There may be an easy answer to the FDA ban

[TropicalBob]

You're certainly right about the devices. It's almost funny how far people will stretch to see the FDA allowing e-cigs to continue -- as they are now. If a full-court ban comes, it will be total -- liquids, carts and devices.

Once drug delivery is taken as fact, then the device to deliver the drug becomes a regulated medical device. And an e-cig isn't approved and regulated for that.

[Duckies]

The only thing I can think of is that it would take a terrific amount of money for the FDA to do anything at this point. I don't think this will be acted on, tbh.

Late to the game here, but wanted to comment on this.

Yes, it would take a huge cash infusion/grant to the FDA to actually bother testing them. Pharma seeks approval/safety -- we are just looking for "less harmful than the alternative". No cash backing that and no way is approval/safety happening as we control our own nic dosage.

With Big Pharma not getting their cut, Big Tobacco not getting theirs and Da Gub'mint not seeing tax revenues, the case could be made that smoking (and useless Pharma NRT) are better off left without competition.

Signatures on ban documents (triggering Customs and who knows who else) don't cost a thing.

[Sun Vaporer]

Late to the game here, but wanted to comment on this.

Yes, it would take a huge cash infusion/grant to the FDA to actually bother testing them. Pharma seeks approval/safety -- we are just looking for "less harmful than the alternative". No cash backing that and no way is approval/safety happening as we control our own nic dosage.

With Big Pharma not getting their cut, Big Tobacco not getting theirs and Da Gub'mint not seeing tax revenues, the case could be made that smoking (and useless Pharma NRT) are better off left without competition.

Signatures on ban documents (triggering Customs and who knows who else) don't cost a thing.

Duckie--Remember that the FDA does not do testing -- the burden falls on the Applicant to have the requiste testing and studies done and paid for by the Applicant!!!! The FDA only approves after reviewing what is submitted to them. The manufacture has the burden of advancing and paying for this. In the case of e-cigs there is no applications on file and no studies in the works that meet their critera--The e-cig's will fail because of the manufactures failure to follow the mandated guidlines of the FDA-----------Sun

[b00stzx3]

Big Tobacco or Big Pharma could take this as a signal and see dollar signs. I mean, we have to get the nicotine from tobacco. They could have a cash cow selling e-juices and e-cigs.

[dEFinitionofEPIC]

You're certainly right about the devices. It's almost funny how far people will stretch to see the FDA allowing e-cigs to continue -- as they are now. If a full-court ban comes, it will be total -- liquids, carts and devices.

Once drug delivery is taken as fact, then the device to deliver the drug becomes a regulated medical device. And an e-cig isn't approved and regulated for that.

I don't know if that is totally true.... ......... is illegal but you are allowed to buy bongs. It would be easy to sell a vaporizer as a "vapor incense burner" or some other kind of nonsense. I think the juice and carts would be the only problem.

EDIT....though I see I spoke to soon... Bizzybot already mentioned this.... Think he's got the right idea though....

[CandyGirl]

You're certainly right about the devices. It's almost funny how far people will stretch to see the FDA allowing e-cigs to continue -- as they are now. If a full-court ban comes, it will be total -- liquids, carts and devices.

Once drug delivery is taken as fact, then the device to deliver the drug becomes a regulated medical device. And an e-cig isn't approved and regulated for that.

now i'm worried.
i have this intuition that TropicalBob has an ability to cut through the bs and see all this for what it is, and will be. he just seems to know what he's talking about.

that said, i'm worried because behind all the what ifs and comparisons and frustrations with "it's not fair", it always comes down to the nicotine.

because of the way it was and is marketed the FDA can say it's a drug delivery device and therfore it's also banned? across the board?

everytime i see members ask about excluding the nicotine, it seems people don't really want to discuss it as an option. i realize, for some, the idea of having the device without the nicotine may render it completely useless, but i really, truly believe this is my answer to keeping off the cigarettes even without the nicotine. i know it.

it may be no more than mental masturbation to most of you to even consider 0 nicotine, but i want this device with or without the liquid. seriously.

why does the equation always have to be with the nicotine. i know, from a suppliers point of view, sales, competitors who sell the nic liquid, nic carts, blah blah blah. it looks like a cigarette, fruity flavors, children, yada, yada yada. all valid concerns, i understand all that, i really do.

but i also want to believe there is some hope that an FDA or even a court decision could be handed down where "we see absolutely no violation of using a personal vaporizer with 0 nicotine."

and please don't start with "flavorings not approved for inhalation", okay just PG and/or VG.

"therefore the devices are not illegal all by themselves".

does anyone see this happening?

TB?

[Sun Vaporer]

now i'm worried.
i have this intuition that TropicalBob has an ability to cut through the bs and see all this for what it is, and will be. he just seems to know what he's talking about.

that said, i'm worried because behind all the what ifs and comparisons and frustrations with "it's not fair", it always comes down to the nicotine.

because of the way it was and is marketed the FDA can say it's a drug delivery device and therfore it's also banned? across the board?

everytime i see members ask about excluding the nicotine, it seems people don't really want to discuss it as an option. i realize, for some, the idea of having the device without the nicotine may render it completely useless, but i really, truly believe this is my answer to keeping off the cigarettes even without the nicotine. i know it.

it may be no more than mental masturbation to most of you to even consider 0 nicotine, but i want this device with or without the liquid. seriously.

why does the equation always have to be with the nicotine. i know, from a suppliers point of view, sales, competitors who sell the nic liquid, nic carts, blah blah blah. it looks like a cigarette, fruity flavors, children, yada, yada yada. all valid concerns, i understand all that, i really do.

but i also want to believe there is some hope that an FDA or even a court decision could be handed down where "we see absolutely no violation of using a personal vaporizer with 0 nicotine."

and please don't start with "flavorings not approved for inhalation", okay just PG and/or VG.

"therefore the devices are not illegal all by themselves".

does anyone see this happening?

TB?

There is a good position to be made for it Candy--PG is in the Nicotine Inhaler that is already appoved--so absent the nicotine---where is the "Drug". And yes, there are a lot of use, including myself that DO NOT USE nicotine in our devices. It is hard to argue that the PG may not be safe when it is already approved to be being inhaled-------Sun

[dEFinitionofEPIC]

now i'm worried.
i have this intuition that TropicalBob has an ability to cut through the bs and see all this for what it is, and will be. he just seems to know what he's talking about.

that said, i'm worried because behind all the what ifs and comparisons and frustrations with "it's not fair", it always comes down to the nicotine.

because of the way it was and is marketed the FDA can say it's a drug delivery device and therfore it's also banned? across the board?

everytime i see members ask about excluding the nicotine, it seems people don't really want to discuss it as an option. i realize, for some, the idea of having the device without the nicotine may render it completely useless, but i really, truly believe this is my answer to keeping off the cigarettes even without the nicotine. i know it.

it may be no more than mental masturbation to most of you to even consider 0 nicotine, but i want this device with or without the liquid. seriously.

why does the equation always have to be with the nicotine. i know, from a suppliers point of view, sales, competitors who sell the nic liquid, nic carts, blah blah blah. it looks like a cigarette, fruity flavors, children, yada, yada yada. all valid concerns, i understand all that, i really do.

but i also want to believe there is some hope that an FDA or even a court decision could be handed down where "we see absolutely no violation of using a personal vaporizer with 0 nicotine."

and please don't start with "flavorings not approved for inhalation", okay just PG and/or VG.

"therefore the devices are not illegal all by themselves".

does anyone see this happening?

TB?

Like I said--- Google "......... Vaporizer". YES, you can legally buy a .........-specific vaporizer in the United States. At a head shop, or on the internet. Medical ......... users use these all the time for a safer smoke. As we know however, medical ......... is not legal in every state. Anyone can buy a ......... vaporizer legally with a medical ......... prescription or not. I do not see why ......... vaporizers would be legal to buy and sell but not NICOTINE vaporizers. If liquid nicotine were made illegal than the two would definitely be in the same ballpark. Because it's ok for ......... (a scheduled illegal drug) I do not see why the same treatment would not apply to nicotine.

[CandyGirl]

thank you Sun.

[b00stzx3]

Like I said--- Google "......... Vaporizer". YES, you can legally buy a .........-specific vaporizer in the United States. At a head shop, or on the internet. Medical ......... users use these all the time for a safer smoke. As we know however, medical ......... is not legal in every state. Anyone can buy a ......... vaporizer legally with a medical ......... prescription or not. I do not see why ......... vaporizers would be legal to buy and sell but not NICOTINE vaporizers. If liquid nicotine were made illegal than the two would definitely be in the same ballpark. Because it's ok for ......... (a scheduled illegal drug) I do not see why the same treatment would not apply to nicotine.

Welcome to the always rational, senses-making United States

What I don't get is, how are things already illegal still allowed for importation? Theres 4 headshops in my old ghetto neighborhood in Baltimore. I doubt there making the bongs and bowls here!