Health Canada was well aware of the risks involved when they took measures to halt the EMPowerplus shipments and sent out the warnings regarding the product. In doing so, they put Canadian citizens lives on the line ... and would by all accounts, be morally held accountable for the deaths resulting from their actions. After a Provincial court win, over criminal charges brought against them by Health Canada, Truehope founders David Hardy and Anthony Stephan next sought a permanent injunction against Health Canada in the federal courts. “Health Canada breached constitutional rights, causing deaths and hospitalizations. Canadians deserve protection from an unaccountable bureaucracy,”
Health Canada charged Truehope with selling its vitamin-mineral formula (EMPowerplus)
In a decision handed down on July 28, 2006, The Honorable Judge Gerald Meagher pointed out that there was no real health risk in taking the supplement and that “. . . to protect the participants in the Truehope Program from harm, there was no reasonable legal alternative but to disobey the DIN regulation.”
Stephan and Hardy wanted an investigation into Health Canada’s response to their discovery. “Why the negative response to such positive findings?” Hardy asks. “Over ten years, thousands of Canadians have sought our help because typical drug treatments have not worked for them. In an environment where suicide is common and where some medications are now known to increase the likelihood of suicide, we are ecstatic with our success rate.” Pioneering any mental health treatment is not without significant risk, but Hardy and Stephan don’t have a choice.
“The court has ruled that we would be found negligent if we did not continue to offer our breakthrough treatment and support to Canadians who need it so desperately,”
Now, only a couple of years later, we are left wondering what the motivation is behind their reaction to the electronic cigarette, since Health Canada has again moved forward with the same reckless disregard, as was shown in its handling of EMPowerplus. Health Canada sent out a very similar warning regarding the possible dangers associated with the use of the electronic cigarette, further stating that it is an unapproved drug and considered a drug devise under FDA regulations. In doing so, Health Canada has played a major role in the product boycott and border ban.
Although there seems to be some discrepancy regarding which category the electronic cigarette fits in since it is such a unique product, in Canada, a number of nicotine products are currently approved as a Natural Health Product by Health Canada. (NHP Ingredients Database, Registry Entry – Nicotine – Number: 54-11-5) Technically, the FDA should not have jurisdiction over the electronic cigarette since there are other similar already approved products on the market and the electronic cigarette would likely fit within the description - Nicotine and its salts when sold in a form to be administered orally by means of an inhalation device delivering 4mg or less of nicotine per dosage unit.
http://webprod.hc-
With regards to the suggested safety concerns, it is completely unreasonable for Health Canada to suggest that this product would be more dangerous than any of the already approved nicotine products in this category. With this in mind, it can also be reasonably expected that nicotine as provided in this form, would certainly be an immensely safer alternative, considering the toxic nature of the tobacco products.
45,000 Canadians die from smoking each year and that number is steadily rising. Most smokers are very aware of the dangers associated with the tobacco products and the electronic cigarette is the first viable alternative ever, to be marketed to the adult smoking consumer. Its popularity has been growing in recent years and there are a large number of consumers which have come to rely on this product. To remove the electronic cigarette from the market would force these consumers to return to the tobacco products which will most likely cause serious health consequences, ultimately leading to death.
http://www.smoke-
As per the Canadian Charter of Health Freedom act ... we have the right to make personal health decisions without the interference of the State. This right includes, but is not limited to, the right to make decisions concerning
(i) maintaining health and wellness;
(ii) preventing illness;
(iii) treating illness or injury, and
(iv) diagnosing illness or injury;
(d) the right to have access to any treatment unless there is substantial and compelling evidence:
(i) the treatment poses a significant health risk, and
(ii) that interfering with access to the treatment will not create a more significant health risk than is posed by the treatment itself, and
(e) the right to refuse any treatment.
http://nhppa.org/
I am of the firm belief that in it's haste ... Health Canada has led other influential entities down a very slippery slope in its efforts to rid the marketplace of a clearly viable alternative to smoking. In doing so, not only has it has put the health and welfare of Canadians choosing to utilize the electronic cigarette in danger, it has also interfered with our rights as set out in the Canadian Charter of Health Freedom Act.
