I understand what you are saying and let me be a little more specific - but since I am not a lawyer or a long time vaper, I might not get it all right.
I can be "pro" regulation and believe that the proposed regulation is too severe, I guess I dont understand what you dont understand about that. I believe in some regulation.
The FDA part is what I don't understand. One thing I've noticed with many that come here is that are in for a wake up call about what FDA regulations actually mean. I would be one of the many of which I speak. At same time, I agree that self regulation won't address the entire industry, and some third party (like FDA) is needed for those that want ALL vendors to comply. Me, I don't.
And I think current / recent status quo shows quite nicely that we don't need industry wide regulation.
I believe in the FDA testing ejuice to make sure the ingredients specified are what is actually in the juice.
I believe in spot checks (like with any consumable) to check for safe handling, clean work environment, proper procedures, etc (and the etc covers anything I do not know yet about creating ejuice, so I cant be much more specific)
At like a really superficial level, I don't think these are (entirely) unreasonable. But I think it is example of what you want could differ from what fellow vapers want. Not differ in say "only you want this, while all of us agree on another path." And instead more like, if we got into all the fine details of each of these points, we'd probably have all sorts of variation in our opinions.
Like with clean work environment, and knowing the link that Kent C provided in post before yours, would you be okay with say "up to 50 rodent hairs in a 30 ml bottle is permissible?" I'm thinking the answer to that is no, and yet, that to me is reasonable expectation given FDA's track record. So, an issue like the recent diacetyl 'problem' is something I feel fairly confident that the FDA will allow in eLiquids (assuming they even allow for sale of eLiquid). Several here have a zero tolerance policy on it. Thus, I would argue that they are even more zealous in their approach to this particular compound than what FDA is likely to allow. But I use this as one of around 800 nuances that we could all discuss if we really wanted to get into the minutiae. Cause just saying "clean work environment" leaves lots of room for what does that really mean?
And so from FDA's proposal perspective it means, everything you can possibly think of, time 10. Which is why it is possible to think applications for your 'new' product to go on the FDA legal market may be 25 million dollars. All because consumers are 'demanding' specific details on ingredients, safe handling, clean work environment, etc.
Me, I don't see why checking for that stuff would cost more than $1000, and I'm thinking you agree. But, political reality is it'll likely cost at least $10,000 (to the business) for a spot check, and then who knows how much to become compliant with whatever FDA deems necessary for full compliance. And that dollar figure is assuming you've paid the million dollar fee just to be able to participate on the market.
So, me who doesn't really care for industry wide regulations just assume it goes to the underground market, where whatever you think should happen with your product, won't. Or EXACTLY like the gray market you and every vaper (who fell in love with vaping) have been enjoying thus far.
I believe in testing all flavoring for inhalation safety/not just consumption. We have found some flavors to be unsafe to inhale like some menthols and oils. And the stuff that starts with a D that makes the buttery flavor (forgot the name off the top of my head)
I believe that every recipe should be checked for actual levels of nicotine.
I believe that the handling of things like peanuts should be standard so people with allergies dont need to worry
I believe that PG/VG levels need to be checked (since there are many that are sensitive to it)
I also think that when a juice states that it is Kosher that should be verified.
I also think that any juice that causes cracks/breaks in plastic tanks should have a mandatory safety warning so people know not to use plastic tanks when vaping it.
So glad I addressed all this stuff already. IMO, you are clearly justifying thousands of reasonable dollars and (more likely) millions of government dollars that vaping companies have to pay. I'm not sure what kind of products you are enjoying now as a vaper, but it is IMO highly unlikely that some of them will be able to fully comply. I welcome them to participate in the black market. The ones that are alive and well on the open/legal market will clearly be known as BV, and whatever it is you (or anyone) currently thinks of BT, will very likely be what you come to think (and think you know) about BV. It's not like mainstream media and anti-vape people are going to be all nicey nice about these large corporations doing billions of dollars in distributing vape goods. Vapers might like them, but I'm thinking it'll likely be most (long term) vapers are engaged in DIY/black market and that many of those same people will possibly resent BV (for a whole range of reasons), but near the top of that will be strong perception that they are essentially in bed with FDA regulators.
Considering I have been vaping for around a month and a half - I am sure there are other things that should be checked that I have no knowledge of, but I also believe that if the regs were written with the cooperation of people in the vaping industry - they would know they things to look out for more than I do.
I DO NOT believe in making sellers of ejuice pay $1000s per flavor/per nic level/per pg/vg ration is appropriate and that should be done based on each flavor with a recipe for all the variations to check for what I stated above.
As far as manufacturers of Mods, I really cant speak on the subject since I just started using one and am not very knowledgeable yet.
I don't believe vaping is inherently dangerous (I do it) - but I do think that anything consumed should be tested for safety and accuracy. Even a lot of the creators of ejuice agree considering they send their juice out to be "certified" by 3rd parties.
For specific, and very limited, items. FDA (and any real third party regulator) is going to want to be as comprehensive as possible. With all the things you have listed, I'd love to see you do an itemized line count where you add up the total for what you think is truly reasonable cost to do those sorts of checks/testing. Not from consumer perspective, but from perspective of you'll be getting paid to do the work, and you have $100,000 in student loans to pay back while you keep yourself busy on this new FDA regulation. Plus liability type considerations in case you are not 100% accurate, cause after all if the vaping business needs to be up to snuff, shouldn't the regulators be top notch as well?
I know that FDA regulations cant guarantee 100% safety but they can check for the things I mentioned and they can have the "spot check" possibility, to increase the odds of maintaining clean and safe environments.
I swear half the comments in this thread imply that if a person thinks regulations can help, then they must think that the government is their savior and if they get involved no harm can come to them. That is not the case. But having a basic level of standards and health checks does provide for more safety then there is now.
The "basic" levels thing is what I feel is the disputable part. Me, I'm fine with the basic level being the anecdotal evidence we've established over the past 5 years. That works for me. You may have your own set of what basic testing/checking entails. Perhaps if you itemized everything and addressed all that you think is reasonable, I'd understand better what you mean by "reasonable" regulations. Without that, then we only have FDA's version of reasonable, and this thread dealing with 'leaked' info suggests it is, according to what I think you and I (and many other vapers) think, so ridiculously over the top that it will be interesting to see if more than 5 companies (selling anything vape related) can enter into the legal market.
I quit smoking to be healthier, I want FDA regulations to help with that quest, not to guarantee it, but to help with it.
I didn't quit smoking via vaping. Nor do I have that intention. Just noting this cause IMO, that has nothing to do with legalization of vaping. In fact, legally it almost can't have anything to do with that (in terms of marketing).
Read any of the DIY threads in ECF and you will see things like "don't use this flavor because it has this in it" "don't use this because it has coloring", "don't use this because it makes plastic crack", "don't use this flavoring because it uses real maple syrup", etc. SOME things can be checked, and I think they should be.
Checked by the consumer, suggested to industry. That's how I take it. Insist on it being industry wide and I think there is almost no basis for "basic" regulations given the way FSPTCA is written.
