November 2021 – Page 2 – Consumer Choice Center

How Germany’s new coalition could change the fate of the TRIPs waiver

Since South Africa and India proposed a temporary waiver on the intellectual property shielding COVID-19 vaccines and other interventions more than a year ago at the World Trade Organization, they have acquired broad — and sometimes unexpected — support.

Germany remains a steadfast opponent though. And while other nations such as the United Kingdom and Switzerland have also maintained their opposition, Germany’s hostility to the proposal carries outsized weight.

“The German government until today has been really harsh in rejecting this,” Jörg Schaaber, from the civil society group BUKO Pharma-Kampagne, told Devex. “That has a significant influence on the EU position.” Observers said Germany’s stance helps explain why the European Commission remains opposed to the waiver despite a June vote by the European Parliament to start discussions on the Indian and South African proposal.

Read the full article here

David Clement on Living Life and Taking Risks

On this pop-up episode of She Thinks, IWF’s Director for the Center of Policy & Innovation interviews David Clement of the Consumer Choice Center on people’s misunderstanding of risk. The COVID-19 pandemic has transformed the way many Americans look at risk, but the concept can be also be applied to other areas of life like food regulations and vaping regulations.

Listen to the podcast here

Deputados europeus defendem quebra de patentes a Lira e Pacheco

Congresso Nacional dará palavra final ao veto de Jair Bolsonaro sobre quebra temporária de patentes de vacinas

O Parlamento Europeu defendeu que o Congresso Nacional derrube um veto de Jair Bolsonaro sobre a quebra temporária de patentes de vacinas e medicamentos para enfrentar emergências sanitárias. A carta foi enviada nesta quarta-feira (17/11) ao presidente da Câmara, Arthur Lira, e ao presidente do Senado, Rodrigo Pacheco.

Oito deputados do Parlamento Europeu defenderam que o Congresso volte a exigir que donos de patentes transfiram o conhecimento das suas tecnologias. “O direito humano à saúde tem precedência sobre regras em aspectos comerciais de propriedades intelectuais”. O documento faz menção ao acordo Trips, lei de patentes internacional da qual o Brasil é signatário.

Read the full article here

Toronto takes on MADD: Good luck with that!

November 30, 2021
By David Clement
In Recent Media, Ride-sharing, Sharing Economy
1 comment

The freeze on new ridesharing licences couldn’t come at a worse time

Last week Toronto city council suspended the issuance of all new ridesharing licences until the city approves and rolls out a driver safety program. This suspension, which will significantly limit supply, does nothing for consumer safety but does run the risk of jeopardizing public safety.

The motion, pushed by councillors who have opposed ridesharing access at almost every turn, addresses a problem that is the council’s own creation. Almost 18 months ago, the city decided it would move forward with a rideshare-driver training program, but then sat on its hands and never approved a vendor. (In Toronto, transactions that don’t require government sign-off are getting rarer and rarer.) And now, Catch-22, Council has decided to suspend new permits because drivers haven’t taken the safety course. Whose fault is it that the city approved a training program without any plan for implementing it? Not drivers’ fault and certainly not consumers’ fault.

The freeze on new ridesharing licences couldn’t come at a worse time — just as the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) announces it is reducing service routes due to staff shortages, mostly because it can’t persuade its employees to get vaccinated. Now, with driver shortages looming in the ride-share industry, consumers can expect to face higher prices and longer than usual wait times.

Restricted ridesharing combined with disrupted public transit is a recipe for increases in drunk driving and motor vehicle collisions, as the academic literature on ridesharing’s effect on impaired driving shows. In Houston, for example, researchers at the University of Texas concluded that “rideshare volume had a significant negative correlation with the incidence of motor vehicle-associated trauma, and this was most evident in those younger than 30 years.” Analyzing 24 million Uber rides, they found that access to ridesharing reduced motor vehicle collisions by 23.8 per cent — a remarkable reduction that should be celebrated from a public safety perspective.

Economist Jessica Lynn Peck found that in New York City the introduction of ridesharing services reduced motor vehicle collisions involving impairment by 25-35 per cent, with the highest reduction taking place in densely packed Manhattan. This well-established negative correlation presumably is why Mothers Against Drunk Driving Canada (MADD) issued a statement in opposition to the City’s motion: “MADD Canada fully supports the implementation of the mandatory training program, but believes the decision to halt rideshare drivers’ licences until that program is in place will have a negative impact on Torontonians.”

Other research finds that ridesharing “leads to a significant decline in arrests for both physical and sexual assault.” This is likely why 81 per cent of femaleriders say that safety is their primary motivation in using ridesharing, which allows digital tracking of the driver and sharing one’s route with a family member or friend in real time. Restricting access to ridesharing will tend to push women to less safe alternatives.

As Ontario continues to open up from the pandemic, Toronto’s city council is putting public safety at risk and doing so, ironically under the banner of consumer safety. More and more Ontarians are going out to restaurants, bars, clubs, and that will only intensify as the holidays approach. From a consumer and public safety perspective, increasing the options available to consumers for travel is the right policy direction. Unfortunately, city councillors don’t see it that way, and Torontonians will be worse off because of it — some of them worse off in the worst possible way.

Originally published here

Cannabis Industry Stakeholders, Policymakers Share Perspectives on States Reform Act

November 29, 2021
By Yaël Ossowski
In Cannabis, Cannabis Legalization, Recent Media
0 comments

U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace unveiled the legislation Nov. 15 to allow state governments to regulate cannabis products through the health-and-safety oversights of their choosing.

During a Nov. 15 press conference, U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace, a Republican from South Carolina who took office at the beginning of the year, unveiled the States Reform Act (SRA), legislation that would allow state governments to regulate cannabis products through the health-and-safety oversights of their choosing.

The 131-page draft bill proposes a 3% federal cannabis excise tax, with a 10-year moratorium on excise tax increases to maintain a competitive marketplace.

The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB), which operates under the U.S. Department of the Treasury, would federally regulate the interstate commerce of cannabis products, while the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) would oversee medical cannabis.

The legislation also includes expungement provisions, but cartel members, agents of cartel gangs or those convicted of driving under the influence would be excluded from seeking expungement.

The Consumer Choice Center applauds Rep. Mace’s effort to provide Americans with a smart, safe and consumer-friendly path to legal cannabis. A focus on establishing legal and safe markets will benefit all of society by finally eliminating the black market, restoring justice and giving the incentive for creative entrepreneurs to enter the marketplace. It is past time America had smart cannabis policies.” – Yaël Ossowski, Deputy Director, Consumer Choice Center

Read the full text here

Ottawa should kill its tax on booze-free beer

Before the pandemic, while at a Blue Jays game, my head turned when a patron at the bar ordered a non-alcoholic beer. At first, I thought this might just be a new hipster fad, but I couldn’t have been more wrong. Non-alcoholic beer isn’t only for designated drivers or pregnant women anymore. It is a continuously growing market with forecast worldwide sales over $4 billion (U.S.) by 2025. While I may not be the target audience for these new beverages, other Canadians clearly are.

This is where federal tax policy comes into play, because, oddly enough, non-alcoholized beer is subject to federal excise taxes, albeit less than what is paid on regular beer. Despite containing virtually no alcohol at all and therefore posing no real risk to consumers other than caloric intake, non-alcoholic beer is charged an excise tax of $2.82/hectolitre — a hectolitre being 100 litres. The application of an excise tax is a problem for several reasons.

The first problem with the excise tax for non-alcoholic beer is that non-alcoholic wine and spirits are exempt from the tax. For some reason, the federal government doesn’t treat all non-alcoholic beverages equally. Removing the excise tax for non-alcoholic beer would simply apply the government’s own logic consistently across the entire non-alcoholic sector.

Beyond consistency, removing the tax on beer would help reduce costs for health-conscious consumers, giving them better access to reduced-risk products. It would also very likely help expand the domestic production of these beverages, given that Canada is unique in its excise treatment of non-alcoholic beer.

The tax also puts Ottawa offside with the provinces, which, as regulators of where alcohol products are sold within their boundaries, have already recognized that there is no justification for treating non-alcoholic products as strictly as standard beverage alcohol. That is why, from coast to coast, you can buy these products outside of each province’s alcohol retail system at grocery and convenience stores, often alongside carbonated water and pop.

Finally, exempting non-alcoholic beer from the federal excise tax would be consistent with the principles of harm reduction, a policy approach the Trudeau government has championed, albeit selectively. When regulating and taxing products that could present some risk to consumers, it is important that legislators evaluate what that risk actually is. For non-alcoholic beer it is near zero, which is why it is not appropriate for the government to treat it the same as beer. Apart from residual puritanism, the main justification for taxes on beverage alcohol is to help cover any alcohol-related health-care costs that might arise. But what is the alcohol-related health-care burden of non-alcoholic beer? There isn’t any, which is why it should be exempt.

At the end of the day, Canada’s beer drinkers already pay enough in taxes — fully $676 million in excise taxes alone in 2020. And because it is indexed to inflation the alcohol excise increases every year without review, which is one reason, in addition to provincial markups, why on average 47 per cent of the price you pay for beer goes to the government. That is an exorbitant amount that should be reduced significantly.

Removing the excise tax for non-alcoholic beer would be a small first step in re-thinking what the appropriate level of tax is in Canada. It would give consumers more health-conscious choices, at better prices, and do so in a way is consistent with the government’s own logic for non-alcoholic beverages.

Originally published here

Cannabis Freedom Alliance Endorses Rep. Mace’s States Reform Act

November 29, 2021
By Yaël Ossowski
In Cannabis, Cannabis Legalization, Recent Media
0 comments

Today, the Cannabis Freedom Alliance (CFA) announced that it has endorsed the States Reform Act. The Act strongly aligns with CFA’s vision of ending prohibition in a manner consistent with helping all Americans achieve their full potential and limiting the number of barriers that inhibit innovation and entrepreneurship in a free and open market. The States Reform Act is the truly principled vehicle for conservatives, libertarian, and all who value limited government to support cannabis reform.

CFA was proud to work with Rep. Nancy Mace’s (R-SC)’s team in crafting this legislation and to lend it our future support. The Act creates a bill that keeps Americans and their children safe while ending the federal preemption of and interference with state cannabis laws. The States Reform Act:

Federally decriminalizes cannabis and fully defers to state powers over prohibition and commercial regulation
Regulates cannabis products like alcohol products
Institutes a 3% federal excise tax on those products to fund law enforcement and small business programs.
Ensures the continued existence of state medical cannabis programs and patient access while allowing for new medical research and products to be developed
Protects our veterans by ensuring they will not be discriminated against in federal hiring for cannabis use or lose their VA healthcare for following their doctor’s advice to use medical cannabis
Protects children and young adults under 21 from cannabis products and advertising nationwide

Read the full text here

Apresiasi Inggris Negara Pertama yang Melegalkan Vape sebagai Produk Medis

Isu mengenai produk rokok elektronik, atau yang dikenal juga dengan nama vape, saat ini masih menjadi kontroversi. Perdebatan mengenai isu terkait vape umumnya muncul pada aspek kesehatan, terlebih lagi, dari tahun ke tahun, jumlah pengguna vape di seluruh dunia kian meningkat.

Bagi sebagian kalangan, vape atau rokok elektronik merupakan produk yang sangat berbahaya, dan tidak jauh berbeda dengan rokok konvensional yang dibakar. Untuk itu, akan sangat berbahaya pula bila produk ini dapat dijual bebas ke masyarakat seperti produk-produk konsumen lainnya.

Mereka yang memiliki pandangan bahwa vape atau rokok elektronik sebagai produk yang sangat berbahaya umumnya akan meengadvokasi berbagai kebijakan yang bertujuan untuk mencegah seseorang mengkonsumsi produk tersebut.

Berbagai kebijakan ini ada dalam berbagai bentuk, mulai dari kebijakan untuk mengenakan cukai atau pajak yang tinggi, untuk mengurangi insentif seseorang mengkonsumsi vape, hingga kebijakan pelarangan total.

Sementara itu, di sisi lain tidak sedikit pula pihak-pihak yag memiliki pandnagan bahwa vape atau rokok elektronik merupakan produk yang tidak lebih berbahaya daripada rokok konvensional yang dibakar. Oleh karena itu, vape atau rokok elektronik memiliki potensi untuk membantu para perokok untuk mengurangi kebiasaan merokoknya yang sangat berbahaya bagi kesehatan.

Mereka yang memiliki pandangan tersebut umumnya justru menentang keras berbagai kebijakan yang ditujukan agar seseorang semakin sulit untuk mendapatkan akses terhadap produk-produk vape.

Mereka melihat kebijakan tersebut justru akan membawa dampak yang kontra produktif, karena bukan hanya akan semakin menyulitkan para perokok untuk mendapatkan produk alternatif yang dapat membantu mereka berhenti merokok, namun juga berpotensi besar akan semakin membuka praktik pasar gelap vape yang sanget berbahaya bagi konsumen.

Di Indonesia sendiri, tidak sedikit pihak-pihak yang memiliki pandangan pertama terkait dengan produk-produk vape. Mereka memiliki pandangan bahwa vape atau rokok elektronik adalah produk yang sangat berbahaya dan harus dilarang oleh pemerintah. Ikatan Dokter Indonesia (IDI) misalnya, menganjurkan agar produk-produk vape dilarang di Indonesia (cnnindonesia.com, 24/9/2019).

Tetapi ada pula negara lain yang memiliki pendekatan yang berbeda terkait dengan produk-produk vape atau rokok elektronik. Salah satu dari negara tersebut adalah Britania Raya, yang bukan hanya tidak melarang vape, tetapi justru menjadikan produk tersebut sebagai alternatif yang dapat membantu seseorang untuk berhenti merokok.

Kebijakan yang diambil oleh Inggris ini memang tergolong unik. Ketika berbagai negara di dunia berupaya untuk memberlakukan kebijakan yang membatasi hingga melarang vape, mulai dari Amerika Serikat hingga Australia, Inggris justru memberlakukan kebijakan yang berbeda 180 derajat dari kebijakan yang diambil oleh negara-negara lainnya.

Pendekatan yang diambil oleh Pemerintah Inggris ini bisa ditarik kembali ke tahun 2015. Di tahun tersebut, lembaga kesehatan publik Inggris, Public Health England (PHE), mengeluarkan laporan mengenai vape, yang isinya secara eksplisit menyatakan bahwa kandungan dalam vape atau rokok elektronik 95% lebih tidak berbahaya bila dibandingkan dengan rokok konvensional yang dibakar.

Tidak hanya itu, PHE juga menyatakan bahwa produk rokok elektronik dapat membantu seseorang untuk berhentu merokok (theguardian.com, 28/12/2018).

Laporan tersebut kelak menjadi salah satu dasar kebijakan resmi dari Pemerintah Inggris untuk menjadikan vape atau rokok elektronik sebagai produk alternatif untuk membantu seseorang berhenti merokok. Kebijakan ini akhirnya secara resmi diterapkan di negara tersebut pada akhir bulan Oktober 2021 lalu.

Pada bulan Oktober lalu, lembaga regulasi medis Inggris, United Kingdom Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) menerbitkan panduan untuk menjadikan produk-produk vape sebagai salah satu resep medis bagi seseorang untuk berhenti merokok. Resep tersebut bisa dikeluarkan oleh lembaga kesehatan nasional Inggris, National Health Service (NHS) (edition.cnn.co, 29/10/2021).

Melalui aturan ini, perusahaan produsen produk-produk vape bisa mendaftarkan produk yang mereka buat ke MHRA untuk diteliti agar bisa mendapatkan lisensi medis bagi produk tersebut. Proses tersebut diberlakukan sama dengan produk-produk medis lainnya.

Kebijakan ini sendiri diambil sebagai salah satu upaya dari Pemerintah Inggris untuk mengurangi jumlah populasi perokok di negaranya. Bila kelak nanti sudah ada produk vape yang lolos proses regulasi dari MHRA dan mendapatkan lisensi medis, maka Inggris akan menjadi negara pertama di dunia yang melegalkan produk-produk vape untuk digunakan sebagai produk pengobatan medis.

Namun, Pemerintah Inggris dalam hal inibukan berartoi menyatakan bahwa vape merupakan produk yang 100% aman untuk dikonsumsi, tetapi resiko tersebut jauh lebih rendah bila dibandingkan dengan rokok elektronik yang dibakar.

NHS menyatakan bahwa, rokok elektronik tidak memproduksi tar dan karbon monoksida, yang merupakan dua zat yang paling berbahaya yang terkandung dalam rokok konvensional yang dibakar (edition.cnn.co, 29/10/2021).

Kebijakan yang diambil oleh Pemerintah Inggris ini sendiri tentu merupakan kebijakan unik dan yang patut diapresiasi, di mana Pemerintah Inggris dalam hal ini berupaya untuk bersikap pragmatis untuk mengurangi populasi perkok di negaranya. Indonesia sendiri tentu dapat mengambil pelajaran dari kebijakan yang diambil oleh Inggris tersebut.

Indonesia merupakan salah satu negara dengan jumlah populasi dewasa perokok tertinggi di dunia. Pada tahun 2021 ini, Indonesia menduduki peringkat negara dengan populasi perokok tertinggi ketiga di dunia, dengan jumlah 65,7 juta penduduk Indonesia adalah perokok aktif, atau 33,8% dari jumlah total penduduk (jpnn.com, 29/4/2021).

Hal ini tentu merupakan sesuatu yang sangat berbahaya, dan bukan hanya membahayakan kesehatan publik, tetapi juga dapat semakin menambahkan beban pemerintah untuk membiayai biaya pengobatan masyarakat Indonesia.

Untuk itu, kebijakan pragmatis untuk menanggulangi hal tersebut adalah hal yang sangat penting, salah satunya adalah mencontoh kebijakan yang diambil oleh Pemerintah Inggris tersebut.

Originally published here

End The War On Sugar: Zuckersteuern

Der Vorwurf, dass Zucker der grösste Treiber von Volkskrankheiten wie Übergewicht und Diabetes ist, passt nicht zu der Beobachtung, dass in den meisten entwickelten Ländern die tägliche Kalorienaufnahme stetig sinkt. Wie in einem vorherigen Beitrag gezeigt, ist Übergewicht

ein multifaktorielles Problem

Nichtsdestotrotz gibt es in der Welt und Europa viele Befürworter der Zuckersteuer. So empfiehlt auch die Weltgesundheitsorganisation (WHO) die Besteuerung von zuckerhaltigen Getränken. Dieses negative Bild von Zucker hat auch Auswirkungen auf die Politik. Es gibt mehrere Länder, die eine Form von Zuckersteuern eingeführt haben, beispielsweise Mexiko, Großbritannien, Irland oder auch kürzlich Polen.

Auch in der Bundesrepublik gibt es in der Politik Befürworter der Zuckersteuer. So hat z.B. die SPD Politikerin Sabine Dittmar mehrmals eine Zuckersteuer gefordert. Die SPD-Gesundheitspolitikerin beteuerte in der Ärzte Zeitung, dass eine Zuckersteuer auf gezuckerte Getränke ein sinnvolles Instrument sei.

Aber wie effektiv ist dieses Instrument tatsächlich? Kann durch eine Zuckersteuer der Zuckerkonsum tatsächlich reduziert werden? Wie sieht es mit dem Problem des Übergewichts aus: Bewirkt eine Zuckersteuer den Rückgang der Übergewichtsrate? Oder ist die Zuckersteuer nur ein weiteres Instrument für Staatseinnahmen?

Die generelle Problematik einer Zuckersteuer ist die gleiche wie bei jeder anderen Verbrauchssteuer: Sie ist regressiv, d.h. belastet die ärmeren Teile der Bevölkerung stärker. Das konnte u.a. eine Untersuchung in den USA zeigen.

Darüber hinaus ist es auch unklar wie stark der Abschreckeffekt wirkt: So konnte eine Umfrage von 2018 in Großbritannien zeigen, dass 62% der Verbraucher ihr Kaufverhalten nicht geändert haben. Eine Analyse hat darüber hinaus auch gezeigt, dass Preissteigerungen bei gesüßten Getränken dazu führen, dass Verbraucher auf andere Produkte umsteigen, wie beispielsweise Alkohol.

Die Erfahrungen in verschiedenen Staaten bestätigen, dass die Zuckersteuer nur eine geringe Auswirkung auf das Konsumverhalten der Verbraucher hat. So konnte man in Mexiko zwar durchaus bestimmte Effekte beobachten. Eine Studie konnte beispielsweise aufzeigen, dass die Konsumption von zuckerhaltigen getränken zurückgegangen ist. Das resultierte lediglich in einer Reduktion an 18 KCal pro Tag. Das ist in etwas so viel, wie in einer Tomate. Eine Kalorienreduktion im zweistelligen Bereich hat keine signifikante Auswirkung auf die Übergewichtsrate. Selbst eine größere Reduktion von Kalorien, wie man sie beispielsweise in UK über die Jahre beobachten konnte (siehe Teil I) verspricht keinen Erfolg, wenn andere Faktoren nicht stimmen.

Wie sind die Erfahrungen mit der Zuckersteuer im Vereinigten Königreich? Im Gegensatz zu den meisten anderen Zuckersteuern zielt die britische Steuer darauf ab die Hersteller dazu zu bringen die Rezeptur ihrer Produkte zu ändern. Die Steuer wurde 2016 angekündigt und 2018 eingeführt. Ein Bericht von Public Health England zeigt, dass bei den Herstellern tatsächlich eine Reaktion stattgefunden hat. So sei der Zuckergehalt von den besteuerten Getränken zwischen 2015 und 2018 um 28,8% gesunken. Das hört sich zunächst nach einem großen Erfolg an. Der durchschnittliche Brite trank im Jahre 2015 etwa 106 Liter von Softdrinks. Das entspricht in etwa 300 ml am Tag. Wenn wir annehmen, dass es sich bei den Softdrinks um Coca-Cola und andere vergleichbare Produkte handelt, so ergibt sich daraus eine Reduktion von etwa 36 KCal. Die Untersuchung zeigt allerdings auch, dass die Menge an Verkauf von

anderen Produkten mit einem hohen Zuckergehalt gestiegen ist.

Daraus kann man schließen, dass die Verbraucher ganz einfach auf andere Produkte umgestiegen sind.

Die Beispiele zeigen, dass die Steuern durchaus kleine Effekte bringen. Diese Effekte haben aber nur geringe Auswirkungen auf die Probleme des Übergewichts. Einerseits ist die Reduktion von Kalorien, die die Bevölkerung pro Kopf aus Zucker zu sich nimmt viel zu klein um einen wirklichen Hebel zu haben. Andererseits entsteht in der öffentlichen Meinung auch das falsche Bild, dass die Reduktion von Zucker automatisch zu einem gesünderen Lebensstil und Fettverbrennung führe. Dies ist nicht der Fall – andere Faktoren, wie Sport und Bewegung, Kalorien aus anderen Lebensmitteln (z.B. fettiges Fleisch) können bei einem reduzierten Zuckergebrauch dennoch zu einem Kalorienüberschuss führen.

So argumentiert auch eine Gruppe von Wissenschaftlern von der Universität Glasgow, dass eine zu starke Fokussierung der öffentlichen Debatte auf Zucker die Verbraucher zu einem Mißverständnis der Problematik führen könnte. Laut ihrer Untersuchung korreliere Übergewicht hauptsächlich damit, ob eine Person große Kalorienmengen und Fett zu sich nimmt. Das stimmt auch mit der Theorie der Gewichtszunahme überein, die im ersten Artikel grob dargestellt wurde.

Abschließend lässt sich sagen, dass die Besteuerung von Zucker auf mehreren Ebenen sinnlos ist. Einerseits ist es falsch Zucker als den Hauptgrund für Übergewicht und Diabetes anzusehen. Andererseits bringen diese Steuern zwar durchaus Ergebnisse, diese sind aber nicht signifikant, wenn es um die Reduktion von Übergewicht innerhalb der Bevölkerung geht, was eine logische Folge der ersten Aussage ist.

Probleme wie Übergewicht, oder Diabetes lassen sich nicht mit der Besteuerung von bestimmten Lebensmitteln lösen. Vielmehr muss mehr Zeit in die evidenzbasierte Aufklärung investiert werden. Der wirklich große Hebel liegt in der Erhöhung der täglichen Verbrennungswerte und nicht in der Dämonisierung einer kleinen Gruppe an Lebensmitteln.

Cookie	Duration	Description
__cf_bm	1 hour	This cookie, set by Cloudflare, is used to support Cloudflare Bot Management.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-advertisement	1 year	The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Advertisement".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional	11 months	The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
CookieLawInfoConsent	1 year	CookieYes sets this cookie to record the default button state of the corresponding category and the status of CCPA. It works only in coordination with the primary cookie.
elementor	never	The website's WordPress theme uses this cookie. It allows the website owner to implement or change the website's content in real-time.
JSESSIONID	past	Used by sites written in JSP. General purpose platform session cookies that are used to maintain users' state across page requests.
viewed_cookie_policy	11 months	The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
wpEmojiSettingsSupports	session	WordPress sets this cookie when a user interacts with emojis on a WordPress site. It helps determine if the user's browser can display emojis properly.

Cookie	Duration	Description
__sharethis_cookie_test__	session	This cookie is set by ShareThis, to test whether the browser accepts cookies.
bcookie	2 years	This cookie is set by linkedIn. The purpose of the cookie is to enable LinkedIn functionalities on the page.
lang	session	This cookie is used to store the language preferences of a user to serve up content in that stored language the next time user visit the website.
lidc	1 day	This cookie is set by LinkedIn and used for routing.
pll_language	1 year	This cookie is set by Polylang plugin for WordPress powered websites. The cookie stores the language code of the last browsed page.

Cookie	Duration	Description
__gads	1 year 24 days	This cookie is set by Google and stored under the name dounleclick.com. This cookie is used to track how many times users see a particular advert which helps in measuring the success of the campaign and calculate the revenue generated by the campaign. These cookies can only be read from the domain that it is set on so it will not track any data while browsing through another sites.
_ga	2 years	This cookie is installed by Google Analytics. The cookie is used to calculate visitor, session, campaign data and keep track of site usage for the site's analytics report. The cookies store information anonymously and assign a randomly generated number to identify unique visitors.
_ga_*	1 year 1 month 4 days	Google Analytics sets this cookie to store and count page views.
_gat_gtag_UA_111177680_1	1 minute	This cookie is set by Google and is used to distinguish users.
_gid	1 day	This cookie is installed by Google Analytics. The cookie is used to store information of how visitors use a website and helps in creating an analytics report of how the website is doing. The data collected including the number visitors, the source where they have come from, and the pages visted in an anonymous form.
CONSENT	16 years 4 months 8 days 16 hours	These cookies are set via embedded youtube-videos. They register anonymous statistical data on for example how many times the video is displayed and what settings are used for playback.No sensitive data is collected unless you log in to your google account, in that case your choices are linked with your account, for example if you click “like” on a video.

Cookie	Duration	Description
_fbp	3 months	This cookie is set by Facebook to deliver advertisement when they are on Facebook or a digital platform powered by Facebook advertising after visiting this website.
_tt_enable_cookie	1 year 24 days	Tiktok set this cookie to collect data about behaviour and activities on the website and to measure the effectiveness of the advertising.
_ttp	1 year 24 days	TikTok set this cookie to track and improve the performance of advertising campaigns, as well as to personalise the user experience.
bscookie	2 years	This cookie is a browser ID cookie set by Linked share Buttons and ad tags.
fr	3 months	The cookie is set by Facebook to show relevant advertisments to the users and measure and improve the advertisements. The cookie also tracks the behavior of the user across the web on sites that have Facebook pixel or Facebook social plugin.
IDE	1 year 24 days	Used by Google DoubleClick and stores information about how the user uses the website and any other advertisement before visiting the website. This is used to present users with ads that are relevant to them according to the user profile.
li_sugr	3 months	LinkedIn sets this cookie to collect user behaviour data to optimise the website and make advertisements on the website more relevant.
muc_ads	1 year 1 month 4 days	Twitter sets this cookie to collect user behaviour and interaction data to optimize the website.
personalization_id	2 years	This cookie is set by twitter.com. It is used integrate the sharing features of this social media. It also stores information about how the user uses the website for tracking and targeting.
test_cookie	15 minutes	This cookie is set by doubleclick.net. The purpose of the cookie is to determine if the user's browser supports cookies.
VISITOR_INFO1_LIVE	5 months 27 days	This cookie is set by Youtube. Used to track the information of the embedded YouTube videos on a website.
VISITOR_PRIVACY_METADATA	6 months	YouTube sets this cookie to store the user's cookie consent state for the current domain.
YSC	session	This cookies is set by Youtube and is used to track the views of embedded videos.
yt-remote-connected-devices	never	These cookies are set via embedded youtube-videos.
yt-remote-device-id	never	These cookies are set via embedded youtube-videos.
yt.innertube::nextId	never	These cookies are set via embedded youtube-videos.
yt.innertube::requests	never	These cookies are set via embedded youtube-videos.

Cookie	Duration	Description
__gpi	1 year 24 days	No description
_gtm_session_start	1 hour	Description is currently not available.
_mailmunch_visitor_id	never	This cookie is set by MailMunch which is email collection and email marketing platform. We do not know the exact purpose of the cookie.
AnalyticsSyncHistory	1 month	No description
asp_transient_id	7 days	No description available.
GoogleAdServingTest	session	No description
li_gc	2 years	No description
mailmunch_second_pageview	never	This cookie is set by MailMunch which is email collection and email marketing platform. We do not know the exact purpose of the cookie.
raygun4js-userid	never	Description unavailable.
st_samesite	session	No description
UserMatchHistory	1 month	Linkedin - Used to track visitors on multiple websites, in order to present relevant advertisement based on the visitor's preferences.

Month: November 2021

How Germany’s new coalition could change the fate of the TRIPs waiver

David Clement on Living Life and Taking Risks

Deputados europeus defendem quebra de patentes a Lira e Pacheco

Congresso Nacional dará palavra final ao veto de Jair Bolsonaro sobre quebra temporária de patentes de vacinas

Cannabis Industry Stakeholders, Policymakers Share Perspectives on States Reform Act

U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace unveiled the legislation Nov. 15 to allow state governments to regulate cannabis products through the health-and-safety oversights of their choosing.

Ottawa should kill its tax on booze-free beer

Cannabis Freedom Alliance Endorses Rep. Mace’s States Reform Act

Apresiasi Inggris Negara Pertama yang Melegalkan Vape sebagai Produk Medis

End The War On Sugar: Zuckersteuern

Fun Police

ConsEUmer Podcast

Consumer Choice Center Cast

Recent Posts

Follow us

Contact Info