The WHO has said all types of cigarettes, including e-cigarettes, are detrimental to health. Most e-cigarettes contain nicotine and carcinogens, which are harmful for smokers and those who are exposed to second-hand smoke.
There is no evidence that proves e-cigarettes could help smokers quit smoking. There are also safety concerns regarding the use of e-cigarettes.
Most e-cigarettes contain carcinogens and can be used to consume marijuana and drugs such as etomidate. The Tobacco Hazards Prevention Act (菸害防制法), which was promulgated last year, prohibits selling, demonstrating and using e-cigarettes.
Despite the law being in effect for almost two years, e-cigarette smokers can still be seen almost everywhere on the streets. Foreigners can also be seen smoking e-cigarettes outside the airport.
Although a law has been enacted to ban e-cigarettes, it seems that the relevant authorities are not proactive about implementing it.
I was recently at a driving training school to sign up for a course for my son. There, I saw a woman, who was probably in her 30s, smoking an e-cigarette while waiting for her turn to practice driving.
Five or six classmates, who were also waiting for their turn to practice alongside the woman, stood up and stayed away from her. Three coaches, watching her from a distance, discussed with each other, not knowing what to do.
When I saw this, I walked toward her and said loudly: “Miss, smoking e-cigarettes is illegal. The penalty ranges from NT$2,000 to NT$10,000.” Shocked, the woman put away her e-cigarette and apologized to the people surrounding her. The Tobacco Hazards Prevention Act has been in effect for almost two years. Many smokers count on luck and blatantly violate the law just because there has not been enough enforcement of the law.
Local health agencies should expand manpower to enforce the new law. This is necessary to correct bad habits and maintain people’s health.
Chen Hung-hui is a counselor.
Translated by Fion Khan
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
The Hong Kong government on Monday gazetted sweeping amendments to the implementation rules of Article 43 of its National Security Law. There was no legislative debate, no public consultation and no transition period. By the time the ink dried on the gazette, the new powers were already in force. This move effectively bypassed Hong Kong’s Legislative Council. The rules were enacted by the Hong Kong chief executive, in conjunction with the Committee for Safeguarding National Security — a body shielded from judicial review and accountable only to Beijing. What is presented as “procedural refinement” is, in substance, a shift away from
The shifting geopolitical tectonic plates of this year have placed Beijing in a profound strategic dilemma. As Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) prepares for a high-stakes summit with US President Donald Trump, the traditional power dynamics of the China-Japan-US triangle have been destabilized by the diplomatic success of Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi in Washington. For the Chinese leadership, the anxiety is two-fold: There is a visceral fear of being encircled by a hardened security alliance, and a secondary risk of being left in a vulnerable position by a transactional deal between Washington and Tokyo that might inadvertently empower Japan
After declaring Iran’s military “gone,” US President Donald Trump appealed to the UK, France, Japan and South Korea — as well as China, Iran’s strategic partner — to send minesweepers and naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. When allies balked, the request turned into a warning: NATO would face “a very bad” future if it refused. The prevailing wisdom is that Trump faces a credibility problem: having spent years insulting allies, he finds they would not rally when he needs them. That is true, but superficial, as though a structural collapse could be caused by wounded feelings. Something
RSS