Smoking Everywhere V. FDA Daily Docket Sheet Update--APPEAL's COURT ISSUES STAY

[BigJimW]

Calm before the storm? Maybe. But in the alternative, ever since the UK's division of ASH welcomed the e-cig, I just have been noticing thinks backing off to some extent.


Sun

And that is true. ASH in the US has not had one mention of the e-cig since the ASK/UK came out with this. Banzhaf has been very quiet lately.

That, and maybe the embarassment of getting trolled from that article could be enough to keep his mouth shut.

[Our House]

What a shame for publications like this to make judgments on the scant FDA study that was done--very damaging and fuels the fire.


Sun

+1 Totally.

I read two things in that publication that made my blood completely boil.

1) "Some of your patients or their at-risk family members who are having a hard time quitting smoking may ask you whether electronic cigarettes are a safer alternative. According to a recent laboratory analysis conducted by the FDA, the answer is, 'Probably not.'"

Really? Probably not safer than CIGARETTES? ****ing really???

2) "According to the FDA's Division of Drug Information, these tests indicate that these products contained detectable levels of known carcinogens and toxic chemicals to which users could potentially be exposed. The results of this limited testing are the only information the FDA has to go on regarding the levels of nicotine or the amounts or kinds of other chemicals in ecigarettes, because the devices have not been submitted to the FDA for evaluation or approval."

I wonder why they're saying "detectable levels" and not what those levels are. Could it because because the FDA is completely full of ****??

And why is the skewed FDA test "the only information the FDA has to go on"? Oh, I know why. It's because their "info" is the only info they are willing to look at. Whenever other evidence is presented they start resembling this guy:



Sweet Jesus, this is the stuff they're telling nurses to say to their patients!! Let's just hope the majority of nurses have half a brain.

[Thulium]

And that is true. ASH in the US has not had one mention of the e-cig since the ASK/UK came out with this. Banzhaf has been very quiet lately.

That, and maybe the embarassment of getting trolled from that article could be enough to keep his mouth shut.

Perhaps there is hope that ASH's initial stance was simply a knee-jerk reaction and they are realizing (though unwilling to admit) they were wrong? I know in my experience explaining my e-cig to rabid non-smokers I usually have to make the point that there is NO smoke at least 5 times before it sinks in. They are so used to criticizing wisps of opaque gas that it seems like they'd ban rainclouds if they could.

[PhiHalcyon]

I don't quite agree with your point with the idea of nicotine candy, as propylene glycol is not sold as anything other than an additive in various things while candy is, well, candy. But I will agree that your points do hold water in the legal sense, and we really only have a slim chance for this to go our way.

Propylene glycol and glycerin are sold and regulated as many things. One of these things is as excipients (substances used as a diluent or vehicle for a drug); which is precisely what they are used for in e-liquid. Furthermore, not only are excipients, like candy, regulated under the FDCA, but once you add nicotine to candy, the candy itself has become an excipient. Thus, it is fair to say that the fundamental purpose of the combination prohibition is to prohibit non-tobacco excipients from being used for the delivery of nicotine in a commercially marketed product that is not sold and regulated as a drug product.

This is why the only legal path for the ecig is to be properly submitted, tested, and approved as a new type of indefinite-term nicotine replacement product. For, this is, after all, what it is being used for.

As for things 'going our way', that all depends on what you define 'our way' to be. If 'our way' is for the ecig to be given some sort of categorical free-pass from the drug approval requirements that every other drug product manufacturer must meet, then 'our way' is about as far removed from reality as it can get. If, however, 'our way' is defined as us being able to sustain a healthier analog-free lifestyle no matter whether an ecig product manufacturer becomes properly initiated in the FDA-approval process or not, then things going our way is something that we will each be able to decide for ourselves.

[Sun Vaporer]

Pulled the Docket at 2:30 PM EST and nothing yet today--I will check again at the end of the day.



Sun

[SNM]

I wonder if this will ever be resolved. And if so how. I hope there answer isent that we all do without and die a long slow death from analogs. Dont we pay there sallary when will they start to think of we the people.

[Slickstick]

Bogie told me this on another forum:

"The Senate HAS NOT voted on this bill.

The bill was considered in the Judicial Committee.

As of Nov 19, 2009:
- This bill was considered in committee which has recommended it be considered by the Senate as a whole.

- Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 216.
(Currently scheduled to be addressed on Nov. 30 - subject to change and does not necessarily mean a vote will be taken)."

I do not have a link to verify this, I hought some of you would know.

[Slickstick]

sry this was supposed to be in THE PACT ACT I think.

[oldlady]

Thanks for sharing that article for nurses. Fortunately, almost every nurse I know is a smoker!

I wish Michael Siegel's blog and the reports on the scientific tests that have been conducted on e-cigs would get half as much press as that stupid FDA paper.

My gosh, entire countries have banned e-cigs on the basis of that stupid, self-serving FDA report! I am SURE the FDA must have been paid handsomely to come up with that drivel and to broadcast it everywhere as fact.

I am beginning to feel that Big Pharma and Big Tobacco have not only captured our government, but the whole freaking world!

[DC2]

Which annoucement, theoretically, would you think would come first?

1) The announcement of the decision in this case
2) The announcement that Phillip Morris has purchased Ruyan

Whoa, wait, who put this tinfoil hat on my head?!?