check list 4 FDA legal status

Discussion in 'Law and the E-Cigarette' started by trying, Apr 13, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. trying

    trying Senior Member

    Check list of E-cigarette journey to legal FDA status

    1. Tobacco or Drug- We will assume tobacco

    2. Did E-cigarettes have to be tobacco products (including tax stamp) prior
    to Feb. 2007 to avoid "new product" testing requirements ?

    3. Flavoring or no flavoring

    4. Amount of Nicotine ?

    5. Sealed or refillable ?

    6. Federal and States taxes.
     
  2. TennDave

    TennDave Vaping Master Verified Member

    Supporting member
    Not sure what you're getting at. Are you saying these are the steps to "approval?" Do we really want "approval?" I say no- we want the FDA to just butt out and stay out! To have FDA status means to be "controlled" and that does mean taxes down the road for us. I just can't imagine that. Others can chime in.
    Btw, I don't think any of the 1-6 has happened yet. We are apparently close to #1 which is not a good thing either.
     
  3. trying

    trying Senior Member

    FDA has authority over drugs and Congress gave the FDA authority over tobacco so FDA regulation is unavoidable.
    #1, if FDA is forced to concede, E-cigarette will be tobacco products I am guessing #2-would be FDA fall back point and next legal challenge.
    #3,4 and 5 are regulations that has a tobacco product under FDA control future E-cigarettes will face.
    #6 is government loves to be able to tax anything with the word tobacco attached to it.
     
  4. JupiterV

    JupiterV Super Member

    Excuse me if I sound stupid but there is no tobacco in e liquid, correct? If I assume there is not, it is not under FDA jurisdiction. Is nicotine classified as a drug? Yes but not under FDA juridiction. I don't believe so or we wouldn't be able to buy it without a prescription. I can't imagine how they will twist this to fall under their RULE.
     
  5. JupiterV

    JupiterV Super Member

  6. Zal42

    Zal42 Super Member

    The FDA has jurisdiction over tobacco as well. The difference is that there are limits to what they can do to restrict tobacco products. Whether or not our juices are tobacco products is not yet fully settled -- in the interim, they are considered tobacco products.

    IMO, we are better off if they are considered tobacco products, because if they are not, then they are drug delivery devices and would be subject to very strict controls. Essentially, it would mean that only pharma companies could produce them.
     
  7. nerofiend

    nerofiend Full Member Verified Member

    [rant]
    I know this isn’t going to happen this way but this is just how i feel things SHOULD work out.

    The FDA should not be involved with E-Cigs AT ALL.

    They have the ability to control TOBACCO; E-Cigs are NOT a tobacco.
    They have rights to DRUGS; Nicotine is a drug but not under FDA rules any more than caffeine.

    I guess I’m with a few others, i don’t think they should be allowed to have any rights over them at all. They are manipulating things to make it appear like it is something that they have the right to control and when that don’t work they use terrorism to make people scared and vote for them to have control anyways.

    The way i see it is that the vendors as well as the consumers of E-Cigs have been doing a FAR better job at regulating the quality and use of E-Cigs than the FDA has EVER done with any of its approved drugs and food control. Look at how many bad drugs there are out there, hell look at how many there are that are less than even one year old. E-Cigs have been around for at least 6 years and we have had no problems with them since their inception.

    My opinion is the FDA needs to be fired in all forms and completely revamped in methods and legality. This FDA system is NOT working at all in its present form.

    Anymore the whole of all government makes me simply want to cessate from the entire planet earth just so i can get away from all the government "Protection" i am force fed.
    [/rant]
     
  8. TennDave

    TennDave Vaping Master Verified Member

    Supporting member
    Well put neuro- I totally agree and rant with you!
     
  9. Vapor Pete

    Vapor Pete The Vapor Pope

    Supporting member
    Most of the nicotine used in juices etc is derived from tobacco. I've only heard of a couple that use other means of getting nicotine. As such, it can be considered a tobacco product. Add to that, that when the FDA did testing, they detected Tobacco Specific Nitrosamines, which are carcinogens found only in tobacco. So, we have two issues that could warrent the FDA looking at e-cigs as tobacco products. One doesnt need to twist this for it to fall under their rule. Its nicotine derived from tobacco.

    -VP
     
  10. Vapor Pete

    Vapor Pete The Vapor Pope

    Supporting member
    Its actually working very well.... for Big Pharma. I agree that its a load of crap and that it isnt about whats in the best interest of the public the FDA is supposed to be looking out for. I agree that Big Pharma is only concerned with how many dollar bills it has lining its pockets. I agree that the FDA is happier knowing that the NTR's it has approved and Big Pharma is selling has an 80% failure rate that creates an endless circle of quitters and recidivism. But thats precisely why its working very well. As long as you understand that it isnt about the PUBLIC, it isnt about protecting us from a billion dollar a year industry that helps fund and pay the FDA, then you see that its working. Its doing its job: keeping us warned of the occasional salmonilla laced peanuts, and protecting the financial interests of tobacco companies and pharmacutical conglomerates.

    -VP
     
  11. trying

    trying Senior Member

    We now know the answer to #1 is tobacco.........as expected
     
  12. earthpig

    earthpig Moved On

    An alternative source for tobacco needs located.
    One person I read (different forum) mentioned a asian grass that has a high level of nicotine. I get that "as is", the only cost effective source is from tobacco leaves, but if a good alternative comes about, it throws a monkey wrench in the FDA gears...for awhile. And I'm all for messing with the FDA's authority. Bastards!!
     
  13. nerofiend

    nerofiend Full Member Verified Member

    Then they would probably try to say that since it is not derived from tobacco it is not a tobacco product and it would be easy for them to push it as a medical device. The thing that made it hard for them this time WAS the fact that the nic liquid was derived from tobacco making it a tobacco product.
     
  14. earthpig

    earthpig Moved On

    Point taken.
    Yet if it comes down to too much regs in the future, an alternative needs sought out.
    The Pituri Bush of Australia is a source. Dunno how good it is.
     
  15. natenitro11

    natenitro11 Full Member

    the whole " ecigs aren't tobacco" argument really isnt valid seeing as how nicorette gum and patches aren't technically tobacco they treat it that may purely because of the nicotine content
     
  16. Enigma32

    Enigma32 Registered Supplier

    Great, except gum and patches are regulated as drugs.
     
  17. ECV's

    ECV's Registered Supplier

    Duboisia. | Henriette's Herbal Homepage

    Pituri Bush: A. W. Gerrard found minute quantities of an alkaloid which he believed to be identical with nicotine, but Liversidge has shown that the liquid, acrid alkaloid, piturine, C12H16N2, is distinct from nicotine.
    ... but it might be fun!
     
  18. earthpig

    earthpig Moved On

    Worth a look by some chemist....I'm not qualified.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page