never-ending contract story. Sarah From: Mahoney, Maggie [maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 4:04 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Wrapping up Contract Hi Sarah, I just thought Id check in and let you know that we are working on figuring out our projects for the new year. Itd be helpful to know whether youve got some ideas of what you might like us to work on first, and the general timeframe for the first few projects. Thanks in advance for any info you can provide! Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Mahoney, Maggie Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2010 3:48 PM To: 'Ross-Viles, Sarah' Cc: 'Hamilton, Joy' Subject: RE: Wrapping up Contract Hi Sarah, Is there anything I can do on my end to help with this process? Just so you know, our offices are closed the last week of December, so hopefully we can wrap things up next week! Im hopeful! J Thanks, Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org 8_19_2011

Page 2

From: Mahoney, Maggie Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2010 9:47 AM To: 'Ross-Viles, Sarah' Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Wrapping up Contract That all looks fine, Sarah. Thanks. Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 4:26 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: Wrapping up Contract Hi Maggie, While I am waiting for the letter from our contracts office, I would like to make sure we are ready to get the contract in the our system. I accepted the changes to the last revised scope, and have attached a budget with a guesstimated 3 year spread. Depending on the COI letter, we may not be able to start until January (as the scope currently says). In which case, we will change the budget. Hopefully, we will be instead changing the scope and getting your help with some items this month. So, please take a look at these documents and let me know if they look fine except for having the actual start date. When I get the draft letter I will send it right along. Hopefully you can confirm it and we can execute this one. Sound like a plan? please let me know of any questions. Thanks, Sarah From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2010 2:34 PM To: 'Mahoney, Maggie' Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Hi Maggie, Our compliance and contracts had some issues with this draft and our taking the opportunity to craft their own draft, which I will forward when I obtain it. Sarah Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County 8_19_2011

Page 3 Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 10:35 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Thanks for checking on this Sarah. Ive attached a draft letter to address the conflict issue. Do you want to see whether thats sufficient? Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 6:19 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Maggie- My understanding is that budgeting into calendar years is something we must do on our end, even if we expect we may amend them. Mark - is that correct? Or is there a way to do a consulting contract in amount only? Sarah

From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 3:05 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Great, thanks Sarah. I will put together a letter that copies the language of the contract and send it to you for review. A December 1 start date sounds good, and I look forward to wrapping up the contracting process, as I know you do, too! In the meantime, I accepted the changes in the draft scope of work, with one exception. I thought, based on our exchange from last week, that we werent going to allocate time to particular time periods so that we had flexibility throughout the remaining 15 months, since it would be hard to predict the ebb and flow of work. If that is still okay with you, I deleted the table in the draft scope of work because it just allocated funding over the life of the project and replaced it with a simple paragraph explaining that well invoice you and youll pay us, as the contract says, that our fee is $175 per hour, up to a maximum of $25,000 total. Ive attached it for your review. After I did that, I opened the budget document and see that the template had a lot of stuff that doesnt apply to this contract (e.g., supplies, fringe benefits, etc.). I simplified it to match the content that is in the scope of work. Ive attached 8_19_2011

Page 4 it for your review. Please let me know how those two things look and, as I said, Ill draft a letter to match the contract language concerning the conflict issue. Thanks! Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 2:59 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Hi Maggie - I have the go-ahead that the letter can copy the language of the contract. I do not think it needs to contain much more than that. Thus, it looks like we are in the home stretch. Are you able to put that together to have in hand while we process the contract? The changes to the scope of work look fine to me, I made changes to the budget as discussed. I put December 1 as a start date. A contractor can begin work they will bill for as soon as we have an agreed upon scope of work. I chose the 1st to allow time to put the decision-making safeguards in place. I do know we will want your help in December in preparing for the leg session. Does this work for you? I am also attaching the template we use for contract budgets. I was not sure if you had other expenses besides the hourly fee. Please populate this template as part of the contract. If you need any assistance, Lauren Holt (cc'd above) is an ace. We will start processing the contract - getting Department and County approval - when we finalize these pieces. I will work on the safeguards. Thanks for bearing with us, Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 263-8211

From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 10:16 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: FW: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation 8_19_2011

Page 5 Hi Sarah, This reminded me to ask you whether we should touch base on the contract. Is there anything else you need from me at this point? I have some time available this week to connect via phone, if youd like. Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 10:51 AM To: Schaibley, David Cc: Armstrong, Kate; Cork, Kerry; Mahoney, Maggie; Blanke, Doug Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Many, many thanks to all of you at TCLC! I really appreciate having so many sets of wonderful eyes to review our draft and to provide such helpful input. I am incorporating many of your comments, and will send a draft off to our county prosecutor's office this morning. This item will go to a vote by our Board of Health on December 16. I'll keep you posted on our progress. Thanks again!! Anne Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov

From: Schaibley, David [mailto:David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 12:59 PM To: Pearson, Anne Cc: Armstrong, Kate; Cork, Kerry; Mahoney, Maggie; Blanke, Doug Subject: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation

Dear Anne: Attached please find our thoughts on Seattle/King Countys proposed e-cigarette regulation. We hope these thoughts are helpful. Please let us know if you are in need of any assistance in the future. Sincerely, Dave

David J. Schaibley |Public Health Law Center Staff Attorney, Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 8_19_2011

Page 6 651-695-7611 | Fax: 651-290-7515 david.schaibley@wmitchell.edu 875 Summit Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 www.TCLConline.org The Tobacco Control Legal Consortium provides information and technical assistance on issues related to tobacco and public health. The Consortium does not provide legal representation or advice. This e-mail should not be considered legal advice or a substitute for obtaining legal advice from an attorney who can represent you. If you have specific legal questions, we recommend that you consult with an attorney familiar with the laws of your jurisdiction.

From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 10:13 AM To: Schaibley, David; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation Great! Thanks so much. Anne Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 263-9411 anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov

From: Schaibley, David [mailto:David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 7:24 AM To: Pearson, Anne; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation

Hi Anne: Just a quick update to let you know that well have our input to you today. Dave
From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 8:41 AM To: Schaibley, David; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation We would like to send a draft to our Prosecuting Attorneys Office by Monday or Tuesday of next week. If we could incorporate your comments before sending, that would be ideal. But if that's too tight, we can still fold in your comments after we send it to her. Thanks!

From: Schaibley, David [David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 4:04 AM To: Pearson, Anne; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation Hello Anne: 8_19_2011

Page 7 Thanks for forwarding it; we'll share our thoughts. When we spoke last week you mentioned a relatively tight time frame for this effort...can you let us know when you need our input by? Enjoy your long weekend, Dave From: Pearson, Anne [Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 6:55 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie; Schaibley, David Subject: Draft E-cigarette regulation Hi Maggie and David, I hope you are both well. I was wondering if you might have the time to review a draft regulation restricting the sale of eproducts (attached). Our Board of Health is not proposing to go so far as to prohibit their sale entirely, but is interested in restricting their availability to youth. If you have a chance to take a look, I would love to hear your thoughts. I'll be out of the office for the rest of the week but back on Monday. All the best, Anne

______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Mahoney, Maggie" <maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu> 12/22/2010 5:14:33 PM RE: Wrapping up Contract

Talk to you then! ________________________________________ From: Mahoney, Maggie [maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 1:11 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Wrapping up Contract Yes, sounds great. Thanks! Maggie

-----Original Message----From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 3:05 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Wrapping up Contract Hi Maggie- how about 11:30 CST, 12: 30 EST tomorrow? I think just the two of us will be fine for a check-in. Is 651-290-7514 the best number to reach you with? Thanks, Sarah ________________________________________ From: Mahoney, Maggie [maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 12:39 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Wrapping up Contract

Whoops! I am available from 11:30-2 and 3-4 Central tomorrow. So, that's 12:30-3 and 4-5 EST and 9:30-12 and 1-2 Pacifi Do any of those times work? Maggie

-----Original Message----From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov]
8_19_2011

Page 2

Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 2:22 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Wrapping up Contract

Sorry, Maggie. I was in transit and missed this email. I am on the east coast at present - so just ahead of you. I have a call fro Thanks. ________________________________________ From: Mahoney, Maggie [maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 10:55 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Wrapping up Contract Can we talk at 2:00 my time, 12:00 your time (one hour from now)? Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-290-7514 Fax: 651-290-7515 www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 12:04 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Wrapping up Contract Hi Maggie,

Are you able to talk on the phone this afternoon or tomorrow? Unfortunately, I have one more chapter to add to our never-en Sarah ________________________________ From: Mahoney, Maggie [maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 4:04 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Wrapping up Contract Hi Sarah,

I just thought I’d check in and let you know that we are working on figuring out our projects for the new year. It’d be helpful t Maggie Mahoney
8_19_2011

Page 3

Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-2907514[ Fax: 651-2907515[ www.TCLConline.org

From: Mahoney, Maggie Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2010 3:48 PM To: 'Ross-Viles, Sarah' Cc: 'Hamilton, Joy' Subject: RE: Wrapping up Contract Hi Sarah,

Is there anything I can do on my end to help with this process? Just so you know, our offices are closed the last week of Dece Thanks,

Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-2907514[ Fax: 651-2907515[ www.TCLConline.org

From: Mahoney, Maggie Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2010 9:47 AM To: 'Ross-Viles, Sarah' Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: Wrapping up Contract That all looks fine, Sarah. Thanks. Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium
8_19_2011

Page 4

875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-2907514[ Fax: 651-2907515[ www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 4:26 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: Wrapping up Contract Hi Maggie,

While I am waiting for the letter from our contracts office, I would like to make sure we are ready to get the contract in the ou Sound like a plan? please let me know of any questions. Thanks, Sarah ________________________________ From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2010 2:34 PM To: 'Mahoney, Maggie' Cc: Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Hi Maggie,

Our compliance and contracts had some issues with this draft and our taking the opportunity to craft their own draft, which I w Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 2638211[

________________________________ From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 10:35 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy
8_19_2011

Page 5

Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Thanks for checking on this Sarah. I’ve attached a draft letter to address the conflict issue. Do you want to see whether that’s

Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-2907514[ Fax: 651-2907515[ www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 6:19 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation

Maggie- My understanding is that budgeting into calendar years is something we must do on our end, even if we expect we m Sarah

________________________________ From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 3:05 PM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Great, thanks Sarah. I will put together a letter that copies the language of the contract and send it to you for review. A Dece

In the meantime, I accepted the changes in the draft scope of work, with one exception. I thought, based on our exchange from

After I did that, I opened the budget document and see that the template had a lot of stuff that doesn’t apply to this contract (e

Please let me know how those two things look and, as I said, I’ll draft a letter to match the contract language concerning the c Thanks! Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue
8_19_2011

Page 6

St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-2907514[ Fax: 651-2907515[ www.TCLConline.org

From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 2:59 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie Cc: Sherard, Mark; Holt, Lauren; Hamilton, Joy Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Hi Maggie - I have the go-ahead that the letter can copy the language of the contract. I do not think it needs to contain much

The changes to the scope of work look fine to me, I made changes to the budget as discussed. I put December 1 as a start dat

I am also attaching the template we use for contract budgets. I was not sure if you had other expenses besides the hourly fee.

We will start processing the contract - getting Department and County approval - when we finalize these pieces. I will work o Thanks for bearing with us, Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 2638211[

________________________________ From: Mahoney, Maggie [mailto:maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 10:16 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: FW: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Hi Sarah,

This reminded me to ask you whether we should touch base on the contract. Is there anything else you need from me at this p Maggie Mahoney Deputy Director Tobacco Control Legal Consortium
8_19_2011

Page 7

875 Summit Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 maggie.mahoney@wmitchell.edu Tel: 651-2907514[ Fax: 651-2907515[ www.TCLConline.org

From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 10:51 AM To: Schaibley, David Cc: Armstrong, Kate; Cork, Kerry; Mahoney, Maggie; Blanke, Doug Subject: RE: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation

Many, many thanks to all of you at TCLC! I really appreciate having so many sets of wonderful eyes to review our draft and t

I am incorporating many of your comments, and will send a draft off to our county prosecutor's office this morning. This item Thanks again!! Anne

Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 2639411[ anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov

________________________________ From: Schaibley, David [mailto:David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 12:59 PM To: Pearson, Anne Cc: Armstrong, Kate; Cork, Kerry; Mahoney, Maggie; Blanke, Doug Subject: R/A WA: TCLC Input on Draft E-Cigarette Regulation Dear Anne:

Attached please find our thoughts on Seattle/King County’s proposed e-cigarette regulation. We hope these thoughts are help Sincerely, Dave

David J. Schaibley |Public Health Law Center Staff Attorney, Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 651-6958_19_2011

Page 8

7611[ | Fax: 651-2907515[ david.schaibley@wmitchell.edu 875 Summit Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 www.TCLConline.org

The Tobacco Control Legal Consortium provides information and technical assistance on issues related to tobacco and public

From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 10:13 AM To: Schaibley, David; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation Great! Thanks so much. Anne

Anne Pearson, JD, MA Public Health - Seattle & King County 401 5th Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 2639411[ anne.pearson@kingcounty.gov

________________________________ From: Schaibley, David [mailto:David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 7:24 AM To: Pearson, Anne; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation Hi Anne: Just a quick update to let you know that we’ll have our input to you today. Dave From: Pearson, Anne [mailto:Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 8:41 AM To: Schaibley, David; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation

We would like to send a draft to our Prosecuting Attorneys Office by Monday or Tuesday of next week. If we could incorpor Thanks! ________________________________ From: Schaibley, David [David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu]
8_19_2011

Page 9

Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 4:04 AM To: Pearson, Anne; Mahoney, Maggie Subject: RE: Draft E-cigarette regulation Hello Anne:

Thanks for forwarding it; we'll share our thoughts. When we spoke last week you mentioned a relatively tight time frame for th Enjoy your long weekend, Dave ________________________________ From: Pearson, Anne [Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 6:55 PM To: Mahoney, Maggie; Schaibley, David Subject: Draft E-cigarette regulation Hi Maggie and David,

I hope you are both well. I was wondering if you might have the time to review a draft regulation restricting the sale of e-prod

If you have a chance to take a look, I would love to hear your thoughts. I'll be out of the office for the rest of the week but ba All the best, Anne

______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses.
8_19_2011

Page 10

______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses. ______________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Jenna Mandel-Ricci" <jricci@health.nyc.gov> "Brawley, Karen" <Karen.Brawley@kingcounty.gov> Date: 12/23/2010 1:25:34 PM Subject: RE: NYC-Seattle call today 10am/1pm Thanks, Jenna. It was great to talk to another site working on smoke-free housing. Please reach out to us whenever and we will be happy to do the same. Happy holidays, Sarah ________________________________________ From: Jenna Mandel-Ricci [jricci@health.nyc.gov] Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2010 7:02 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Brawley, Karen Cc: Victoria Grimshaw Subject: RE: NYC-Seattle call today 10am/1pm Sarah and Karen, We cannot thank you enough for taking the time to talk with us and providing all of these great resources. We promise to keep you up to speed on our progress. Very happy holidays to both of you, Jenna ________________________________ From: Ross-Viles, Sarah [mailto:Sarah.Ross-Viles@kingcounty.gov] Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 5:01 PM To: Jenna Mandel-Ricci; Brawley, Karen Cc: Victoria Grimshaw Subject: RE: NYC-Seattle call today 10am/1pm Hi Jenna and Vicky So lovely to talk to you today. I am attaching some of the documents we discussed, First, I am attaching the results of our survey with KCHA and with King County renters, along with survey instruments. I am also attaching the reduced survey instrument we currently recommend when asked. Also attached is Portland/Vancouver's eval of their smoke-free housing program (I haven't yet read it) and an article on the evaluation of Guardian's policy change. Lastly, attached is the staff presentation to the Board of Health on yesterday's e-cig ordinance. Let me know if I missed anything, Sarah

Sarah Ross-Viles CPPW Tobacco Project Manager Public Health - Seattle & King County Suite 900 401 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98102
8_19_2011

Page 2

(206) 263-8211

________________________________ From: Jenna Mandel-Ricci [mailto:jricci@health.nyc.gov] Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 7:26 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Brawley, Karen Cc: Victoria Grimshaw Subject: NYC-Seattle call today 10am/1pm Sarah and Karen, We are looking forward to our call later today. In the hopes that it is helpful, below is a list of things we were hoping to talk through with you: • Overall approach to smoke-free housing • Work with public housing authority staff • Work with public housing authority tenants • Work with other tenant groups • Work with other government agencies that provide rent subsidies for tenants or tax/development subsidies for developers • Work with private developers, landlords, etc. • Any experience with disclosure laws • New ordinance prohibiting use of e-cigarettes where regular cigarettes are prohibited Shall we call you or would you like to call us? If you’d like to call us the number is 212-676-8304. Thanks in advance, Jenna Jenna Mandel-Ricci Deputy Director, Bureau of Tobacco Control NYC Department of Health and Mental Hygiene 2 Lafayette, 21st Floor (212) 676-8360 jricci@health.nyc.gov ********************************************************************** The New York City Department of Health & Mental Hygiene is now offering information important for the health of all New Yorkers. To sign up for these new and valuable updates, log-on to our website at http://www.nyc.gov/health/email and select the NYC DOHMH updates you'd like to receive. IMPORTANT NOTICE: This email is meant only for the use of the intended recipient. It may contain confidential information that is legally privileged or otherwise protected by law. If you have received this communication in error, please notify me immediately by replying to this message and please delete it from your computer. Thank you for your cooperation. ********************************************************************** The New York City Department of Health & Mental Hygiene is now offering information important for the health of all New Yorkers. To sign up for these new and valuable updates, log-on to our website at http://www.nyc.gov/health/email and select the NYC DOHMH updates you'd like to receive. IMPORTANT NOTICE: This email is meant only for the use of the intended recipient. It may contain confidential information that is legally privileged or otherwise protected by law. If you have received this communication in error,
8_19_2011

Page 3

please notify me immediately by replying to this message and please delete it from your computer. Thank you for your cooperation.

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> "Pearson, Anne" <Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov> "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> Date: 12/24/2010 10:16:45 AM FW: CPPW Weekly Update 12.24.10 - E-cigs and early success in CPPW weekly bulleting for Subject: site Attachments: CPPW Related Training Events Calendar January - April 2011.pdf Coalition Effectiveness Inventory_butterfoss.pdf CACSH Partnership Self Assessment Tool.pdf

________________________________________ From: Payne, Rebecca L. (CDC/ONDIEH/NCCDPHP) [rco0@cdc.gov] Sent: Friday, December 24, 2010 5:34 AM

Hello!

We hope this message finds you healthy and well, and hopefully finding some time to relax and recharge as we bring 2010 to a close. Below you will find the weekly update for the week ending December 24, 2010. To be added to the distribution of this message please send your name, title, organization, and e-mail address to Brenzena Avery at bavery@cdc.gov.

All the Best, Becky Payne Here is what you will find in this update: General Updates & Resources: Reminder – CPPW Training Calendar; The CPPW "Collaborative Space"; Communities Putting Prevention to Work Website; Secretary of Health and Human Services Announces 2011 Healthy Living Innovation Awards Cooperative Agreement Updates: None this week Tobacco Resources: None this week

Nutrition, Physical Activity & Obesity Resources: Nominations requested for food policy and active transportation initiatives to prevent obesity; Tools for Measuring Partnership and Coalition Strength; APHA Invites You to a Webinar Series on: What Healthy Communities Need from their Transportation Networks; The Beverage Bulletin Early Successes: E-Cigarette regulation passed in Seattle King County ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ General Updates & Resources: Reminder - CPPW Training Calendar: We are pleased to announce the availability of a CPPW Training Calendar attached. The purpose of the Training Calendar is to provide CPPW communities with an “at-a-glance” update on upcoming CPPW-related training events. The contact person is listed for each event on the attached calendar, and they can be contacted if you have any questions.
8_19_2011

Page 2

Reminder - The CPPW "Collaborative Space" now has the National Campaign presentation from the Action Institute, NYC ads, and numerous reports and resources. The Collaborative Space is a secure, interactive, website designed to give core staff in the 50 communities a place to share resources and ideas. Please remember that the collaborative space is a great forum for sharing and well collaborating. This forum is available for any topics related to CPPW. We have heard that some thought it was only for media contacts, however we encourage you to own the space as a community and use it to foster sharing and to make peer connections on any topics you choose. If you would like to receive an invitation to the space, need assistance, or have questions, please email Cindy Hockaday at hia5@cdc.gov or call 770-488-5053.

Reminder - Communities Putting Prevention to Work Website: In October we announced the release of the Communities Putting Prevention to Work (CPPW) website on cdc.gov. We hope the Information on this website will be of value to funded communities, partners, and communities across the nation that are interested in addressing obesity and tobacco use locally and may benefit from the experience of the CPPW communities.

This website will be updated periodically, and in the future will include such features as community-specific profiles and an expanded tools and resources section.

Please feel free to share this website with your colleagues. http://www.cdc.gov/CommunitiesPuttingPreventiontoWork/

Secretary of Health and Human Services Announces 2011 Healthy Living Innovation Awards The Secretary of Health and Human Services is proud to announce the 2011 Healthy Living Innovation Awards. A new initiative at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) that seeks to identify and acknowledge innovative health promotion projects within the last 3 years that have demonstrated a significant impact on the health status of a community. The Healthy Living Innovation Awards offer an exciting chance to recognize and foster the spread of effective health promotion efforts, specifically community-based efforts that either make use of an entirely new tool or approach or have applied existing tools in an unusual way to improve community health and well-being. Eligible organizations must have an innovative project in at least one of three health promotion areas: · Healthy weight · Physical activity · Nutrition

Nominated programs must have been piloted or implemented within the last three years and have demonstrated results. (Note: An innovation can be an existing program that has been implemented in a new way within the last three years.) Awards will be given in the following categories 1) Faith-Based and/or Community Initiatives 2) Health Care Delivery
8_19_2011

Page 3

3) Healthy Workplace · Large Employer > 500 Employees · Small Employer < 500 Employees 4) Non-Profit 5) Public Sector 6) Schools (K-12) 7) Let’s Move Cities and Towns Winners will receive awards from the Secretary at a public recognition ceremony and have the opportunity to present their innovations at a national conference in spring 2011. Nominations for the awards will be accepted January 18 through March 1, 2011. To learn more about the 2011 Healthy Living Innovation Awards, please visit www.hhs.gov/secretary/about/healthyliving/. Additional information about how to apply for the awards will be forthcoming.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Cooperative Agreement Updates: None this week

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Tobacco Resources: None this week

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Nutrition, Physical Activity, Obesity Resources:

Nominations requested for food policy and active transportation initiatives to prevent obesity CDC's Division of Nutrition, Physical Activity and Obesity (DNPAO). DNPAO is seeking nominations for food policy councils and active transportation initiatives that: · Address obesity through improved nutrition and increased physical activity · Have not already undergone a rigorous evaluation of effectiveness NOTE: We are especially interested in programs and policies that address low-income populations and ethnic groups that experience higher rates of obesity. Please consider nominating your own work or that of others, and please distribute information about this nomination process widely to your relevant networks. Submission Deadline is January 21, 2011. If selected, your program will be: · Invited to participate in an Evaluability Assessment to determine its readiness for evaluation, which will include a
8_19_2011

Page 4

Spring 2011 site visit to assess implementation, data availability, intended outcomes and staff capacity. · Offered ideas by CDC project staff for improvement and evaluation design. · Featured on the CDC Web site and may be considered for a comprehensive evaluation. Share your promising programs and policies with us today! To share your notable practices with us, visit www.zoomerang.com/Survey/WEB22BK2CHY6U6/ Tools for Measuring Partnership and Coalition Strength As part of an evaluation of one of North Carolina’s state-level programs (the Eat Smart Move More Community Grants Program), tools for measuring the strength of community partnerships and/or coalitions were identified. Attached are two tools they found that may be useful to your program as well. * Partnership Self-Assessment Tool (2006-7, Center for the Advancement of Collaborative Strategies in Health, accompanying documents can be found at http://partnershiptool.net/) * Coalition Effectiveness Inventory (1998, Frances Butterfoss)

APHA Invites You to a Webinar Series on: What Healthy Communities Need from their Transportation Networks Public health and transportation professionals have the opportunity to participate in a new, four-part webinar series in 2011 that covers how transportation systems impact health in diverse communities across the nation. Join us for this series that explores the intersections between health and transportation, highlights innovative state and local programs that leverages opportunities in transportation that benefit health, and explains what the future may hold for the federal surface transportation authorization.

Participants must register to join the webinar. Please click here to register or visit https://cc.readytalk.com/r/4ozeg2azyaax

Beverage Bulletin: The Beverage Bulletin is a new CDC–supported electronic resource for practitioners interested in public health efforts to reduce sugar drinks. In addition to this monthly email bulletin, we are seeking your input on how regular networking calls related to sugar drink reduction strategies might be beneficial to you. These calls would be similar to the Fruit and Vegetable Coordinator Call or the Child Care Networking Call. Topics could include: · Ensuring ready access to potable drinking water · Limiting access to sugar drinks · Promoting access to more healthful drink alternatives · Limiting marketing of sugar drinks
8_19_2011

Page 5

· Differential pricing of beverages Please respond to Kelly Pattillo at KPattillo@cdc.gov with your interest level or ideas regarding a sugar drink networking call.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Early Successes: E-Cigarette regulation passed in Seattle King County! Board of Health approves electronic cigarette regulations. Regulations will limit sales to adults only, prohibit free samples, and restrict use in public places and places of employment. King County, WA—The King County Board of Health passed regulations today to protect King County youth from electronic smoking devices and unregulated nicotine delivery devices. The Board of Health voted unanimously to: * restrict the sales of e-cigarettes or any other unapproved nicotine delivery devices only to people 18 and older; * prohibit free or highly discounted electronic smoking devices or unapproved nicotine delivery products; * prohibit the use of e-cigarette devices in places where smoking is prohibited by law. “I am pleased that the Board of Health acted today to prohibit the sale of e-cigarettes to youth and to restrict their use in public spaces,” said Board of Health Chair Julia Patterson. “E-cigarettes are used as a means to encourage people, especially our youth, to begin smoking. Their safety and long-term health impacts are untested and unknown. The Board of Health’s responsibility is to create policies that foster the health and well being of our community, and today’s action will help achieve that objective.” Rebecca Payne, MPH Community Interventions Team Lead Communities Putting Prevention to Work Division of Adult and Community Health, NCCDPHP CDC-Atlanta office: 770-488-5167 fax: 770-488-5964

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Greto, Lindsey" <Lindsey.Greto@kingcounty.gov> 12/27/2010 1:36:16 PM RE: Fox News segment re: ecigs

Appreciated! Gla dyou were in touch with Nate. He did a great job during the segment. ________________________________________ From: Greto, Lindsey Sent: Monday, December 27, 2010 9:30 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah Subject: FW: Fox News segment re: ecigs Sorry for not looping you into this - didn't want to overload your inbox :)

--Lindsey Greto, MPA >Tobacco Prevention Program >Public Health - Seattle & King County >Ph: (206) 263-9410 Fax: (206) 296-0177 -----Original Message----From: Greto, Lindsey Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2010 5:57 PM To: Hamilton, Joy; Pearson, Anne; Neal, Scott Subject: FW: Fox News segment re: ecigs Nate's answer on e-cig segment. Good point about the toxicity of nicotine... if we could use his expertise for a board statement later, I bet we can get it... ________________________________________ From: Nathan Cobb [NCobb@legacyforhealth.org] Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2010 3:49 PM To: Greto, Lindsey Subject: Re: Fox News segment re: ecigs Lindsey, Good to hear from you! I was happy to do the segment, and a little surprised that the host wasn't more positive towards the industry (I was expecting to get double teamed.) There are a couple of swirling arguments, and I think they were expecting a more traditional tobacco control argument. There is a valid one to be made - including issues with you uptake and displacement of cessation aids. Another way of looking at it is that until these devices, every time refined nicotine has been introduced into the consumer market (apart from pharma) it has been swiftly removed. Even the tobacco companies have never tried this. There is a clear precedent that refined nicotine is too dangerous to be marketed without oversight and controls. My personal view is that the refined nicotine is the elephant in the room. Its incredibly toxic when not bound in tobacco or something else, and its only a matter of time before a kid drinks a bottle of cherry flavored "juice". - Nate On Dec 23, 2010, at 5:18 PM, Greto, Lindsey wrote:
8_19_2011

Page 2

Hi Nate, I hope that all is going well at Legacy. We just saw the Fox News segment that referenced King County's recent e-cigarette regulation. We wanted to thank you for providing such a great counter to the industry argument - we had some industry presence at the hearing last week and know that our Board members have received a lot of negative feedback. Thanks for providing the medical perspective on the show. Thanks again for helping out our cause! And if you have any suggestions for us (literature, etc), please pass it on we're anticipating more push back in the coming weeks. Happy holidays, Lindsey --Lindsey Greto, MPA Tobacco Prevention Program Public Health - Seattle & King County Ph: (206) 263-9410 Fax: (206) 296-0177

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: To: Date: Subject:

"Ross-Viles, Sarah" "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> 12/27/2010 8:33:00 PM RE: Joe McDermott

Cool! ________________________________________ From: Hamilton, Joy Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 2:28 PM To: Neal, Scott; Ross-Viles, Sarah; Pearson, Anne Subject: Joe McDermott At the e-cig debrief, someone mentioned that our new policy committee member, Joe McDermott, has championed tobacco issues in the past. I did some digging and he introduced a bill for a smoking ban in 2003. Great to hear that we've got a true champion joining our committee. http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/Content?oid=13558

Joy

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> "Pearson, Anne" <Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov> "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> Date: 12/27/2010 1:26:16 PM Subject: RE: Rush Limbaugh Deep breaths. Sigh. At least he is more factual than the Fox report. However, 10 to 1 says he was either shipped free product or is getting kick-backs to use and discuss the product. Sarah ________________________________________ From: Hamilton, Joy Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2010 9:19 AM To: Pearson, Anne; Neal, Scott; Ross-Viles, Sarah Cc: Bennett, John; Hatzenbuehler, Eric; Pajimula, Fel; Greto, Lindsey Subject: Rush Limbaugh Came across the Rush Limbaugh transcript about our e-cigs work this am: http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_121410/content/01125109.guest.html

8_19_2011

Page 1

From: "Ross-Viles, Sarah" To: "Hamilton, Joy" <Joy.Hamilton@kingcounty.gov> "Pearson, Anne" <Anne.Pearson@kingcounty.gov> "Neal, Scott" <Scott.Neal@kingcounty.gov> "Muhm, Jennifer" <Jennifer.Muhm@kingcounty.gov> Date: 12/28/2010 3:03:23 PM Subject: RE: Bill Draft Thanks, Joy and Anne. These questions reflect all my concerns. ________________________________________ From: Hamilton, Joy Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2010 10:38 AM To: Pearson, Anne; Ross-Viles, Sarah; Neal, Scott; Muhm, Jennifer Subject: RE: Bill Draft Looks like you've got everything covered Anne. One other thing to add is that we will revise the intent section to make a stronger youth-centered argument with as strong a rationale as possible. We may considered also adding rationale for the fee and penalty increases if that stays in the bill. Joy ________________________________ From: Pearson, Anne Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2010 10:33 AM To: Ross-Viles, Sarah; Neal, Scott; Hamilton, Joy; Muhm, Jennifer Subject: RE: Bill Draft

Joy and I had a chance to speak briefly this morning. Here is a list of questions we would like to discuss on tomorrow's call:

1. The fee and penalty increases are something we haven’t discussed previously. Where did that idea come from? How were the increases calculated? Should we consult the relevant agencies before proposing these increases? In particular, it would be useful to know how the agency would explain the need for an increased license fee. 2. what was the intent in singling out “non-tobacco products that contain nicotine”? Do they intend to use this bill to ban e-cigarettes since that description does not capture dissolvables, which contain ground tobacco. 3. the proposed language banning flavored products has a number of significant legal problems which I can explain on the call. I have drafted an alternative which we can describe and discuss. 4. On the issue of flavored, we need to decide whether we want to include an exception for menthol/mint flavor. As you all know, the FDA scientific advisory committee is reviewing the evidence base concerning menthol now and is scheduled to issue a report in March. Joy will take a look at the presentations that have been made to the committee to see what evidence about mint-flavored OTPs has been presented. 5. A ban on flavored products will not reach dissolvable products, unless there is the program/money to test those products to determine if they have a flavor. (I assume there will be no such funding available.) So, we need to think of an alternative way to approach dissolvables.
8_19_2011

Page 2

6. Lastly, what is the timeframe. Erin wanted edits by this Friday, which isn’t really realistic given the holidays and the need for extensive re-writes.

Joy, did I miss anything??

-----Original Message----From: Ross-Viles, Sarah Sent: Monday, December 27, 2010 4:24 PM To: Pearson, Anne; Neal, Scott; Hamilton, Joy; Muhm, Jennifer Subject: RE: Bill Draft

Hi Anne,

I thought your comments were the important ones. I added a few comments on Anne's comments. As an overall piece, I had expected to see dissolvables called out specifically. Given the difficulty of writing an all-inclusive definition for flavor, I thought the course to go would be defining dissolveable as well, and restricting products that fit that definition.

________________________________________ From: Pearson, Anne Sent: Monday, December 27, 2010 12:51 PM To: Neal, Scott; Hamilton, Joy; Ross-Viles, Sarah; Muhm, Jennifer Subject: FW: Bill Draft

Hi all,

I have had a chance to review this today and have a number of questions and concerns. I know we have a call scheduled with the advocates this Wed. I am going to try to schedule a time for us to chat internally before that call so we’re all on the same page before Wed.
8_19_2011

Page 3

Anne

________________________________ From: Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org [mailto:Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org] Sent: Monday, December 27, 2010 9:31 AM To: Hamilton, Joy; Muhm, Jennifer Cc: Pearson, Anne; 'Carrie.Glover@cancer.org'; 'Carrie Nyssen'; 'Lucy Culp'; Ross-Viles, Sarah; Neal, Scott Subject: Bill Draft

Hi All,

Thank you for your patience. Attached is a very rough draft of the pre-emption bill. I have not had a chance to review it but wanted to forward it so we could all start reviewing. Please again note this is a rough draft and any error or omission is just a mistake, not indicative of a change in direction on this legislation.

Please send your comments, proposed changes or concerns to me by Friday.

Thanks.

(See attached file: Tobacco control legislation.docx)

Erin Dziedzic Washington State Government Relations Director American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network (ACS CAN)
8_19_2011

Page 4

2120 1st Ave N. Seattle, WA 98109 Cell: 425-466-5177 Erin.Dziedzic@cancer.org

8_19_2011

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful