Deeming Regulations have been released!!!!

[CMD-Ky]

Our autocrats, technocrats and bureaucrats know one thing…the creation of artificial scarcity is the path to gov ruled monopoly, their preferred conduct of enterprise. The effective eradication of private property.

Remember petroleum is derived from sea shells.

They fail when our actions make us impervious to their regulations.

Good luck.

And, here all this time I thought petroleum came from ground up unicorn horns and that caused our seasonal shortages. Remember though, the use of petroleum is a gateway to vaping because most vapers have, at some time, used a petroleum product and now look at them - vaping and happy about it.

My actions to render the regulations ineffectual is to use well made mechanicals and stock up on nicotine.

 

[Rossum]

I think they are misunderstanding human nature, and they are trying to manufacture what people will do (social engineering through regulation), ie: that smokers will automatically go over to alternate forms of nicotine use ... I DON'T think this will be the case if my husband is any indication of the general (smoking) public's sentiments over this - and the thing here is that your average smoker isn't paying a darn bit of attention to any of this where concerns new regulation.. if it weren't for me vaping and keeping up with deeming my husband wouldn't know a darn thing, and I bet we could take a poll and not find even one smoker who knows anything about these plans for the future of smokers.

I suspect that's pretty close to correct.

When it hits them, it will hit them hard because the regulations by then will be set in stone. They will simply wake up one day with new supposedly non addictive cigarettes and not know what happened, and then a huge black market will be created, and it will be created fast. These people aren't going to say Oh, I need to buy a mod... nope, they are going to ask where they can get some tobacco on the black market.

I wonder whether the FDA is stupid enough to do it that way -- i.e. from today's cigarettes to their new "non addictive" ones in a single step, overnight. If so, I agree; it will blow up in their faces, just like Prohibition and the War on (some) Drugs did.

 

[Eskie]

What remains confusing about a gateway to cigarettes for teens is, if the current age verification sales are followed, how does it act as a gateway and create trouble down the road for the susceptible kid? Following that logic, what about beer and wine? Shall we ban them so despite age requirements, teens will never ever be exposed and tempted? Throw in any other product or activity meant to be age protected, and why aren't they being smeared and forced off the market?

 

[Opinionated]

As this latest news slowly sinks in, I feel it more in my chest.

Vaping is an absolute miracle. It could virtually wipe out smoking. At least, wipe out smoking for those that WANT it to. It gives such hope for a better life.

And, they don't care.

In defense of the FDA here, they do intend on keeping vaping around.

It's still a big question mark as to how it will all look in the end; how the market will look for us the hobbyists, whether or not we will continue to be able to purchase our own nicotine, whether or not they will put caps on nicotine levels in commercial e juice and what those caps will be, and just plain how many of today's products will we continue to be able to purchase.

We know they won't do away with it, as they do see vaping as a net positive for public health - it's just a question as to what it will look like as it's always been.

The problem as I see it outside of nicotine regulation as whole where concerns vaping, is the anti vaping ads aimed at teens.

While these ads are aimed at teens adults see these ads as well, adults use YouTube and Hulu and more, so how much these ads will affect an adult smokers outlook on vaping remains to be seen.

We see adults now affected by the anti vaping campaigns and coming to believe smoking is better... so how much we will literally have to fight the FDA for the hearts and minds of smokers who might benefit from switching we will soon see, and have to deal with.

Of course we don't want to see kids vape, but at the same time we want to see adults properly educated concerning vaping and not terrified of it.

But as far as vaping as a whole, they are planning on definitely keeping it around.

 

[stols001]

First, Opinionated thank you for the digest. My browser won't support that link.

Second, Aiiiie!!!! I'm definitely going to stock up on nicotine, and other things I will need. I am glad I have some Provaris, too, because I can get by with those indefinitely and I don't want to be needlessly forced into getting mechanicals (though I might get a cheap one, just in case).

Third, teens are not "smart". Even if they're intelligent, they aren't "smart." Teens jump in on things based on emotions and bravado, quite often, and I'd think anti-vaping commercials would only ENCOURAGE teen vaping, they'll know more about them AND they will be the forbidden fruit. I'm shocked that anyone these days thinks an educational campaign is going to do much difference. The last one I listened to was growing up during the time that we were told that HIV would wipe out the earth. While I'm glad that one sunk in and whatnot, I can't think of another "educational" campaign aimed at youth that was really successful (and we can note HIV is still around, so not everyone listens to everything. Information is fine, that kind of information will do nothing but inflame those teens (a somewhat high percentage I would think) looking for cheap thrills and lawlessness, to go for it. If they want to stop teens from vaping, they need to talk about how dangerous and ill advised it is NOT to vape. Just my opinion on teens from having worked with a fair number of them....

Gottlieb, I even wrote you a Love Letter. Why are you doing this to meeeee??????

Also, Opinionated, I'm going to need to talk to the husband about growing nic, though maybe if I don't he might at least start dual using? This whole "making cigs unappealing thing is.... it's not going to work at this point, there are too many lifelong smokers, and it will be a disaster. The best way to handle this is to just Leave Everything Alone, and let the sanity of vaping and harm reduction take over. Cigarettes are NEVER going to be not appealing to a determined smoker, I envision a future where cigs get soaked in nic, left to dry, and then are smoked. That's ONE really easy way to circumvent that issue, though then essentially, smokers will be paying double. Maybe that's the real goal.

Anna

Sigh. More nic is next on my list.

Anna

 

[CMD-Ky]

I agree with your thoughts.

I don't accept the "gateway concept" at all. What bothers me about the gateway concept is that fails to address those who never go through the gateway. Say 98% of all "Y" users had previously used "X" is that a justification to ban or regulate "X"? Not necessarily, because the concept fails to address anyone who might have used "X" but failed to go through the gateway to use substance "Y". It could be only a few people or the number could dwarf the number who did move on to "Y". We simply don't know but gateway advocates don't care, such thoughts thwart the agenda.

Say, hypothetically, I used "X" as a dissolute and rebellious youth but never moved on to use to "Y" as perhaps many others like myself may not have. Then we don't have a gateway, what we have is an illusory correlation. But that illusory correlation is being fed to us as a cause and an effect. And those doing so are charlatans or useful idiots.

What remains confusing about a gateway to cigarettes for teens is, if the current age verification sales are followed, how does it act as a gateway and create trouble down the road for the susceptible kid? Following that logic, what about beer and wine? Shall we ban them so despite age requirements, teens will never ever be exposed and tempted? Throw in any other product or activity meant to be age protected, and why aren't they being smeared and forced off the market?

 

[Eskie]

The funny part is the statistics are beginning to demonstrate it is not a gateway to combustible tobacco. Despite a rise in e-cig use by teens, cigarette use has consistently decreased over the same time frame. And as there continues to be a decline on cigarette use across age groups, particularly young adult, it's hard to see how vaping would increase cigarette adoption. If it were a gateway, cigarette use should be rising in that age group.

But that doesn't make for a good sound bite, so here we are, once again, saving the children.

 

[stols001]

I wish there were a way to get that information out to parents everywhere, and also educate them on vaping. A lot of kid smokers have parent smokers, and I'm fairly certain if those parents were informed about the relative safety of vaping over smoking, they would prefer their kids vape, not smoke. I certainly preferred it when mine did and if he ever ran out of money or equipment broke, I would replace it, because I didn't want him going back to the desperation of bumming or stealing cigs, quite honestly.

IF parents knew the TRUTH they might be more supportive of vaping than smoking, and my kid's a model example of how vaping ISN'T a gateway drug, he QUIT vaping (with far less effort than I've seen with most smokers, though I'm also sure it wasn't easy, but when the kid is doing hard things he doesn't want to discuss it, just to be left alone and suffer, so I don't know how "easy" it was, actually) but not only did he step down from smoking cigs to vaping, he has successfully quit for going on 7 or 8 months now, and I'm certain if he went through a stressful period he would pick up vaping, not smoking. He actually prefer it.

If I could keep my license and all, I'd love to go on the talk show circuit talking about how if you are sane and rational with your kids, work with them without scaring them, they can actually be successful, sooner, if you just weigh the risks and support harm reduction until they are old enough to make wiser decisions. I wish my parents had done that with me and that vaping had been around then. Shock! Horror! You're grounded! just doesn't work when it comes to smoking....

Anna

 

[Opinionated]

The funny part is the statistics are beginning to demonstrate it is not a gateway to combustible tobacco. Despite a rise in e-cig use by teens, cigarette use has consistently decreased over the same time frame. And as there continues to be a decline on cigarette use across age groups, particularly young adult, it's hard to see how vaping would increase cigarette adoption. If it were a gateway, cigarette use should be rising in that age group.

But that doesn't make for a good sound bite, so here we are, once again, saving the children.

This was a point of sanity that Prof. Ken Warner pointed out, that the FDA is going by old data concerning teens and vaping and we need time to gather and assess new data as teen use might not be so bad as the older data is showing.

But here is my thinking, first, I don't believe in gateway anything. I really don't, there are "gateway" personalities, not gateway drugs.

But going from there, even if data shows a linear move from smoking combustible cigarettes to vaping among teens, (which is what older data shows) I don't see that as a net negative.

There will always be a subset of teens wanting to try that thing they aren't allowed to try, and if the teen experimentation is trying vaping instead of smoking, then it's a better public health outcome anyway as I don't see vaping hooking a kid for life like cigarettes do.

 

[ENAUD]

Let's not forget that the heat not burn category was discussed they are proposing reducing nicotine levels in combustible cigarettes to non addictive levels, whatever they determine that to be.
The tobacco companies will be able to pursue the HNB product catagories , certain vapor product manufacturers will have their market share, SNUS products would likely be approved. This is where the legal nicotine will reside in their grand scheme for a future market, oh, and the Pharma products will always be with us

They are trying to up turn the apple cart, the extension gives them time to do it and have their teams of lawyers dot every eye and cross every T, so as to not make a huge mess of it.

smokers get tossed in the dirt...there are going to be a lot of angry smokers down the road.

 

[Opinionated]

Let's not forget that the heat not burn category was discussed they are proposing reducing nicotine levels in combustible cigarettes to non addictive levels, whatever they determine that to be.
The tobacco companies will be able to pursue the HNB product catagories , certain vapor product manufacturers will have their market share, SNUS products would likely be approved. This is where the legal nicotine will reside in their grand scheme for a future market, oh, and the Pharma products will always be with us

They are trying to up turn the apple cart, the extension gives them time to do it and have their teams of lawyers dot every eye and cross every T, so as to not make a huge mess of it.

smokers get tossed in the dirt...there are going to be a lot of angry smokers down the road.

Totally agree with you.

What I think worries me the most about this plan for non addictive cigarettes, is what exactly are they planning on doing to them for goodness sake?

Remember when they made cigarettes fire safe? I never had breathing problems until then.. my breathing problems started so suddenly after that that I mentioned it to the clerk at the cigarette store and other customers there were having the same problems and one guy mentioned that this was because they were doing something to our cigarettes now to make them fire safe and lots of people were developing breathing problems as a result. .

So my question is, what kind of affects will these new cigarettes have on health? Will it be worse?

We know these beaurocrats are happy to throw smokers under the bus in the creation of their imagined utopian society they are working so diligently to create... look at nhs now in England (no surgery for smokers or the obese) and that is the model they want to create here..

 

[stols001]

WHHHHATTTT? You can't get surgery if you are obese and a smoker? Do they have anything to back this up with or are they just being exclusionary.

England, how far you have fallen. I went there one summer to stay with my best friend who slipped (censored) into a beverage of mine (she wasn't the greatest best friend, she also started me smoking, LOL) and I was awake for two weeks, reading Lovecraft (all that was on offer, but not the best choice when you are thinking about the cat swimming studies and how sleep depravation can kill you) and finally went to the ER. It was the best ER experience of my life. No wait, the doctor accurately diagnosed my current condition, gave me antacids and also sleep meds, and it was all free. I kept saying, "Dude, I'm not even from here, I don't pay taxes, are you CERTAIN you don't want any money???" But no, they just handed me my prescriptions and sent me on home, the whole thing took like a half hour IIRC and everyone was super nice, not rushed, and not mean. It really sold me on socialized medicine.

I suppose to be fair, I had a PCP as a kid who had treated TWO presidents, and had all these pics of him and his family and famous people up on the wall. He didn't accept insurance "Because they want to limit what I choose to do for diagnosis and treatment," but he would give you something to submit to the insurance co if you so desired, and it always got paid for.

I suppose, to be fair, my favorite doc of all was a guy I just happened to run into at the Crap little Medical Practice near me, and he was only a PA, but he either a) KNEW everything or b) researched it until he found out. My entire family ended up seeing the dude, and we ALL agreed that he was the Best Medical Practitioner ever, and it cost me 0 dollars to see him. When he left the practice due to all the insurance BS (he got burned out, once I asked him why he was late and he was like, "Oh, I'm always late, they never give you enough time to actually see your patients. If you want me to be on time, select my first appointment.") and whatever, a deep, deep grief washed over our family and we all agreed that no one would ever Beat this Guy, EVER, and so far, it has been true. He was the BEST. Thanks, Obama, cuz I think it was around then that he said "F this" and went to work on a military base (his family was military).

But still, NHS you disappoint me. You've disappointed me before, and since I have a MI now, I would NEVER go to England after reading about how they handle "MI treatment" that just would not work for me, but this is a new level of Sadness. Sigh.

Anna

 

[Alien Traveler]

Vaping is an absolute miracle. It could virtually wipe out smoking. At least, wipe out smoking for those that WANT it to. It gives such hope for a better life.

Smoking is declining even without help of ecigarettes. It is not fashionable any more, quite the reverse.
In the opinion of society now
- smoking is for uneducated (34% for those with GED vs 4% for those with graduate degree)
- smoking is for poor (26% for those below poverty level vs 14% for the rest)
- smoking is for Midwest... (19% vs 12% for the West)
For teens there are no incentive to smoke anymore.

Ecigs can help. According relatively recent British paper
The results show that 65 percent of e-cigarette users had tried to quit smoking, versus 40 percent of people who smoked but didn’t use e-cigs. About 8 percent of e-cig users succeeded in quitting for at least three months, compared to about 5 percent of non-users.
But is is not an overwhelming success, in contrast to statistics of members of our forum. Vaping does not looks like an universal cure. So...
Current trend: people are surrendering to paternalistic governments. Makes it easier to live.

I have enough of nicotine to last till my 85th birthday. If I will became more optimistic (or stupid), I'll buy additional 10-year supply and live happily ever after.

 

[Opinionated]

WHHHHATTTT? You can't get surgery if you are obese and a smoker? Do they have anything to back this up with or are they just being exclusionary.

England, how far you have fallen. I went there one summer to stay with my best friend who slipped (censored) into a beverage of mine (she wasn't the greatest best friend, she also started me smoking, LOL) and I was awake for two weeks, reading Lovecraft (all that was on offer, but not the best choice when you are thinking about the cat swimming studies and how sleep depravation can kill you) and finally went to the ER. It was the best ER experience of my life. No wait, the doctor accurately diagnosed my current condition, gave me antacids and also sleep meds, and it was all free. I kept saying, "Dude, I'm not even from here, I don't pay taxes, are you CERTAIN you don't want any money???" But no, they just handed me my prescriptions and sent me on home, the whole thing took like a half hour IIRC and everyone was super nice, not rushed, and not mean. It really sold me on socialized medicine.

I suppose to be fair, I had a PCP as a kid who had treated TWO presidents, and had all these pics of him and his family and famous people up on the wall. He didn't accept insurance "Because they want to limit what I choose to do for diagnosis and treatment," but he would give you something to submit to the insurance co if you so desired, and it always got paid for.

I suppose, to be fair, my favorite doc of all was a guy I just happened to run into at the Crap little Medical Practice near me, and he was only a PA, but he either a) KNEW everything or b) researched it until he found out. My entire family ended up seeing the dude, and we ALL agreed that he was the Best Medical Practitioner ever, and it cost me 0 dollars to see him. When he left the practice due to all the insurance BS (he got burned out, once I asked him why he was late and he was like, "Oh, I'm always late, they never give you enough time to actually see your patients. If you want me to be on time, select my first appointment.") and whatever, a deep, deep grief washed over our family and we all agreed that no one would ever Beat this Guy, EVER, and so far, it has been true. He was the BEST. Thanks, Obama, cuz I think it was around then that he said "F this" and went to work on a military base (his family was military).

But still, NHS you disappoint me. You've disappointed me before, and since I have a MI now, I would NEVER go to England after reading about how they handle "MI treatment" that just would not work for me, but this is a new level of Sadness. Sigh.

Anna

No.. it's if your a smoker OR obese, two groups of people not one.

Anyway, it's four days old now I believe, so new and controversial even in England - but while the left constantly says there will be no death panels ( the determining who is deserving of treatment and who isnt) we know once you give that much power to one entity as well as limited funds in which to do something, this type of thing in the long run is always the case in the end.

Utopia simply cannot be had through state decree and state control.

Look it up on Google to hear more about it.

 

[zoiDman]

Has everyone seen this discussion at John Hopkins University about 'Nicotine Regulation'? (Occurred yesterday, Thursday October 19, 2017 at 12:44 pm)



...

I wonder how much of this is Really Projected Policy Direction? And how much of it is the Type of Talk we Many Times hear when the word "Budget" is in the News?

 

[Kent C]

A couple things here: he agrees that e cigarettes are a gateway drug to smoking for teens and young adults, from what I gathered

Actually Zeller addresses this point at @58 minutes in - 'we aren't going to stop kids from foolish and reckless behavior' (paraphrasing from memory, but close to what he said). Basically he's saying just the opposite: That KIDS are a gateway to smoking. And the more they understand that, it takes away from the whole 'gateway argument' of ecigs to cigs. Actually with the more recent studies of the never smokers who try or use ecigs - in some studies below 1%, it's cigarettes that are a gateway to ecigarettes - which is a good thing and which almost all on that panel (not all TC idiots) think that it is a safer use of nicotine. Zeller pointing out that it is the smoke, not nicotine that is the dangerous aspect of smoking.

Knowing that - they shouldn't even be thinking about lowering nicotine in cigarettes but lowering smoke, which of course is a lot harder than lowering nicotine. They should realize that it is the vapor of ecigs that is the substitute for smoke, and that the smoke/vapor part of smoking is a crucial point that no other NRT has, and hence are not as effective as ecigs in curbing smoking.

 

[Kent C]

Right!??? Stupidity can lead to, well…stupidity!

Good luck.

 

[englishmick]

No.. it's if your a smoker OR obese, two groups of people not one.

Anyway, it's four days old now I believe, so new and controversial even in England - but while the left constantly says there will be no death panels ( the determining who is deserving of treatment and who isnt) we know once you give that much power to one entity as well as limited funds in which to do something, this type of thing in the long run is always the case in the end.

Utopia simply cannot be had through state decree and state control.

Look it up on Google to hear more about it.

Hey, it was the British medical establishment that gave the world the 95% safer number for vaping. America gave you Deeming. I know you guys put men on the moon and saved us from Hitler, but we get some stuff right over there.

I try to stay out of politics here. But during Bill Clinton times I used to hear about all the bad stuff that happened in England health-wise. I remember Rush telling folks how people were taken off dialysis when they hit 45, or 73% of people who needed cataract surgery went blind before they got to the top of the waiting list.

Jeez. I had just come over from there. I knew Rush and his political cronies were lying. I tried to warn people, but nobody listened.

"death panels ( the determining who is deserving of treatment and who isn't)". Awful business. Those decisions should be left where they have always been, in the just and capable hands of insurance company accountants. Death Panels? From the mouth of an Alaskan halfwit to the ears of the American people, and how many years later it's still around?

Just saying. Don't believe what you're told about the horrors of medicine in the Socialist Republics Of Europe. They are lying to you.

 

[Opinionated]

Actually Zeller addresses this point at @58 minutes in - 'we aren't going to stop kids from foolish and reckless behavior' (paraphrasing from memory, but close to what he said). Basically he's saying just the opposite: That KIDS are a gateway to smoking. And the more they understand that, it takes away from the whole 'gateway argument' of ecigs to cigs. Actually with the more recent studies of the never smokers who try or use ecigs - in some studies below 1%, it's cigarettes that are a gateway to ecigarettes - which is a good thing and which almost all on that panel (not all TC idiots) think that it is a safer use of nicotine. Zeller pointing out that it is the smoke, not nicotine that is the dangerous aspect of smoking.

Knowing that - they shouldn't even be thinking about lowering nicotine in cigarettes but lowering smoke, which of course is a lot harder than lowering nicotine. They should realize that it is the vapor of ecigs that is the substitute for smoke, and that the smoke/vapor part of smoking is a crucial point that no other NRT has, and hence are not as effective as ecigs in curbing smoking.

First, In the portion of my post that you quoted, I was speaking specifically to what Gottlieb himself said at the 43 minute mark where he spoke about youth migrating from e cigarette use to combustible tobacco use and that lowering the nicotine level in regular cigarettes is a preventative measure to keep that from happening. You can go back to the video for what he spoke about at that point (again, 43 minutes) That plus the ads etc led me to write down gateway drug in my note taking.

I did mention later on in my post what was said concerning the dangers of combustible tobacco

Some points made, one, that it is combustible forms of nicotine delivery which is what is deadly. Everyone agrees on this point

I did miss what you are saying that Zeller said, ie that e cigarette use does not lead to combustible tobacco use, however on this point he would disagree then with Gotteib but I will go back to the video to see what he said specifically. I might have been taking notes and somehow missed that point.

As to your opinions concerning the effectiveness of e cigarettes etc. I do wholeheartedly agree with you.

 

[Opinionated]

Hey, it was the British medical establishment that gave the world the 95% safer number for vaping. America gave you Deeming. I know you guys put men on the moon and saved us from Hitler, but we get some stuff right over there.

I try to stay out of politics here. But during Bill Clinton times I used to hear about all the bad stuff that happened in England health-wise. I remember Rush telling folks how people were taken off dialysis when they hit 45, or 73% of people who needed cataract surgery went blind before they got to the top of the waiting list.

Jeez. I had just come over from there. I knew Rush and his political cronies were lying. I tried to warn people, but nobody listened.

"death panels ( the determining who is deserving of treatment and who isn't)". Awful business. Those decisions should be left where they have always been, in the just and capable hands of insurance company accountants. Death Panels? From the mouth of an Alaskan halfwit to the ears of the American people, and how many years later it's still around?

Just saying. Don't believe what you're told about the horrors of medicine in the Socialist Republics Of Europe. They are lying to you.

I got my information concerning the medical from British newspapers and sources, figured if the British are talking about it then its likely true.

As far as opinions, everyone is entitled to them even me and you..