FDA Scott Gottlieb etc Discuss "The Regulation of Nicotine" Webcast 1PM 10/19/17
- Thread starter Mowgli
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Zeller: paraphrase - 'in order to avoid the harmful effects of cigarettes, some people may have to use an alternative method forever. Would society be able to handle that?'
Joanna Cohen, PhD, MHSc, Bloomberg Professor of Disease Prevention from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health - obvious intervener/controller - smiling, while holding up packs of cigs with large warning labels (supposing pictures of diseased lungs - from Europe). Obviously pleased with such graphic (but ineffective) showings. This is the 'old' smug TC guard, not realizing that they are losing ground. Zeller looks like a genius in comparison - although I think he is being just self-interested in keeping his job, with a boss who may be more non-interventionist/deregulatory type.
Zeller is lying right now (@2:30) about low tar and nic - saying that wasn't a 'regulatory' effect but a marketing scheme. The fact is, that while there were no regulation regarding low tar, etc., there were threats of such and increasing TC discussion of such measures that the cigarette companies 'got ahead' of it by lowering tar and nicotine.
Thanks for posting, Mowgli!!!
Assuming a video to follow but not yet. I'll be checking as I missed the first 1/2 hour.
I watched it all. I think taking most of the nic out of cigarettes and allowing vaping for at least a few more years is preferable to banning vaping next summer while cigs are still for sale the same as always.
The ads aimed at kids seem like window dressing because I don't believe most never-smoking kids who try vaping will be life long vapers. They see cloud toys, not electronic cigarettes.
I think Warner is the only panelist who is not afraid of being on the losing side of the ecig argument. According to the introduction he's retired. That might explain it. My impression is they are fascinated by the nic reduction idea. I am too.
The ads aimed at kids seem like window dressing because I don't believe most never-smoking kids who try vaping will be life long vapers. They see cloud toys, not electronic cigarettes.
I think Warner is the only panelist who is not afraid of being on the losing side of the ecig argument. According to the introduction he's retired. That might explain it. My impression is they are fascinated by the nic reduction idea. I am too.
I'm still trying to wrap my head around the idea of how it could be a good thing to limit information such as tar and nicotine measurements or how they would have the right to restrict the publication of information. This is completely irrespective of any difference of risk. Moreover, it did not justify banning the use of words like "light" when used to refer to cigs with a lighter flavor or lighter-colored tobacco; "light" is not a judgement but a fact.
They think it's a good idea to reduce nicotine in cigs, ignoring the fact that currently manufacturers are highly restricted in even selling such a thing and completely restricted from claiming it. They don't need to require it they need to allow it.
I'm pleased to see progress in how these people are thinking, and even think what they're proposing could work, but still see a group of people calmly discussing what is best for everyone which will be enforced by Government power. My view is that vaping is not theirs to regulate, considering 1) it's saving lives and 2) it wouldn't exist if they had already gotten their way.
They think it's a good idea to reduce nicotine in cigs, ignoring the fact that currently manufacturers are highly restricted in even selling such a thing and completely restricted from claiming it. They don't need to require it they need to allow it.
I'm pleased to see progress in how these people are thinking, and even think what they're proposing could work, but still see a group of people calmly discussing what is best for everyone which will be enforced by Government power. My view is that vaping is not theirs to regulate, considering 1) it's saving lives and 2) it wouldn't exist if they had already gotten their way.
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 66
Below is my take on this event, with some historical perspective on the very selectively invited participants.
Last week, FDA’s Scott Gottlieb unveiled CDC's new anti-nicotine anti-vaping ad (that may once again encourage more nonsmoking teens to vape since telling teens to NOT do something is the most effective way to encourage them to that very thing, just as occurred with cigarette smoking).
(at 36 minutes of the video).
The nearly two hour vapor/tobacco prohibitionist love fest was organized by Bloomberg/DHHS funded THR opponents at Johns Hopkins to deceptively promote and defend the cigarette protecting TCA, the cigarette protecting Deeming Ban, and FDA's new cigarette prohibition policy (that was never referred to as such) as major public health advancements against evil tobacco companies.
Scott Gottlieb gave an overview, then Mitch Zeller gave another "doublespeak" presentation, then Josh Sharfstein (who worked for Henry Waxman lobbying Congress to enact the TCA without any THR amendments, and who then started FDA's War on Vaping in 2009 by demonizing and illegally banning them) moderated a discussion with irreconcilably conflicted THR prohibitionists Dorothy Hatsukami and Joanna Cohen (also at Hopkins), and Ken Warner, all of whom praised the cigarette prohibition proposal by Zeller/Gottlieb. While Ken correctly pointed out that flavored vapor products may not pose a risk for children, he said it would take two more years before we might find out, which Hatsukami responded to by saying flavored vapor products should be banned even if there is NO evidence of harm.
During the entire discussion, although everyone paid lip service to THR (if it was coupled with a cigarette ban), NONE of the participants even acknowledged any of the TCA's disastrous anti-THR policies (e.g. grandfathering cigarettes while banning sales of all new smokefree alternatives, banning truthful health claims about smokeless tobacco, requiring even larger fear mongering warnings on smokeless ads), Sharfstein's unlawful vapor product ban in 2009, or the Deeming Rule's disastrous anti-THR policies (e.g. banning sales of new vapor products in August 2016, banning truthful health claims about vapor products, and banning the sales of all vapor products in 2018 - recently delayed to 2022).
There was also no mention of the many potentially disastrous ramifications of the FDA's new policy to ban cigarettes (and other combustible tobacco products) that is being promoted under the deceptive guise of a "regulation to reduce nicotine to non addictive levels", which was/is as intentionally deceptive as was FDA's portrayal of its vapor sales ban to adults as a "regulation to protect children".
Hopkins posted an article hyping their event at
FDA Commissioner Promotes Nicotine-Reduction Plan
Not surprisingly, they refused to post the comment I submitted.
This event at Hopkins deployed similar public relations and lobbying tactics (and many of the same individuals) as were utilized by Big Pharma, tobacco controllers, DHHS officials and their funding recipients to lobby for enactment of the TCA from 2003-2009, and to lobby for FDA's vapor Deeming ban from 2011-2016.
I expect more of the same from FDA, its many funding recipients and other tobacco controllers for the next several years (unless/until we can convince Gottlieb that he's been misled about the true ramifications of the TCA, FDA's vapor Deeming ban, and FDA's new VLN cigarette policy).
Last week, FDA’s Scott Gottlieb unveiled CDC's new anti-nicotine anti-vaping ad (that may once again encourage more nonsmoking teens to vape since telling teens to NOT do something is the most effective way to encourage them to that very thing, just as occurred with cigarette smoking).
(at 36 minutes of the video).
The nearly two hour vapor/tobacco prohibitionist love fest was organized by Bloomberg/DHHS funded THR opponents at Johns Hopkins to deceptively promote and defend the cigarette protecting TCA, the cigarette protecting Deeming Ban, and FDA's new cigarette prohibition policy (that was never referred to as such) as major public health advancements against evil tobacco companies.
Scott Gottlieb gave an overview, then Mitch Zeller gave another "doublespeak" presentation, then Josh Sharfstein (who worked for Henry Waxman lobbying Congress to enact the TCA without any THR amendments, and who then started FDA's War on Vaping in 2009 by demonizing and illegally banning them) moderated a discussion with irreconcilably conflicted THR prohibitionists Dorothy Hatsukami and Joanna Cohen (also at Hopkins), and Ken Warner, all of whom praised the cigarette prohibition proposal by Zeller/Gottlieb. While Ken correctly pointed out that flavored vapor products may not pose a risk for children, he said it would take two more years before we might find out, which Hatsukami responded to by saying flavored vapor products should be banned even if there is NO evidence of harm.
During the entire discussion, although everyone paid lip service to THR (if it was coupled with a cigarette ban), NONE of the participants even acknowledged any of the TCA's disastrous anti-THR policies (e.g. grandfathering cigarettes while banning sales of all new smokefree alternatives, banning truthful health claims about smokeless tobacco, requiring even larger fear mongering warnings on smokeless ads), Sharfstein's unlawful vapor product ban in 2009, or the Deeming Rule's disastrous anti-THR policies (e.g. banning sales of new vapor products in August 2016, banning truthful health claims about vapor products, and banning the sales of all vapor products in 2018 - recently delayed to 2022).
There was also no mention of the many potentially disastrous ramifications of the FDA's new policy to ban cigarettes (and other combustible tobacco products) that is being promoted under the deceptive guise of a "regulation to reduce nicotine to non addictive levels", which was/is as intentionally deceptive as was FDA's portrayal of its vapor sales ban to adults as a "regulation to protect children".
Hopkins posted an article hyping their event at
FDA Commissioner Promotes Nicotine-Reduction Plan
Not surprisingly, they refused to post the comment I submitted.
This event at Hopkins deployed similar public relations and lobbying tactics (and many of the same individuals) as were utilized by Big Pharma, tobacco controllers, DHHS officials and their funding recipients to lobby for enactment of the TCA from 2003-2009, and to lobby for FDA's vapor Deeming ban from 2011-2016.
I expect more of the same from FDA, its many funding recipients and other tobacco controllers for the next several years (unless/until we can convince Gottlieb that he's been misled about the true ramifications of the TCA, FDA's vapor Deeming ban, and FDA's new VLN cigarette policy).
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 66
Don't know why strange changes were made in my previous note every time I used the word tobacco.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
