If you don't care enough to read this...

[Rizzyking]

Yes it's true the UK NHS will be including an ecig kit on prescription but it is a cigalike kit that fully conforms to the conditions laid out in the TPD so basically useless and likely to turn more people against vaping as they will view the whole thing by the standard of that useless carp.

 

[Douggro]

I always come back to one thing, the FDA approved Chantix, I've seen more commercials in the last two weeks than the last two months. I'll say this again, it's FDA approved.

What are the side effects from vaping?

Here's the list for Chantix, makes you wonder why the FDA has a problem with vaping.

And my doctor wondered why I didn't fill the scrip for it he gave me…

As it was spelled out in the CASAA post, the procedures for getting FDA approval on medications are more clear-cut than how they're being applied to anything they decide falls under the TCA. Pharma knows what the game is and how to play it.

 

[FlamingoTutu]

My attention span is not something to be proud of.
And have you heard about Christmas? Yes, the one that was yesterday? It had cut my (already laughable) span of attention at least in half.
Would somebody be so kind to explain in not too many words what is it about?
(I tried to read, really tried...)

I put it into a word doc so I could read it later with bigger type. Times New Roman 12pt, almost 50 pages with footnotes. They need an ADHD version, but what I did skim as I was transferring, scroll button no longer works, they did a nice job. What really makes me happy is some underling will have to read the whole damned thing. I hope that person gets it.

I've been officially told that the UK will fully implement the whole tobacco products directive in may 2016 so for us in the UK the fight is well and truly over hope our cousins across the Atlantic have better fortune with your fight.

I'm really sorry. What a bunch of BS. Do you have any idea what the implications will be for tourists coming into the country with vape stuff? I've been there six times, my husband was with me last three. We love England/UK enough to consider living there. We can't help as citizens but we sure as hell can as tourists. If you know what we can do to help, please let me know.

Doc, I hate to be the voice of doom but I believe its a fait accompli.

The MSA money is just to great to loose and they want the money more then they care about our health.

I always come back to one thing, the FDA approved Chantix, I've seen more commercials in the last two weeks than the last two months. I'll say this again, it's FDA approved.

What are the side effects from vaping?

Here's the list for Chantix, makes you wonder why the FDA has a problem with vaping.

Chantix side effects
Abnormal Dreams
Chronic Trouble Sleeping
Feel Like Throwing Up
Gas
Head Pain
Incomplete or Infrequent Bowel Movements
Throwing Up
Angina
Trouble Breathing
Acute Infection of the Nose, Throat or Sinus
Condition in which Stomach Acid is Pushed Into the Esophagus
Drowsiness
Dry Mouth
Excessive Sweating
Feeling Weak
Increased Hunger
Indigestion
Itching
Loss of Appetite
Low Energy
Nightmares
Not Feeling Well
Rash
Runny Nose
Sluggishness
Stomach Cramps
Abnormal Heart Rhythm
Abnormal Liver Function Tests
Anemia
Anxious
Behaving with Excessive Cheerfulness and Activity
Chest Pain
Delusions
Depression
Diabetes
Erythema Multiforme
Giant Hives
Hallucination
Having Thoughts of Suicide
Heart Attack
High Blood Pressure
Injury
Mental Disorder with Loss of Normal Personality & Reality
Panic Disorder
Paranoia
Problems Metabolizing Alcohol
Seizures
Stevens-Johnson Syndrome
Stroke
Suicidal
Thoughts of Hurting or Killing Others
Transient Ischemic Attack
Unconscious
Aggressive Behavior
Backache
Cannot Focus Thoughts
Cramps
........
Disturbance of Attention
Dizzy
Excess Urination
Feeling Anger Toward Something
Feeling Restless
Flu-Like Symptoms
Heart Throbbing or Pounding
Hives
Joint Pain
Mood Changes
Muscle Pain
Nosebleed
Peripheral Vascular Disease
Problem Behavior
Problem with Periods
Problems with Eyesight
Reaction due to an Allergy
Ringing in the Ears
Sensation of Spinning or Whirling
Sleep Disorder
Swollen Lymph Nodes
Taste Problems
Temporary Redness of Face and Neck
Visible Water Retention
Weight Gain

You forgot the part where over 500 people have died from that freaking medication because, gasp, they wanted to quit smoking. Nobody cares (I know you do, not saying that). It's a disgrace this medication is still on the market. Statins are another disgrace. Even my doctor admitted all the tests are carried out by the drug companies. Seems it's a longstanding tradition for the FDA to be bought off, not to mention congress. May they all go to hell for the pain, suffering and deaths they cause.

The FDA can do good work, wish they'd concentrate on that.

 

[Rizzyking]

As far as tourism goes I don't know how that will be affected but I'd guess you'd be subject to the same laws . Best bet would be to contact a UK consulate and check assuming they have and understand the legislation.

 

[beckdg]

My attention span is not something to be proud of.
And have you heard about Christmas? Yes, the one that was yesterday? It had cut my (already laughable) span of attention at least in half.
Would somebody be so kind to explain in not too many words what is it about?
(I tried to read, really tried...)

Let me get this right...

You refuse to get your opinion other than from a brief sound bite of someone else's opinion.

Yet later, you'll undoubtedly refuse to accept a well known reality... even go as far as to question it based on the watered down sound bites and flawed logic you're willing to put forth less than minimal effort to obtain?

I don't get it. I know you're educated... in science of all things.

Yet you'll refuse to collect the data. Rather rely on interpretation of data from an unqualified source.

Tapatyped

 

[sparkky1]

I believe that by design much of the content in the CASSA document stemmed from a rather extensive survey they sent to the CASSA membership prior to their meeting with the OMB/OIRA.

Several of the questions asked how and individual may react to the deeming regs and one choice was black market and shadow markets. Several times that was my answer.

Reading the CASSA document it appears that may of the responses (or questions) from the membership survey were incorporated into their response. It's just a guess on my part but the amount of ink may be a direct correlation to much of the membership responding that black market and shadow markets would be their alternative.

Looks like the very same survey question answers I gave ...............

 

[motordude]

Bumping for importance

 

[DC2]

I'm left wondering if this isn't a play by the FDA to maintain the status quo ante of the days before e-cigs and vaping so they don't have to do the work of performing meaningful work as it applies to the industry. "We don't want to have to deal with this, so let's just make it don't have to and look like we're doing the 'right thing' in the process." Remove the Machiavellian schemes of BT/BP that get floated around and you have a lazy bureaucracy trying not to have to do anything, which is eminently more probable.

My conclusion is that the deeming regulations are a bit of all of the above.
With a lot of bones tossed in for the ANTZ as well.

The deeming regulations, as written last we saw, seem designed to satisfy everyone but us.
And when I say us, I mean the consumers, who are the ones the regulations should be designed for.

 

[DC2]

I am NOT going back to "the Chuck mod" people... NO.. PLEASE NO

Hey now!!!
<---------

Not that I'm using those anymore, but damn, that's harsh.

 

[DC2]

I'm really not sure how many members responded or were asked to respond but I believe there is a vast difference with data collected through an advocacy group, consolidated and in a concise story. Much more powerful then random statements posted on the web.

It sounds like you didn't read the appendix.
You can surely be excused for that.

This appendix provides a summary of the methods and nature of the CASAA survey whose results appear in the main text. The survey was conducted in November and December of 2015. It was a self-administered online survey that took approximately five to ten minutes to complete. The survey can be viewed, as seen by the subjects, via CASAA E-cigarette Survey - November 2015 (a flat-file description of the full survey will be created shortly). Subjects were asked slightly different questions depending on their smoking history.

The target population was adults living in the United States who are CASAA members; CASAA membership was approximately 120,000 at the time of the survey. We were able to directly contact approximately 77,000 members by email (the others did not opt in for receiving emails from CASAA) to invite them to participate. An initial invitation and several reminders were sent via email. CASAA members who did not receive the email could take the survey, but would need to find out about it via invitations on our social media accounts or website.

There were 18,398 respondents who received the email and 2,056 others who CASAA members who did not (based on self-report). Of those, 259 indicated they had never been e-cigarette users (defined based on having spent a minimum of $100 on e-cigarette products for personal use), and are also excluded (the CASAA membership includes users of other smoke-free products and interested non-users; they were also asked to take the survey, though presumably many of them did not bother because they knew it was about e-cigarettes). An additional 5,416 respondents indicated they were not CASAA members and are excluded from this analysis to better define the survey population. Invitations and the survey introduction made clear who the target population was and questions were asked to confirm that status, but respondents who were not in the target population were allowed to complete the survey to minimize the chance someone would misrepresent their status in order to be able to complete the survey.

Because this survey targeted the CASAA membership, it is the best-defined population of any survey of e-cigarette users to date, other than a few population representative surveys that have asked only a couple of questions about e-cigarette use. Previous surveys lacked clearly-defined target populations; they recruited respondents via untargeted social media snowballing, and thus collected a convenience sample of responses from across jurisdictions, whoever happened to be enthusiastic about doing the survey. The e-cigarette users who are CASAA members are a better defined population. They are 99% American. They are clearly not representative of all U.S. e-cigarette users, given that they self-selected to participate in CASAA Calls to Action (advocacy alerts) or were otherwise interested in joining the organization. They are probably representative of Americans who will be most affected by policy action targeted at e-cigarettes and are sufficiently socially and politically connected to be aware of such actions. The response rate was far higher, as a portion of the target population, than any previous e-cigarette survey, though it was still low enough that there was presumably selection based on enthusiasm within the CASAA population.

We believe the results are reasonably representative of the 1 to 2 million who are actively enthusiastic about e-cigarettes, though some results will represent the perhaps 5 million other e-cigarette users in the USA. In particular, the percentage who achieved particular levels of smoking cessation are clearly not representative of all e-cigarette users (most of the survey respondents quit smoking entirely using e-cigarettes, while most American e-cigarette users have only used them to substitute for some, but not all, of their smoking). However, within the subpopulation who quit entirely using e-cigarettes or merely cut down, the responses are probably reasonably representative. The responses to the questions about planned actions in the event of bans are probably only representative of the enthusiast population, given that plans to seek alternative markets requires knowledge and social connections in the e-cigarette space.

I absolutely respect the treatment they gave to the possible interpretations of their methods and results.
That is what real science looks like.

 

[Plumes.91]

lol oh my, i had no idea you were the creator of this thread! i was thinking of you as i wrote that, haha!
come to think of it... where in the H did my post go? it looks like it got deleted!

 

[DC2]

come to think of it... where in the H did my post go? it looks like it got deleted!

I may have carried that quote over from another thread and had it in my "insert quotes" thingy.
Not realizing that, I seem to have responded to your quote here instead of there.

My bad.

 

[Marc411]

It sounds like you didn't read the appendix.
You can surely be excused for that.




I absolutely respect the treatment they gave to the possible interpretations of their methods and results.
That is what real science looks like.

I did miss that DC2, thanks for posting.

 

[crxess]

Let me get this right...

You refuse to get your opinion other than from a brief sound bite of someone else's opinion.

Yet later, you'll undoubtedly refuse to accept a well known reality... even go as far as to question it based on the watered down sound bites and flawed logic you're willing to put forth less than minimal effort to obtain?

I don't get it. I know you're educated... in science of all things.

Yet you'll refuse to collect the data. Rather rely on interpretation of data from an unqualified source.

Tapatyped

Sadly that seems to be his norm since being here.

Sorry, not trying to be snarky, but learning is an APPLIED skill. I'm having retention issues(short term) so I go over things again and again. Hoping each time, it will take root.
Some things are lost for long periods, while others stick, but truth and power are in knowing. I struggle on.(and babble a bit)

It really wizzes me that these people can close up shop, go home and Celebrate Christmas as if they were <Caring Giving Human Beings> knowing full well they will return to work and finish their Crucifixion upon those that believe in a better alternative.

 

[Douggro]

My conclusion is that the deeming regulations are a bit of all of the above.
With a lot of bones tossed in for the ANTZ as well.

The deeming regulations, as written last we saw, seem designed to satisfy everyone but us.
And when I say us, I mean the consumers, who are the ones the regulations should be designed for.

Now that's what's interesting. These regs are attempting to protect us from ourselves. And from my short time in the vaping community, what I've seen is that, on the whole, we do pretty well protecting ourselves already. Could the industry use some oversight when it comes to the contents of e-liquids? Perhaps, and that may be a very fair play for the FDA to make. But the outright ban on post-deeming products is a pure attempt to effectively stamp out vaping. It's what the FDA would want to do with tobacco if given the chance of it actually succeeding, but we know that will never happen because of the huge financial stakes in government would that actually occur. Hundreds of millions in farming subsidies to tobacco growers, the BT lobby pressure, revenue generation from taxation, Pharma tagging along with NRT therapies and the countless medications that treat smokers when the habit finally catches up with them.. They have the opportunity to kill something in one fell swoop and are diving in for the kill, to save us from ourselves. When they don't have the fortitude to do the one thing that would have a far bigger impact on the health and well-being of the population they are supposed to protect. That, my friends, is irony. Writ large.

 

[crxess]

It's what the FDA would want to do with tobacco if given the chance of it actually succeeding, but we know that will never happen because of the huge financial stakes in government would that actually occur.

Most of your statement is well thought out, however that statement is a swing and a miss.
The FDA Tobacco regulation division is a Anti-smoking Camouflage division to Pacify non-Smokers and lull them into believing government cares.

The FDA-CTP, with a hand full of Employees, Locked down Tobacco regulations in 2009 with restrictions applying to 2007 Specifications.
Since then the FDA -CTP has become a Monster with hundreds of employees, State of the art Facilities and an ever growing Money pit of Funding -to Maintain Status Quo

It seems Clear to me the FDA-CTP was created to Protect US Tobacco Companies from Being Shut Down and Tobacco Products outright Outlawed in the Face of Public Outrage.

There is a Chain of events which must All be followed to get a clear picture and one Name is in the entire mix.

OBAMA:
Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Now, for better or worse:
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

Presidential Office for sale to the highest bidders.
Congress for Higher - Price negotiable


...........And while I'm on a Rant, I am so sick and Tired of the (CANNED) Party Replies from Congressional Representatives that Clearly have taken exactly -0- Time to become informed on anything pertaining to the Interest of the People they intend to Repress.
No doubt at least the vast Majority think This is what E-cigs are about

Ijits

 

[MyMagicMist]

The maximum theoretical benefits from any regulation in this sector are modest, given that e-cigarettes pose low risk to consumers (and little is known about how to lower that risk further still), there is no history of major manufacturing mishaps, and the oft-claimed harms are either mythical or of modest magnitude. FDA has not produced even a prima facie case that the deeming ban and other rules they plan will further any of their goals, let alone quantified the supposed benefits and compared them to the enormous costs.


CASAA: CASAA Report to OMB/OIRA dated December 15, 2015

I think the above statement will sink any attempt by the FDA to do anything regarding vaping. What I emphasize is something what often makes or breaks cases. They're not offering evidence, support, a body of proof that what they seek doing will do as even they themselves desire. How then can anyone else be expected to approve, consent to it?

Ultimately though I appreciate two questions regarding government. Can an individual by right instigate force against another individual, lawfully and legally? Can an individual delegate a right that individual does not have to another individual or agency? Go ask some of our esteemed representatives these questions, watch the mayhem and hilarity ensue. They will you tell you that you're implying every act of government is instigation of force.

No, you are not implying that. They are conflating the two issues in order to attempt avoiding the answers to the questions.

They are two separate and two valid questions. You are simply asking if you do not have a right to instigate aggression, how can you delegate others a right to instigate aggression? These are two different subjects. All you are doing is adding 1+1=A. Funny as heck to see them squirm, side step answering. The reason they do not want to answer is it totally invalidates delegated authority.

Ergo, if the FDA cannot offer proofs, I think any case they want to pose to regulate is as invalidated. Like an expression goes, "blank them if they can't take a joke."

 

[beckdg]

There are proposals for modifications of the rule that would reduce its net harms, but nothing short of disallowing this deeming, pending the creation of new enabling legislation, could actually eliminate the enormous net harm it will cause.

It's about time.

Taking all day. But I'm getting through it.

Tapatyped

 

[DC2]

Taking all day. But I'm getting through it.

I spread my reading across five days.
In fact, I hadn't even finished reading it yet when I made this thread.


But I wasn't going to say that up front.
Because then no one would have even TRIED to read it.

 

[Marc411]

I downloaded it as a PDF just because it's easier to read with my old eyes.

If anyone wants it it's attached.