Kuhio Park Terrace got a visit from an old friend yesterday as U.S. Sen. Daniel K. Inouye met with residents and toured the facility as part of National Community Service Day.
Advertisement

Inouye, who established the housing project’s Kameha’ikana resource center with $13 million in U.S. Department of Labor funds in 2003, was joined by fellow U.S. Sen. Daniel Akaka, Lt. Gov. James “Duke” Aiona, Hawai’i Public Housing Authority executive director Chad Taniguchi and others.

“It means a lot for everyone to have Sen. Inouye visit because he played such a major role in the development of these buildings and because he is so highly regarded in the Samoan community,” said Robert Faleafine, president of Realty Laua, which manages the property.

About 100 Bank of Hawaii employees and their families joined more than 200 residents in painting and repairing 15 vacant units and cleaning the grounds.

BOH regional manager and senior vice president Danny Kim said his first visit to Kuhio Park Terrace was a memorable one.

“It’s a beautiful facility and the people were very nice,” said Kim, who came with his 12-year-old son, Micah. “Still, when you go into the units, it opens your eyes and you feel fortunate and blessed for what you have. At the same time, you also realize that you have an obligation and a responsibility to help others.”

Resident Jackson Nithan, 36, spent the morning picking up trash around the periphery of the property, a job that left him shaking his head in disgust.

“There was plastic and garbage all along the fences,” he said. “It really needed to be cleaned up. It was very, very dirty, and that’s not healthy for the people that live here.”

Nithan also attended a financial advising seminar in which Bank of Hawaii representatives offered tips for establishing and maintaining a budget, building savings and planning for the future.

“It was awesome,” Nithan said. “I realized that I have to quit smoking so I can save money — hundreds of dollars — for my kids for school. It was very helpful.”

Neighbor Cathsy Nathan, 23, agreed.

“I like to spend money, but afterward I feel like crying,” she said. “They told us how to budget our money and save for the future.”

Reach Michael Tsai at mtsai@honoluluadvertiser.com.

SALEM, Ore. — The Oregon Department of Justice last week filed two settlements that prevent two national travel store chains, Pilot and TravelCenters of America, from selling “electronic cigarettes” in Oregon. The action is the first of its kind in the country and prevents Oregonians from buying “potentially dangerous” products that the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) has yet to approve, the department said.

“When products threaten the health and safety of Oregonians, we will take action,” said Mary Williams, deputy attorney general. “If companies want to sell electronic cigarettes to consumers, they have to be able to prove they are safe.”

The affected travel store chains, Pilot Travel Centers, which has seven centers in Oregon, and TravelCenters of America (TA), which has four centers in Oregon, both sell NJOY brand e-cigarettes.

E-cigarettes are battery operated nicotine delivery devices constructed to mimic conventional cigarette. Each “cigarette” consists of a heating element and a replaceable plastic cartridge that contains various chemicals, including various concentrations of liquid nicotine. The heating element vaporizes the liquid, which the user inhales as if it were smoke.

“Despite FDA-issued Import Alerts against NJOY and other brands of electronic cigarettes, and despite the fact that the U.S. Customs Service detained several shipments of these devices, sales of e-cigarettes continue throughout the United States. Sales persisted even though just last week the FDA warned the public about health concerns regarding e-cigarettes,” the department said.

The FDA tests showed a wide variation in the amount of nicotine delivered by three different samples of nicotine cartridges with the same label. Tests also revealed the presence of nitrosamines—a known carcinogen. By the time the FDA issued its warnings, the Oregon Department of Justice had already launched an active investigation of the sale and promotion of e-cigarettes. NJOY electronic cigarettes were a target of that investigation.

The settlement prohibits the sale of e-cigarettes in Oregon until they are approved by the FDA, or until a court rules the FDA does not have the authority to regulate e-cigarettes. Even if courts decide that the FDA does not have regulation authority, the settlement stipulates that e-cigarettes may not be sold in Oregon unless there is competent and reliable scientific evidence to support the product’s safety claims. In addition, the companies must give the attorney general (John Kroger, pictured) advance notice that they intend to sell e-cigarettes in Oregon, provide copies of all e-cigarette advertising and provide copies of the scientific studies they maintain substantiates their claims.

Scottsdale, Ariz.-based said in a statement regarding the FDA’s report, “NJOY’s products have been on the market since at least April 2007 with no reports of significant adverse health consequences…. NJOY has been tested by an independent third-party laboratory, Exponent…. We are therefore surprised the FDA’s testing has resulted in the agency suggesting that our products represent a health risk on par with conventional cigarettes.”

The FDA’s report admits its conclusions don’t apply to all products, the statement said. “Broad statements were made on the call that diethylene glycol (DEG) was detected in the test samples, but the specific report shows that DEG was not found in NJOY’s products. The results touted by FDA related to antifreeze are inapplicable to NJOY’s products. FDA’s report simply shows that the products contain certain tobacco-specific impurities (at much lower levels than conventional cigarettes, and this is something we are having our experts compare in the reports conduct by NJOY and the FDA).

It added, “The FDA has not asked us to relabel our product, or to remove it from product shelves, at any point in the two years we have been in the market.”

Separately, Smokefree Innotec Inc. recently issued a statement referring to articles in USA Today and The New York Times regarding the FDA taking aim at e-cigarettes. The national newspapers stated that tests show that certain e-cigarettes contain “known carcinogens and toxic chemicals,” including diethylene-glycol (an ingredient used in antifreeze, printing ink, brake fluid and glue) and nitrosamine (which is used in rubber products, the tobacco industry and, less concentrated, in beer and fish products).

Thomas Schroepfer, president of Smokefree Innotec, said, “The company’s electronic cigarette was not among those tested and is completely different from those tested as we do not use any kind of transponder substance. We have received confirmations from industry sources with knowledge of our product design and manufacturing process that no carcinogens or toxic chemicals capable of polluting our product are used in the manufacturing process and that the design of our product ensures a lower consumption level of nicotine, while still providing satisfaction to the consumer.”

The Nashville, Tenn.-based company is in the business of designing, developing, manufacturing and marketing a “smokeless tobacco innovation.” It said its patent-pending, odorless cigarette-style electronic device uses a liquefied, vaporizable depot of a raw, unmanipulated extract of tobacco. “Smokefree Innotec’s products are designed to protect the nonsmoker from secondhand smoke and all its effects while providing the smoker a way to enjoy a smoke-free cigarette anywhere, including places where smoking is prohibited. Further, [its] products will allow the smoker to enjoy smoking while not having to worry about the dangers and ill effects of regular cigarette smoking.”


© Cspnet

WALDO COUNTY : Waldo County government property may soon join the ranks of a growing number of entirely smoke-free places.

On July 14 the Waldo County Commissioners proposed the complete smoking ban during a routine review of county policy. While several county officials present at the meeting raised questions about the effect of an outright ban on the personal liberties of smokers, the commissioners seemed to agree on the need for a smoking cessation program.

If the ban is implemented, the county would likely receive support from Healthy Waldo County, a public health organization funded with tobacco settlement money and dedicated in part to discouraging smoking.

HWC Administrator Vyvyenne Ritchie met with the county commissioners on Tuesday to discuss a smoking cessation program. Ritchie invoked the widely documented dangers of second-hand smoke and stated a statistic from HWC literature: that 80 percent of people who smoke want to quit.

“By implementing this policy, you’re supporting them being more healthy,” she said.

According to Ritchie, the “support” would not be limited to a slap on the wrist. HWC would offer a range of resources to county employees who wished to quit smoking, from publications to support groups and access to the Maine Tobacco Helpline. Nicotine patches could be used to help workers get through shifts where taking a smoking break would be impractical, she said.

The commissioners were generally receptive to the proposed ban, but Commissioner Donald Berry raised questions about interfering with personal liberties.

“When you talk about it being hard to quit, I know,” Berry said. “Why? Because I don’t think I could ever quit dark chocolate.”

“But we’re not taking your chocolate away,” replied Commissioner Amy Fowler. “We’re just telling you you can’t eat it here.”

Ritchie said that, in her experience as a nurse, she became aware that smoking is among the hardest addictions for people to overcome. It’s legal, and often people have been smoking since they were teenagers, she said, making it more difficult for them to quit later.

Smoking is currently prohibited within 25 feet of public entrances to county buildings. On Tuesday, the possibility of employees wishing to smoke on break being pushed out to the sidewalks where the regulations would not apply came up several times.

Regional Communications Center Director Owen Smith spoke of his employees taking smoke breaks outside the Communications Center building. If smoking were banned on the property, Smith said, there would still be ways to call staff members back to the building in the event of an emergency. Smith sympathized with anyone struggling to quit, and cautioned the county to give employees plenty of advance notice.

“I’m sensitive to it,” he said. “My demon is Pepsi.”

When Ritchie brought up the cumulative expense of buying cigarettes, Commissioner Bill Shorey revealed that his was Pepsi, too. “I’m with Owen here. I know what two Diet Pepsis a day costs,” he said. “It’s not cheap.”

The move to tighten smoking restrictions at county facilities comes on the heels of recent state legislation prohibiting smoking at state beaches and parks, and at outdoor dining areas. A bill on workplace smoking, signed into law on June 8, eliminates designated indoor smoking areas, and extends laws that prohibit smoking in the workplace to “residential facilities” that are licensed by the Department of Health and Human Services, a designation that includes day cares.
©  Villagesoup

At least 15,000 purchasers of chewing tobacco in Massachusetts could be eligible for a piece of a $10.65 million class action settlement with U.S. Smokeless Tobacco Co., according to a lawyer for plaintiffs who sued the company.

The plaintiffs’ legal team, which had alleged that UST artificially inflated the cost of chewing tobacco through its large market share, has launched a Web site to explain to consumers how they can access their share of the settlement.

Frequent purchasers of chewing tobacco could be eligible to get up to $700 depending on how many UST products – which include the Copenhagen and Skoal brands – they purchased from Jan. 1, 1990, through May 21. Infrequent purchasers could get $25 to $100.

Robert Bonsignore, one of the lawyers who represented the plaintiffs, said he was initially approached by chewing-tobacco users about filing a lawsuit after Conwood, a competitor of UST’s, had made similar claims against the company. The suit was filed in Suffolk Superior Court in 2001, and was one of several similar class action suits across the country, Bonsignore said.

Both sides in the Massachusetts fight eventually reached an agreement. That settlement was approved on May 22 by Suffolk Superior Court Judge Stephen Neel.

“They fought it hard for a lot of years,” Bonsignore said of U.S. Smokeless Tobacco, which is now part of Altria Group. “Both sides understood there were great risks (with moving forward with the case, so) we sat down and tried to come to a fair and reasonable settlement.”

A portion of the settlement amount will be used to pay the plaintiffs’ legal costs. Any funds that are left over would be contributed through court-approved donations to charities that haven’t been named yet.

© Patriotledger

Some of the world’s greatest red wines come from the fog-shrouded hills of the Piedmont region of northwestern Italy, an area also known for its fragrant — and very expensive — white truffles. Two such wines are Barolo and Barbaresco, made from the grape nebbiolo.

The grape is grown in other places — some California vintners produce decent versions — but it’s very fussy about its surroundings. No place else in the world produces nebbiolo as stunning as those from the Barolo or Barbaresco zones.

The two wines used to be tough, acidic and tannic, requiring many years of aging to be drinkable. Now they are still powerful, but modern winemaking techniques have resulted in wines that are fresher and more approachable.

For one thing, fermentation and maceration times are shorter. With the old methods, the new wines would be left on the skins for as long as two months. This extracted huge amounts of tannin from a grape that already had a tendency to be quite tannic. Then the wine was aged in casks for five or six years to soften it some, but that resulted in a lot of oxidized, dried-out wines.

Some of the modern techniques got a little extreme. Ten years ago, some winemakers’ fondness for new French oak barrels resulted in overly oaky wines. But the pendulum seems to be swinging back toward the center, and a lot of the modernists are toning down the new oak. “Even more modern producers are moving
Advertisement
toward the more traditional,” says Aldo Vacca, director of Produttori del Barbaresco, which makes wines in a fairly traditional style. “Everything is sort of coming together.”

These wines are luxuries: You won’t find many bottles of Barolo or Barbaresco for under $50, and single-vineyard examples often cost well over $100. (The basic Barbaresco that Vacca produces at Produttori del Barbaresco is a good value. The 2005 ($40) is rich yet bright, with dark red cherry fruit, hints of dried cherry and anise, persistent acidity and firm but approachable tannins.)

I stopped at a handful of producers on a brief visit during last winter’s truffle season, when the air is pungent with the aromas of the pricey white fungus. Here are some of the highlights.

CERETTO: Ceretto produces a range of Barolo and Barbaresco wines that are rich and fairly modern but still true to their roots. In fact, Federico Ceretto says, the winery has backed off some from its use of small oak barrels, a reaction to the very hot and dry 2003 vintage, when those barrels were simply too aggressive for the wines.

The Ceretto wines are bottled under the family name as well as under the names of two satellite wineries: Bricco Asili for Barbaresco and Bricco Rocche for Barolo. The 2005 Ceretto Barbaresco “Asij” ($46) is rich and ripe, with dark cherry, mocha and fine tannins, while the 2005 Bricco Asili Barbaresco “Bernardot” ($81) is lively, rich and more structured, with notes of red cherry, roasted coffee and spice, drying tannins and a long finish. The 2004 Ceretto Barolo “Zonchera” ($53) displays rich, dark cherry, notes of spice, anise and tar, good acidity and firm tannins. The 2004 Bricco Rocche Barolo “Brunate” ($90) is rich, opulent and more modern, with dark cherry and mocha flavors and fine tannins.

The Cerettos are a forward-thinking family, and they’ve opened a new wine education center at their main winery outside Alba. The center, which was still under construction during my visit, has a tasting area, shop and conference facilities. This sort of Napa-style facility isn’t common in Piedmont but should become a good draw for visitors.

PIO CESARE: Pio Cesare represents a synthesis of the traditional and the modern. The winery dates to 1881, and some of the cellar walls date back to Roman times. But inside these old cellars (and a new addition), the winemaking is a mix of old and new. Pio Boffa, great-grandson of the founder and manager of the winery, is particularly excited about the 2004 vintage, calling it “a classic vintage for nebbiolos.”

The 2004 Pio Cesare Barbaresco ($64) displays bright cherry and dried cherry flavors, hints of tobacco and mineral, firm but approachable tannins and a long finish, while the 2004 Barolo ($64) has ripe cherry fruit, notes of anise and tar, hints of dark chocolate and coffee and fine tannins. The single-vineyard 2004 Barolo “Ornato” ($117) is a little more modern, with dark cherry and great concentration. It’s still tight but shows great potential.

RENATO RATTI: The late Renato Ratti was considered the father of modern Barolo. In addition to introducing winemaking innovations like temperature-controlled fermentation and shorter aging times, he was a pioneer in producing single-vineyard wines. According to his son Pietro Ratti, who runs the winery, his father was inspired by a trip to Burgundy, where he saw the similarities between pinot noir and nebbiolo. He produced his first single-vineyard Barolo in 1965.

The 2004 Renato Ratti Barolo “Marcenasco” ($55) is ripe and elegant, with cherry, an intriguing note of caraway and fine tannins, while the 2004 Barolo “Rocche” ($99) is ripe, aromatic and powerful, with dark cherry, anise seed, spice and very firm tannins. (I loved the 2004 Barolo “Conca,” with its juicy fruit and floral notes, but the importer is sold out; if you can find it, expect to pay at least $85.)

PAOLO SCAVINO: Enrico Scavino makes fairly modern wines, but he, too, is making less use of small oak barrels. The Barolos here are powerful and spicy, with good length. I tasted a pair of 2005s, which won’t be available till this fall. The 2005 Barolo “Bricco Ambrogio” ($80) is firmly structured but approachable, with bright cherry and notes of anise and tar, while the 2005 Barolo “Bric del Fiasc” ($128) is a tremendous, full-bodied wine with ample fruit and structure. It will reward long aging.

ALTERNATIVES: For a less expensive alternative to Barolo and Barbaresco, look for wines labeled as nebbiolo d’Alba or nebbiolo Langhe. These wines are less powerful and complex than Barolo or Barbaresco, but they’re also ready to drink sooner. The 2007 Renato Ratti “Ochetti” Nebbiolo d’Alba ($18) is a tremendous value. It offers ripe cherry, a hint of anise and firm tannins. The 2007 Produttori del Barbaresco Nebbiolo Langhe ($26), made from grapes from the Barbaresco zone, displays ripe yet bright cherry and dried cherry flavors, notes of anise seed and spice and fine tannins.

The other main reds from the area, barbera and dolcetto, can also be good values, though they are completely different from the nebbiolo-based wines. The 2007 Prunotto Dolcetto d’Alba ($18) is fresh and fruity, with bright berry, hints of tar and spice and medium tannins, while the 2007 Renato Ratti “Torriglione” Barbera d’Alba ($17) displays ripe blueberry and a hint of white pepper.
© Mercurynews

U.S. senators began debate Tuesday on historic legislation to allow the Food and Drug Administration to regulate cigarettes – an idea that has the strong backing of public health advocates across the country.

Standing in their way on Tuesday were the two senators from North Carolina.

Republican Richard Burr and Democrat Kay Hagan teamed up for the first significant issue in their short time together in the Senate, offering arguments to weaken the effects of a popular bill that, they fear, could decimate a historic industry in their state.
North Carolina is the nation’s top producer of tobacco, growing $686 million worth of leaf last year on 12,000 farms. The state’s tobacco manufacturers, from the behemoth R.J. Reynolds to tiny boutique companies, put 10,000 people to work.

The economic impact, Hagan told committee members, amounts to $7 billion.

“The bill before us today is going to further devastate the economy in North Carolina and put thousands of people out of work,” she said.

The effort by North Carolina’s senators to protect tobacco came, coincidentally, on the same day that N.C. Gov. Beverly Perdue signed into law a sweeping ban on smoking in most bars and restaurants in the state.

Perdue, a Democrat, signed the bill in the old House chamber in the state Capitol as more than 125 state lawmakers and others cheered.

Perdue called it “an absolutely historic day for this great state that was built initially on the backbone of tobacco.”

The smoking ban takes effect in January and applies to the inside portions of nearly all bars and restaurants. There are narrow exceptions for cigar bars, and private clubs such as country clubs and VFW halls.

Tuesday was the first meeting of the Senate health committee to discuss details of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009, championed by Sen. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts. Committee discussion and approval, called a mark-up, will continue Wednesday and possibly into Thursday. From there, the bill goes to the Senate floor.

The bill could have sweeping impact on tobacco companies, the marketing of their products. One of every five Americans uses tobacco, and smoking-related disease kills nearly half a million a year – more than any other preventable cause of death.

The bill would require companies to register their products and ingredient breakdowns with the FDA. It would allow the agency to limit the amount of harmful products, though not wipe out entirely addictive ingredients such as nicotine.

It also aims to reduce childhood smoking – banning candy-flavored tobacco products, ending advertising near schools and playgrounds, sending vending machines to adult-only establishments and plastering larger warnings across packs of tobacco.

Backers say the advertising restrictions aimed at youth are critical. Ninety percent of smoking adults began as children, and more than 3,000 children try their first cigarette each day.

“From a moral sense, I don’t understand people who manufacture products which kill people,” said Sen. Bernie Sanders, a Vermont Independent.

Tobacco opponents came armed with props. Sen. Sherrod Brown, an Ohio Democrat, put up a chart showing the sleek pink-and-black packaging of Camel No. 9’s, a sleek cigarette stamped with a pink camel. The cigarette was handed out free at bars around N.C. State University when it launched two years ago and is advertised in magazines such as Cosmopolitan and Glamour that target young women.

Sen. Jeff Merkley, an Oregon Democrat, criticized “dissolvable tobacco,” a sweet-tasting melt-in-your-mouth lozenge that contains nicotine. A type called “Orbs,” sold in packages shaped as cell phones, is being test-marketed in his state.

“The best marketers are the people who make Camel,” Brown said. “They beat the sheriff.”

Orbs and Camel No. 9’s are products of R.J. Reynolds of Winston-Salem, N.C.

Burr, a Winston-Salem resident, didn’t speak until nearly an hour into the hearing, passing on an opening statement with a shake of his head and only raising his voice — very quietly — during a discussion of an amendment on putting tobacco regulation not in the FDA, but in the Centers for Disease Control.

“Mr. Chairman,” Burr began.

The room rustled and heads craned. Burr is Kennedy’s top opponent on the bill.

Burr spoke for 10 full minutes. He talked about the shortcomings of the FDA, how it has struggled against salmonella. He raised the specter of swine flu and said the agency could get distracted during a pandemic.

“I’m up here defending the FDA right now, not tobacco companies, not tobacco farmers,” Burr said.

And he issued a warning, hinting at the filibuster he has threatened in the past to shut down debate on the Senate floor.

“I put my colleagues on notice,” Burr said. “This is something that will be carried a much longer time on the floor than it will in this hearing.”

(Such a filibuster would be tough to sustain, given Democrats’ potential 60-vote support in the Senate.)

Burr fought back further as his colleagues criticized tobacco companies. He accused the FDA of falling short on investigations into food-borne illnesses: “You’re recommending turning regulation of tobacco over to an agency that has a track record of killing Americans,” he said.

And he practically challenged tobacco opponents to a duel: “If you want to outlaw tobacco, I’m happy to offer that amendment. … If you want to deprive adults of their choice, that’s fine. But let’s have a go at it.”

But though Burr’s and Hagan’s legislative staffs have been talking daily, Burr declined to offer any of the amendments he had in his pocket.

On Wednesday, Burr may put forward his own alternative bill, co-sponsored by Hagan, that would create a new agency for tobacco regulation – without many of the restrictions in the Kennedy bill. He will wait on his other ideas. Those include amendments on setting health standards for cigarettes and smokeless tobacco, and an amendment that addresses some advertising restrictions.

Hagan offered two amendments. The first would keep the FDA from forcing manufacturers to make changes that might impact leaf growers. The second would clarify that the FDA cannot directly or indirectly regulate tobacco growers or the leaf itself.

Both brought a flurry of opposition, and she withdrew them before the committee could vote.

After the meeting, Hagan circled the table to the Republican side and leaned over to speak into Burr’s ear about the amendments.

She may bring them back up, she said afterward. “We’ll wait to see.”

New tobacco legislation ordered to check the content matches the cigarettes labeling. Researchers explained that in general, picture is for illustrative purposes only.

Tobacco products in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and other Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries have to experience content tests before they can go on sale, as part of the new needs on tobacco in the region.
The head of the National Tobacco Control Committee, Dr. Wedad Al Maidoor, told that soon will order to test all tobacco products for to assure that their ingredients, such as tar and nicotine, were correct.
Before the smoking products will go on sale, they will be tested in a laboratory in Jordan, for to make sure that the content labeling is correct, said Dr. Wedad.
Researchers added also, that not only cigarettes will be tested but all types of tobacco, including cigarettes, sheesha tobacco and loose tobacco for the midwakh, and all current and new cig brands of tobacco products.
For example, under the rule will be tobacco products that claim to contain less than 10mg of tar, for example, will be tested to ensure they contained the appropriate amount. The rule could become effective by the end of this year.
Other need is to put warning photos on tobacco packs, such as blackened lungs, rotting teeth and brain hemorrhage, along with the health warning text.
The UAE Ministry of Health reported that the graphic warnings will be on tobacco packs in September, said researchers. It believes that these warnings will influence the people’s attitudes regarding tobacco.
“The pictures will have to take up 50 percent of the front and back of the tobacco pack,” Dr. Wedad said.
The main aim of this new legislation is to see if the pictures will help smokers to decide, whether to avoid or stop smoking.

Mike Rudowicz, former president of the American Amusement Machine Association, has formed Entertainment Connections LLC. He plans to work with carefully selected companies as a coin-op specialist to explore opportunities for new product development, licensing and market analysis.

His first venture will be the establishment of an international network of distributors for a line of tobacco-free alternative smoking products manufactured by Freedom Smokeless Corp. (Dana Point, CA). Freedom’s Electra Smoke system makes use of cigarette- and cigar-shaped battery-powered vaporizers that deliver a fine aerosol mist free of particulate matter and other combustion products. They contain no tobacco, generate no smoke (“second-hand” or otherwise) and present no fire hazard.

Mike Lewis, the chief executive officer of Freedom Smokeless, welcomed Rudowicz to the team. He and Glenn Kassel developed the “electronic cigarette” to meet growing international demand for something to satisfy the desires of cigarette smokers while not violating clean-air laws. The design, now available in cigarette and cigar form, consists of an atomizer cartridge with an orifice at one end mounted inline with a long-life battery. Creating a low-pressure zone around the orifice causes the battery to atomize a liquid medium in the cartridge; the low pressure pulls it through the orifice. In practice, this is effected by picking the assembly up and taking a drag.

The cigarette-styled model’s cartridge can generate a volume of mist equivalent to 50 conventional cigarettes — and, unlike a cigarette, it does not present the need to consume the entire payload at one time. It presently is available in four flavors — tobacco, menthol, apple and vanilla — with either regular or light nicotine, or no nicotine at all.

The cigar simulator contains enough medium to produce mist equivalent to nonstop smoking of about eight cigars. Cartridges are available in Cubana and Vanilla flavors, with or without nicotine.

Freedom Smokeless regards vending as a prime market for the line, and offers machines for the cigarette and cigar surrogates. The wall-mounted venders feature traditional solid wood or conemporary stainless cabinet styling, with a large merchandising window. The “Electra Smoke” cigarette-sized devices are supplied in packages that can be vended through any cigarette machine accommodating 100mm. styles.

According to Lewis and Kassel, the concept has done extremely well in tests, and they are confident that it will prove very successful in vending because it meets a widespread demand that continues to grow as more and more jurisdictions outlaw indoor smoking. This has proved especially problematic in bars, taverns and clubs, traditionally the core of the cigarette vending business.

Rudowicz’s Entertainment Connections organization will assist in acquainting operators with the line and setting up distribution. “Having an experienced, well-respected guy like Mike on our team will help us immensely,” Kassel predicted.

Source: Vendingtimes