Public health policy quiz...

Most readers will know that e cigarettes now look likely to become regulated as a medicinal product, with huge cost implications for an industry comprised mainly as SME’s. I thought it might be fun to play a little public health policy themed game, called "What/who am I and should I be banned/prosecuted?"
------------------------------------
A) 93,489 of these products were sold in 2011, all quite legally

In the same year, they caused the deaths of 362 users, as well as 5,247 serious injuries and 20,150 casualties. A much safer alternative is readily available, and 99% of consumers already use it. The 1% of consumers who choose not to use the safer alternative make up 20% of all related deaths and serious injuries.

They are 40 times more likely to die than consumers who chose the safer alternative. The 1% of consumer who chose the more dangerous product in 2011 included the then Chief Executive of the Trading Standards Institute, who remain silent to this day about the appalling safety record of these products and the risk of death and injury to its users.

B) In 2009, an All Party Parliamentary Group estimated that there were 1.5 million involuntary addicts of these products in the UK

They are illegal to supply without a government licence, however in 2010, the government directly subsidised the supply of more than 6.6 million batches of them to consumers in England. It did so though its authorised agents in the public and private sectors, who are almost entirely self-regulating. The suppliers of these products, which are known to cause many serious long term health problems, have never faced any criminal sanctions.

Although several of them have been successfully sued by consumers. In 1987, a Scandinavian study found that 11% of male addicts and 23% of female addicts commit suicide.

C) We are an organisation that supplies goods and services to schools and schoolchildren

One of the products we supply to schoolchildren is highly toxic and resembles confectionery. Although the packaging states "keep out of reach of children", we have a policy of ignoring this warning.

In 2009 there was a documented case where we supplied this product, in a potentially lethal dose, to a 14 year old child called Aiden without telling his parents. He was rushed to hospital and survived. Aiden's Mother called for us to be banned from supplying these products to schoolchildren, but nothing happened. The doctor who treated him commented that had he not smoked two cigarettes prior to using the product we gave him he would have died.

When questioned by the media regarding the incident we simply defended our policy of supplying these products to children without parental consent and resolved to continue doing so whether the parents like it or not. Neither the Local Authority nor any other government regulator took any form of enforcement action against us.
------------------------------------
Can anyone guess the answers? Over the next week or so I’ll post some answers, with links, and invite you to discuss the public health policy issues at stake.