The FDA vs E-Cigarettes debate

[Madness008]

I dont like the e-cigarette companies argument about how the harmful chemical found in these is the same as what is found in the patch and gum. Its an irrelevant argument because the patch and gum are meant to be used temporarily while quitting nicotine altogether. These are meant to replace cigarettes. I still believe these are 100 times safer than real cigarettes, but part of that is just hope. Intense studies need to be done ASAP, as these products easily show more promise than anything else with regards to getting people off of tobacco. If they are safe as advertised, its revolutionary and IMO within 10 years everyone will switch over. If they arent that safe.....thats another story.

[HaploVoss]

How in the world is it not a valid argument? ALL components have long term studies done in several different products if you look them up individually, and also how would you even dilineate the difference?

What do you consider long term enough? There are people that stay on the gum or patch for years even though it is supposed to be short term. So... I ask again - how is it not a valid argument that people on much higher doses of the same chemicals, for extended periods of time are relative to the issue at hand?

It is not what the court case is currently about actually, but as far as this particular argument I think that the statement has validity.

Take care,
- Hap

[Madness008]

What is the court case about? What prevented the approval?

[HaploVoss]

Sorry, I am too wiped out to go into the details, I've been up all night fixing a client's website and posting here in between times

Here is a link to the thread for the docket updates - read up on the last few pages and it will give you all the details. In a nutshell the court case between SE/NJoy and the FDA is based on the FDA classifying the e-cig as a 'drug-delivery' device vs. a tobacco product.

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/for...et-update.html

Take care,
- Hap