ECA vs FDA

[Cori]

I would personally like to see, and would support any company, that went through the proper testing and approval process. As much as I disagree with the FDA's statements, I too think that far too many have jumped on the lets make a quick buck bandwagon.

For my own selfish reasons I wish the FDA would leave us alone, but thats not likely to happen. I think in the end, with proper testing and approval, we could end up with a better product. I think some level of regulations needs to be applied to the eliquids. I for one would feel better knowing what I'm putting into my body "is what it says it is".

As for the ECA... I hope they are doing all they can for our cause. Without inside knowledge of whats going on though, I really can't comment one way or the other. Until I know different, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Bryn]

Electronic Cigarettes are not a smoking cessation device, they are just alternative that eliminates a lot of the hazardous carcinogens, let’s face it - it is still smoking so it cannot be totally healthy for you, "Think about it".

Fuma, I would rather not call it "smoking" because there are some anti-organizations especially ASH US that are coming down hard on us, lumping us with smokers, moving us to "smoking area". This would send a strong message to the public that vaping equals smoking. I consider myself non-smoker now and would hate to be in a room with smokers or be forced to vape outside. It would be nice if vaporer rooms/lounges were created and be permitted in buildings, restaurants, bars, etc. It would be good for ecomony.

 

[Kate51]

I don't care about the FDA approving/disproving claims made by anyone covered under their jurisdiction. That is their job, to keep dangerous or untrue claims from being distributed, the only ones we usually hear about are the ones that kill or sicken a few people first, then get banned or cleaned from store shelves. So why the hold up of manufacturers applying for acceptance.
I'll just about guarantee the the first one to get FDA approval will be the top seller, at least for awhile, until others fill the bandwagon. I think for every selling point manufacturers have made, time to step up and be counted. The retailer certainly isn't going to spend the money for this, and shouldn't have to, the manufacturer bears responsibility here.
Or do they perhaps have too many known approval busters to start? Is there something we don't know that we should know? We're the ones who right now are supplying the data. That's a little frightening, to me.
I just saw the light for a company today that grossly misrepresented its product. It will be known in the end, and I assume shortly. Bryn, you're signature is very meaningful here, "the truth is not related to what is believed".

 

[TropicalBob]

That was the section of his post that turned me off. I didn't respond then, because he's just plain wrong.

We do not smoke, since "smoking" involves inhaling the result of tobacco combustion. That is defined in federal law. Therefore, we are not smokers. These are not cigarettes. Pretty soon, none of us will have to qualify such statements as opinion, since a federal judge will determine whether the FDA oversees these as drug or tobacco products. Smart money is on "drug".

Like others, I want responsible companies to test what they sell, and sell only legal products. The route to that nirvana is not by misnaming these as "tobacco products" and the act of using them as "smoking."

The FDA has two rubber stamps for all of our products: NOT APPROVED and MISBRANDED. A successful product will deserve neither stamp.

BTW: Katink asked all the right questions, for which we did not receive answers.

 

[grimmer255]

Thats what I said tropicalbob just differently. But I will say vaping is not smoking.

 

[TropicalBob]

I was actually reacting to your post, Grimmer, agreeing, but a whole bunch of other posts got here ahead of mine. Happens.

 

[grimmer255]

I was actually reacting to your post, Grimmer, agreeing, but a whole bunch of other posts got here ahead of mine. Happens.

Thanks tropical bob I respect your opinions. Plus I learned a few things when reading your posts. you have great insight on things and I enjoy reading them.

 

[FadedGene]

Hello everyone, I'm new here and to Vaping. I've been vaping for almost 3 weeks now and have put down regular cigarettes hopefully for good pending how things turn out in legislation and what not. I've been smoking for 25 years and it's funny now how I'm a bit scared that my "crutch for my crutch" so to speak might be taken away.

It really seems like a mess what has been going on from all the reading I've done here and elsewhere about the FDA thing and what not. But I do understand why what is happening is as it is. We all want to know that what we put in our bodies is not to to poison us from the result of bad quality control, and the past has showed us that China doesn't have a good record in that regard. I agree with those of the mind that the FDA may have been push this way by Big T and or Big F, but I kind of believe that was really about it. Someone told the FDA "hey look over there at that" and what the FDA saw what was a accident waiting to happen. Now there probably is more to it than that, but I'm not "in the know" so it's all just guessing. The thing is it was going to happen sooner or later. I just wish I had found out about this wonderful creation sooner to give me enough space away from smoking to quit nicotine for good.

 

[LaceyUnderall]

I wanted to note my analogy of kids in the sandbox because that is what is happening:

Two kids are playing in the sandbox one day. Kid 1 has a shovel and a bucket and asks Kid 2 to come help him with his castle. Kid 2 turns his back, tells Kid 1 he wants nothing to do with his shovel, bucket or castle.

When Kid 1 gets done building an beautiful castle, Kid 2 decides he wants the shovel, the bucket AND the castle. Kid 2 is ten times bigger than Kid 1, but Kid 1 puts up a fight to save his shovel, his bucket AND his castle.

This is what is happening.

2 years ago, the FDA AND the ATF were approached by several suppliers and all had the same outcome: Either their phone calls were IGNORED or they were told that the agency(s) wanted NOTHING to do with e-cigs. Now the FDA does.

IMHO, they had their chance to help those of us who were here early on and they chose not to help us. We went seeking guidance and they ignored us. Now that they realize what they have done, that they have not only given up one of the possible remedies to one of our biggest health and social problems but the immense profits from applications, they want a piece of it.

IF they had the right to do what they are doing, they would have done so a long time ago. They didn't. If the assumptions are true that the FDA has any right over this product, if the product is not making health claims, then they would have pulled this product from the US market back in September of 2008 when the WHO made their comments that this is not a proven cessation device. They didn't. Why? Because they couldn't.

What would have happened if they had blocked these from the market in 2008? Maybe 10 suppliers would have been upset and consumer levels were pretty low at the time so they would have been bummed but gone on to something else or continued to modify and find alternatives.

PS: And a Welcome FadedGene!

 

[SheerLuckHolmes]

This is what is happening.

2 years ago, the FDA AND the ATF were approached by several suppliers and all had the same outcome: Either their phone calls were IGNORED or they were told that the agency(s) wanted NOTHING to do with e-cigs. Now the FDA does.

Do you and/or the suppliers have the documentation to support this? If so, this would be an incredibly BIG stick to club the FDA and ASH with. If so, it needs to be given out everywhere and to everybody to show what snobs and corrupt bast**ds these people at the FDA, government and ASH are! It would bring everyday ordinary people to our side of the argument.

Post the doc's or links here and we'll get this info out! NOW!!!

 

[LaceyUnderall]

Do you and/or the suppliers have the documentation to support this? If so, this would be an incredibly BIG stick to club the FDA and ASH with. If so, it needs to be given out everywhere and to everybody to show what snobs and corrupt bast**ds these people at the FDA, government and ASH are! It would bring everyday ordinary people to our side of the argument.

Post the doc's or links here and we'll get this info out! NOW!!!

I know we attempted with phone calls... lesson learned now that hind-sight is 20/20. As for others... this is what we have discussed so I am not sure if they have it in writing or not. I would hope that IF they did, they would use this to their advantage...

At this point... I can only be ...... that we were ignored and that's about it.

 

[LaceyUnderall]

It really would have made no difference Lacey. People are misguided that agencies like the FDA are mandated to never change their position. That simply is not the case. New information and claims made can and will change the FDA's position.

Sun

Thank god we aren't making any claims then right?

Unfortunately for the FDA, they do have to have an act of Congress in order to do what they are trying to do (or they would have had tobacco in 1994 when they tried to grab it and failed).

 

[LaceyUnderall]

Maybe so. But your outcome is not 100% certain. It is one opinion. It isn't that it isn't correct, it very well could be. But it isn't 100% certain.

Only the Judge knows at this point how he is going to rule.

 

[harmony gardens]

I just came on the scene in April, so I wasn't aware of a lot of the things that are coming to light here now.

Are Njoy and SE both supplied by the same company, and the main difference the focus of the marketing strategy??

Who made the samples that the FDA tested?? It must have come from Ruyan, right???

In regards to the companies trying to work with the FDA and EPA,,, we are now dealing with a new administation. Perhaps there was a more lax atmosphere there at that time than we have now. (just a speculating)


As I see this all in this new light,,,I find I need to adjust my emotional attachment a bit.

I love vaping,,,, but man,,, this whole thing puts bees in your head,,, and it gets more complex at every turn.

 

[Sun Vaporer]

Maybe so. But your outcome is not 100% certain. It is one opinion. It isn't that it isn't correct, it very well could be. But it isn't 100% certain.

Only the Judge knows at this point how he is going to rule.

Well I do not know how else to read the definition of tobacco when it specifically states it shall not include any devices:

SEC. 101. AMENDMENT OF FEDERAL FOOD, DRUG, AND COSMETIC ACT.​

(a) D​

​

​

​

EFINITION OF TOBACCO PRODUCTS.—Section 201 of the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321) is amended
by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(rr)(1) The term ‘tobacco product’ means any product made
or derived from tobacco that is intended for human consumption,
including any component, part, or accessory of a tobacco product
(except for raw materials other than tobacco used in manufacturing
a component, part, or accessory of a tobacco product).
‘‘(2) The term ‘tobacco product’ does not mean an article that
is a drug under subsection (g)(1), a device under subsection (h),
or a combination product described in section 503(g).
‘‘(3) The products described in paragraph (2) shall be subject​

to chapter V of this Act.

Sun

 

[LaceyUnderall]

Well I do not know how else to read the definition of tobacco when it specifically states it shall not include any devices:

SEC. 101. AMENDMENT OF FEDERAL FOOD, DRUG, AND COSMETIC ACT.​

(a) D​

​

​

​

EFINITION OF TOBACCO PRODUCTS.—Section 201 of the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321) is amended
by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(rr)(1) The term ‘tobacco product’ means any product made
or derived from tobacco that is intended for human consumption,
including any component, part, or accessory of a tobacco product
(except for raw materials other than tobacco used in manufacturing
a component, part, or accessory of a tobacco product).
‘‘(2) The term ‘tobacco product’ does not mean an article that
is a drug under subsection (g)(1), a device under subsection (h),
or a combination product described in section 503(g).
‘‘(3) The products described in paragraph (2) shall be subject​

to chapter V of this Act.

Sun

I am not arguing with you about devices not being a part of tobacco. However, there is still the argument to be made with the FDA, that these devices are not any different than a water pipe, a larger version vaporizer etc. Those are not regulated by the FDA. There is no reason that they should be giving preference to one kind of vaporizer over another.

You could easily take loose tobacco, soak it PG and make it your wick instead of the poly filling. This would vaporize the tobacco just as the larger versions do.

 

[LaceyUnderall]

Lacey--that might be a good argument if NJOY and SE did not make cartridges that specifically fit thier e-cigs to deliver nicotine. There is where the problem is. To do what you are saying with the e-cig, would be to alter it by changing the cartridge and its contents. That is not what we are dealing with, rather we are dealing with the product as it is sold.

Sun

What about cartridges that are sold blank that could contain anything you want?

 

[SheerLuckHolmes]

It really would have made no difference Lacey. People are misguided that agencies like the FDA are mandated to never change their position. That simply is not the case. New information and claims made can and will change the FDA's position.

Sun

Who cares if it makes no difference to or with the FDA. I'm talking educating the general public, doing some general PR to get the public to see the other side of the debate and from our perspective not just the perspective and spin of the powers that be.

 

[quovadis]

One thing is for sure.
History repeats itself.
New ideas and new science is always scorned upon, until a major amount of money is thrown at it.
The "new" needs friends according to "Ratatouille"

Veni-Vidi-Vapi

 

[grimmer255]

I still see no ECA taking action. IF ASH can walk right in and hand a judge some documents and havent even been in the case at all. where the heck is ECA......I would have been in there with 20 feet worth of papers that had every person in here the ECF forum....plus the signed petition and all the independent studies done up to date. And who knows what else.