FDA FDA's leaked guidance for PMTAs confirm deeming reg would ban >99.9% of nicotine vapor products

[skoony]

That trends Today aren't always Realities in the Future.

The future is the future. One must scout the terrain as it is now to choose the right path.
I wish they would release the deeming regs so we can prepare for the final battle.
Regards
Mike

 

[Luke matt]

Yes I believe that this FDA regulations suck. But big tobacco makes billions of dollars every year. And I seen on "not blowing smoke" that big tobacco pays millions of dollars to state's such as California and New York. So they will stay quite about all the nasty chemical's in each cigarette smoke. It's {moderated} up big time.

 

[Luke matt]

The future is the future. One must scout the terrain as it is now to choose the right path.
I wish they would release the deeming regs so we can prepare for the final battle.
Regards
Mike

AMEN ON THAT BRO. But they won't because big tabbaco makes ALOT of united States country's too much $$$. And that is what it is all about the money.

 

[Luke matt]

Nothing I guess bro.

 

[sofarsogood]

Yes I believe that this FDA regulations suck. But big tobacco makes billions of dollars every year. And I seen on "not blowing smoke" that big tobacco pays millions of dollars to state's such as California and New York. So they will stay quite about all the nasty chemical's in each cigarette smoke. It's {moderated} up big time.

I think you're picking the wrong villian this time. I believe BT has very mixed feelings about ecigs. It's a market they can participate in and their strength is 100,000 retailers ready to go if they can figure out the right products, which they haven't quite so far. We spend $100 billion a year on tobacco. Most of that money does not go to BT, it goes to governments as taxes. Tax supported institutions are the big losers if tobacco crashes. Find me a tax supported institutions that loves ecigs. My recent realization is 20 mg of nicotine from the government in a pack of cigarettes costs $6 (in Michigan). 20 mg of nic from myfreedomsmokes costs 1 penny (not a typo). That's tobacco apocolypse.

 

[SeniorBoy]

FYI with respect to FDA legal action and enforcement:

"The FDA Office of Chief Counsel consists of about 95 lawyers and 25 support staff. It is located at the FDA headquarters in Silver Spring, Maryland, a suburb of Washington, D.C.

The Office is a component of the Office of the General Counsel (OGC) of the Department of Health and Human Services. The Office works closely with other components of OGC and with other federal agencies including:

• the Department of Justice on court litigation
• the Federal Trade Commission on advertising issues
• the Department of Agriculture on food products
• the Environmental Protection Agency on environmental and pesticide issues
• the Federal Bureau of Investigation on criminal matters
• the Department of State on international matters
• the Customs Service on imported products
• the Drug Enforcement Administration on controlled substances
• and the Postal Service on mail fraud.

Page Last Updated: 06/23/2014"

Source

 

[AndriaD]

I think you're picking the wrong villian this time. I believe BT has very mixed feelings about ecigs. It's a market they can participate in and their strength is 100,000 retailers ready to go if they can figure out the right products, which they haven't quite so far. We spend $100 billion a year on tobacco. Most of that money does not go to BT, it goes to governments as taxes. Tax supported institutions are the big losers if tobacco crashes. Find me a tax supported institutions that loves ecigs. My recent realization is 20 mg of nicotine from the government in a pack of cigarettes costs $6 (in Michigan). 20 mg of nic from myfreedomsmokes costs 1 penny (not a typo). That's tobacco apocolypse.

I agree, BT is not really our "enemy," not the way that BP and big evil gov't are our enemies -- BT is just a competitor, but BP and big evil gov't (and all the idiot ANTZ) want to wipe out vaping completely. Completely different paradigm. Plus the fact that the fewer packs of cigarettes that are sold, the less money that BT has to hand over to gov't.

But I really don't think that BT can compete, if the playing field stays level as it is currently -- only if big evil gov't hands it over to them on a silver platter with ridiculous regulations; BT is used to the "big corp" type of business, and vaping isn't that sort of business at all -- it's distributed amongst 1000's of small businesses, fast moving, ever-changing, responding almost instantly to consumer demand. The only way that BT can compete with that is for the FDA to just hand it to them, gift wrapped with those asinine regulations.

Andria

 

[sofarsogood]

But I really don't think that BT can compete, if the playing field stays level as it is currently -- only if big evil gov't hands it over to them on a silver platter with ridiculous regulations; BT is used to the "big corp" type of business, and vaping isn't that sort of business at all -- it's distributed amongst 1000's of small businesses, fast moving, ever-changing, responding almost instantly to consumer demand. The only way that BT can compete with that is for the FDA to just hand it to them, gift wrapped with those asinine regulations.Andria

Right now vaping is more like pipe tobacco smoking. Party stores and gas stations don't provide that tpye of product. The tobacco companies might come up with some interesting vaping products. It ain't over.

 

[Luke matt]

I think you're picking the wrong villian this time. I believe BT has very mixed feelings about ecigs. It's a market they can participate in and their strength is 100,000 retailers ready to go if they can figure out the right products, which they haven't quite so far. We spend $100 billion a year on tobacco. Most of that money does not go to BT, it goes to governments as taxes. Tax supported institutions are the big losers if tobacco crashes. Find me a tax supported institutions that loves ecigs. My recent realization is 20 mg of nicotine from the government in a pack of cigarettes costs $6 (in Michigan). 20 mg of nic from myfreedomsmokes costs 1 penny (not a typo). That's tobacco apocolypse.

I don't think that we are going to agree on this subject. So God bless and good night.

 

[Luke matt]

Yes I believe that this FDA regulations suck. But big tobacco makes billions of dollars every year. And I seen on "not blowing smoke" that big tobacco pays millions of dollars to state's such as California and New York. So they will stay quite about all the nasty chemical's in each cigarette smoke. It's {moderated} up big time.

Sorry I just have a lot of passion for vaping.

 

[Luke matt]

I agree, BT is not really our "enemy," not the way that BP and big evil gov't are our enemies -- BT is just a competitor, but BP and big evil gov't (and all the idiot ANTZ) want to wipe out vaping completely. Completely different paradigm. Plus the fact that the fewer packs of cigarettes that are sold, the less money that BT has to hand over to gov't.

But I really don't think that BT can compete, if the playing field stays level as it is currently -- only if big evil gov't hands it over to them on a silver platter with ridiculous regulations; BT is used to the "big corp" type of business, and vaping isn't that sort of business at all -- it's distributed amongst 1000's of small businesses, fast moving, ever-changing, responding almost instantly to consumer demand. The only way that BT can compete with that is for the FDA to just hand it to them, gift wrapped with those asinine regulations.

Andria

I totally agree with you. I know that big pharma and the government are two evil sources. I wonder how many people here called the White House and sent a email to they're state Representative. And how many people here belong to CASSA. Just a question please no hate email's. Lol

 

[Robino1]

And how many people here belong to CASSA. Just a question please no hate email's. Lol

I think most of the people that hang around this section of the forum, are CASAA members

You shouldn't ever get hate emails for asking a question... Just sayin' *looking around at everyone*

 

[AndriaD]

I think I probably joined CASAA the first week I was here. I sent them money about the same time I subscribed here, which was about 4-5 months later (when we got our income tax refund!). Membership is important, but I bet the sending money part is probably more useful to them.

I also leave acerbic comments on vaping articles, when I can -- someone started a thread earlier this evening about this one, did y'all see it?
Smokers deserve lower-risk alternatives to the deadly cigarette --

This was my comment, and I really hope anyone in the FDA reads it:

"The entire FDA needs to be booted out and brought up on charges of Crimes Against Humanity, if they manage this farce, allowing deadly cigarettes to stay just as they are, while effectively banning the only thing that's EVER come along that ACTUALLY helps smokers to quit -- without side effects like suicide and homicide!

This "deeming" business is just plain CRIMINAL, and it needs to be KNOWN that criminals are now setting policy. They need to be PROSECUTED for this "deeming" lunacy, for what it will mean to all those who still smoke who might otherwise have benefitted from switching to e-cigarettes -- THEIR EARLY AND NEEDLESS DEATH. The FDA is guilty of Conspiracy to Commit Murder!"

Andria

 

[Katya]

I wonder how many people here called the White House and sent a email to they're state Representative.

Most likely every single person who posted in this thread?

I kinda know this crowd.

I called, emailed, faxed and signed every petition I saw!

And how many people here belong to CASSA.

CASAA?

Probably all of us/them who post regularly in this thread.

I've been a member for years, submitted my personal story, took surveys. I contribute financially monthly and answer all CTAs.

 

[Luke matt]

I think most of the people that hang around this section of the forum, are CASAA members

You shouldn't ever get hate emails for asking a question... Just sayin' *looking around at everyone*

Thank you for your help. Robino 1

 

[Shameless]

I'm way behind and don't know if shameless is still active. To answer this we do have ISO standards for clean room facilities that almost all juice makers are following or are working to get to that standard, at least here in the US. Small labels are starting to work with bigger labels to make thier blends. The thing is there are regs already in place that cover a lot of the manufacturing practices used by juice makers. Why do we need more?

Look at companies like provape and HOH. They already set a very high standard for safety and quality on mods WITHOUT regulation telling them to. The vaping public demanded things and companies stepped up. Companies that haven't are failing or have failed. Free market at its best.

What these regs won't do is have ANY effect on over seas manufacturers. And that is where the majority of problems are coming from

I'm actually not active on this thread any more (I didnt like being the only voice for regulation, it was getting a little mean) - but to answer your question - counting on companies to "do the right thing" and self regulate has caused a lot of problems - look at the cigarette industry. I'm not saying all companies are bad - but as I said before - think about it - there will come a time when big tobacco and probably big pharma are in the business - do you want to trust them to self regulate? Stick to high standards and only use FDA approved nic, pg/vg. and flavorings? Do you trust them not to put anything else into the juice to make it more addictive? Or less costly?

I am by no means saying what the FDA proposed is the right way to go - but self regulation in an industry like this isnt either - in my opinion. (and again I am out - sorry but I really dont like being the only one pro regulation, I feel some people took their anger out on me and I'm not thick skinned enough)

 

[skoony]

I'm actually not active on this thread any more (I didnt like being the only voice for regulation, it was getting a little mean) - but to answer your question - counting on companies to "do the right thing" and self regulate has caused a lot of problems - look at the cigarette industry. I'm not saying all companies are bad - but as I said before - think about it - there will come a time when big tobacco and probably big pharma are in the business - do you want to trust them to self regulate? Stick to high standards and only use FDA approved nic, pg/vg. and flavorings? Do you trust them not to put anything else into the juice to make it more addictive? Or less costly?

I am by no means saying what the FDA proposed is the right way to go - but self regulation in an industry like this isnt either - in my opinion. (and again I am out - sorry but I really dont like being the only one pro regulation, I feel some people took their anger out on me and I'm not thick skinned enough)

E-cigarettes are not unregulated. They are a commercially available product and as such all regulations
concerning health and safety and consumer protection apply to this industry as they apply to any other
commercially available product. The industry is regulating itself and what the industry doesn't do the
lawsuits being brought on now and in the future will take care of the rest.

regards
Mike

 

[Kent C]

THE MEDIA BUSINESS; ABC NEWS SETTLES SUITS ON TOBACCO

"In an extraordinary act of contrition, ABC News publicly apologized last night for asserting in a news program that two giant tobacco companies add extra nicotine to their cigarettes.

In joint statements, Capital Cities/ ABC, Philip Morris and R. J. Reynolds said ABC agreed to apologize for a report on its program "Day One" that said Philip Morris and Reynolds controlled and manipulated nicotine levels to addict smokers. "



http://rodutobaccotruth.blogspot.com/2010/07/who-said-light-cigarettes-are-safer.html

"As I have previously blogged, in 1976 the Cancer Society published research (here) showing that light cigarettes were indeed safer. In 1959-60, over a million people were enrolled by the Cancer Society in a prospective epidemiological study of cancer risk factors. Smokers were classified according to nicotine-tar content, high (2.0-2.7 milligrams nicotine and 26-36 mg tar) or low (less than 1.2 mg nicotine and less than 18 mg tar); detailed records were obtained about the number and dates of deaths.

The study revealed that the death rate from all causes was 16% lower among smokers of low nicotine-tar cigarettes than among smokers of high nicotine-tar cigarettes. Similarly, low nicotine-tar smokers had a 14% lower death rate from heart attacks and a 26% lower rate from lung cancer. "

"American smokers made a large-scale transition from full-flavor to light cigarettes almost 50 years ago; the public health impact remains a highly debated topic even today. One fact is not debatable: The marketing of light cigarettes was not entirely an industry-driven conspiracy. The health advantages of light cigarettes compared with full-flavor brands were documented and promoted by the American Cancer Society in 1976 and 1979."

 

[AndriaD]

THE MEDIA BUSINESS; ABC NEWS SETTLES SUITS ON TOBACCO

"In an extraordinary act of contrition, ABC News publicly apologized last night for asserting in a news program that two giant tobacco companies add extra nicotine to their cigarettes.

In joint statements, Capital Cities/ ABC, Philip Morris and R. J. Reynolds said ABC agreed to apologize for a report on its program "Day One" that said Philip Morris and Reynolds controlled and manipulated nicotine levels to addict smokers. "



http://rodutobaccotruth.blogspot.com/2010/07/who-said-light-cigarettes-are-safer.html

"As I have previously blogged, in 1976 the Cancer Society published research (here) showing that light cigarettes were indeed safer. In 1959-60, over a million people were enrolled by the Cancer Society in a prospective epidemiological study of cancer risk factors. Smokers were classified according to nicotine-tar content, high (2.0-2.7 milligrams nicotine and 26-36 mg tar) or low (less than 1.2 mg nicotine and less than 18 mg tar); detailed records were obtained about the number and dates of deaths.

The study revealed that the death rate from all causes was 16% lower among smokers of low nicotine-tar cigarettes than among smokers of high nicotine-tar cigarettes. Similarly, low nicotine-tar smokers had a 14% lower death rate from heart attacks and a 26% lower rate from lung cancer. "

"American smokers made a large-scale transition from full-flavor to light cigarettes almost 50 years ago; the public health impact remains a highly debated topic even today. One fact is not debatable: The marketing of light cigarettes was not entirely an industry-driven conspiracy. The health advantages of light cigarettes compared with full-flavor brands were documented and promoted by the American Cancer Society in 1976 and 1979."

So I wonder how long it will be before they retract amd apologize for their lies about vaping.

Andria

 

[sofarsogood]

If all e liquid was DIY and all devices were mail order from China what would be the politics and regulations be? The big fat juicy tax target is pre mix but they can't squeeze that goose very hard--unless they start a drug war over nic.