FDA to regulate e-cig as tobacco

[Vocalek]

I would like to THANK SE and njoy for making this happen !!!

Also I would like to thank Bill Goodshall , Vocalec and Yvilla for there concise input and support .

The juice and pre packaged KITS that include the carts with nic in them will be the spots that will be regulated , mods and attys will be outside of the regulation IMO as we can just change the name of them if they get included on some list ( like a water pipe vs. a .... )

correct me if I am wrong please.

You talkin' about my eGo VapoLight?

 

[BuzzKill]

You talkin' about my eGo VapoLight?

If it included a juice with nic in it YES ! , IMO this is the only place that they can really regulate , the E-cig or personal vaporizer can be used for other things ! and can be marketed as such , in fact I am seeing some marketing in the medical ......... area .

 

[sjrily]

If you were selling ("marketing") a watermelon juice, "as" juice (as a food product), that also had nicotine added to it, promoted as a stimulant juice, for example - that would violate the "marketed in combination" prohibition.



Watermelon flavored nicotine eliquid, however, is just that, a flavored alternative tobacco product. Is is not sold as a juice for drinking, but rather is marketed as nothing but an alternative tobacco product. Do you see the difference?



That is not to say the FDA may not try prohibit "characterizing flavors" in smokeless products in the future, as the FSPTCA now prohibits them for cigarettes only - but that's a different issue altogether, not the "marketing in combination" issue at all.



Another example of something that would indeed likely violate the "marketing in combination" prohibition is any nicotine eliquid that also has any other drug added to it, and sold expressly for its having the other drug mixed within - like that infamous ...... infused eliquid that the FDA already challenged back in September.

Yes, I do see and understand the difference, and it makes perfect sense to me. My statement is more about the FDA seeing the differences, or twisting them. We've watched this (rouge) agency try to do things like this for years related to natural therapies and suppliments - it's an ongoing battle we have to constantly be mindful of. Years back FDA approved a genetically modified supplement and when people started getting sick, even dropping dead, they yanked ALL the suppliments, including the unaltered, off the market, then stated this was "proof" of why they needed to control suppliments. I think the unaltered suppliments are still off the market today. No logic there, just interest.



And let's face it, they used customer statements about not smoking to (try to) "prove" a vendor was selling a smoking cessation product, they seized e-cig battery shipments because the batteries didn't have instructions. It didn't hold up, of course, but it keep the fight going. I'm just saying I don't think we should assume they're always going to follow the logic of the law.

Well, it may be overly simplistic, but there are a few grains of truth in my statements. I don't consider them absurd when I watch my state government raise taxes almost every year on cigarettes, anywhere from 10 cents per pack to a dollar a pack (thanks Florida). It's difficult to examine a complex problem on a forum with reducing your reasoning to "absurd statements" in the name of brevity.


Let's just put it this way. I don't trust politicians and/or bureaucrats to do what's in our best interest.

I don't either, tobacco. I've read several reports that give really good arguments about why states some states (especially New York) are fighting so hard against e-cigs. The tax revenue they receive from cigarettes certainly brings that into question.



And on the tobacco industry, I can't remember the particulars, but isn't there some kind of early congressional provision protecting tobacco agriculture - in the interest of the economy?

 

[TNT]

I don't either, tobacco. I've read several reports that give really good arguments about why states some states (especially New York) are fighting so hard against e-cigs. The tax revenue they receive from cigarettes certainly brings that into question.

I've always thought cigarette taxes were strictly revenue enhancers. If a state wanted to stop people from smoking, slap on a $50 a pack tax. Instead, they seem to do a lot of mathematical calculations to come up with a figure that may cause some people to quit, but that others will pay... and enough people will continue to smoke that the overall revenue will increase.

I may have missed something, but I don't recall ever reading an article that said, "The new increase in taxes has caused the state's cigarette tax income to fall."

 

[sjrily]

I'm still trying to find the reference, but so far, no luck... however, I have a very good memory that I trust...

At least one of the nicotine replacement therapy company went on record as saying, "We will price our product the same as cigarettes so as not to encourage non-users to take up the habit." That was considered being "socially responsible."....

I recalled something like that too but my memory's not as good, and my stuff is way too cluttered I did know where something similar was though - you might be able to findsourcee for your quote (or a clue on it, anyway) it in post #73 link. Long paper, but excellent read. Big Drug's Nicotine War (nm, no need to sort back through the thread *lol*) Post back if you find it!

 

[Vap0rJay]

I was at a restaurant this weekend outside at my table and I had some guy approach me with the audacious claim that he found what I was doing offensive and it bothered him...

I was like "My "vapor" bothers you? It's water vapor, its not even smoke... You’re joking... right? I'm outside..."

He said I looked like I was enjoying myself and I was sending the wrong message to his children because smoking is bad.

Oh I went off... I said something along the lines of "Well since we're being honest here, truth-be-told your brats are bothering me, and I can't eat in peace. Furthermore I find your ugly offensive along with your intrusion into my personal business and my space.” I said… “Tell ya what... I'll put this down as soon as you leave. Then we'll both be happy… you can tell your precious children what a horrible person I am and how daddy is best served with his affairs in other peoples business... Because that’s the REAL underlying message you’re teaching them.”

I got a couple dirty words as he was walking away and I got to close with a “Sir, such language. Think of the children….”



I felt a little bad afterward, because I really was kinda an ...… The whole thing about flavors attracting kids pisses me off to no end. I am in no way shape or form responsible for your brat and your lack of parenting if your child picks up an e-cig. Just because you couldn’t keep your legs shut and popped out a kid doesn’t mean you’re MY parent. Just because you didn’t educate them and/or discipline them doesn’t give you the right to dictate what I do or am allowed to do... all under the guise of “thinking about the children!”

 

[Levitas]

I just hope that PV's don't end up as a novelty in head shops with other non-tobacco-use devices....

Vaporizers have been in head shops for years already - I've never used one, though I did used to smoke a little bit of the sticky icky in the past. This is no concern to e-cigs.

 

[cookiebun]

I was at a restaurant this weekend outside at my table and I had some guy approach me with the audacious claim that he found what I was doing offensive and it bothered him...

I was like "My "vapor" bothers you? It's water vapor, its not even smoke... You’re joking... right? I'm outside..."

He said I looked like I was enjoying myself and I was sending the wrong message to his children because smoking is bad.

Oh I went off... I said something along the lines of "Well since we're being honest here, truth-be-told your brats are bothering me, and I can't eat in peace. Furthermore I find your ugly offensive along with your intrusion into my personal business and my space.” I said… “Tell ya what... I'll put this down as soon as you leave. Then we'll both be happy… you can tell your precious children what a horrible person I am and how daddy is best served with his affairs in other peoples business... Because that’s the REAL underlying message you’re teaching them.”

I got a couple dirty words as he was walking away and I got to close with a “Sir, such language. Think of the children….”



I felt a little bad afterward, because I really was kinda an ...… The whole thing about flavors attracting kids pisses me off to no end. I am in no way shape or form responsible for your brat and your lack of parenting if your child picks up an e-cig. Just because you couldn’t keep your legs shut and popped out a kid doesn’t mean you’re MY parent. Just because you didn’t educate them and/or discipline them doesn’t give you the right to dictate what I do or am allowed to do... all under the guise of “thinking about the children!”

Good for you Vap0rJay!
What a jerk. Don't feel bad. If he doesn't want his kids to see something he considers a bad influence he should leave them at home. The whole world doesn't revolve around his children.

 

[fuzznut]

I may have missed something, but I don't recall ever reading an article that said, "The new increase in taxes has caused the state's cigarette tax income to fall."

NY cig sales went down 27% after their crazy tax increase, but hey, if the tax hike is 200% they're still making a gain. I just found this out, NY wants to hike the tax AGAIN???

» New York Considers Hiking Cigarette Tax…Again - Big Government

 

[Dicot]

I'm of the opinion that many things in the US are better left in the grey area. The courts would of upheld their decision if the FDA tried to appeal the Sottera ruling. The FDA knew the deck was stacked against them so they took the side door to gain control through re-classification instead. Of course hindsight is always 20/20, but regardless. I agree with most of your points Section31, and overall I think some level of taxation is appropriate as well as oversight/guidelines with respect towards juice mixing and gear manufacturing. However I just don't trust big tobacco and feds to do the right thing when it comes down to it.

Nicotine is an addictive poison, so even e-cigs do cause some level of public harm, albeit pale in comparison to traditional cigarettes. When it comes to taxes I'm all for assigning tax based on public harm like the chart DC2 posted in another thread. If that rationale holds taxes will be very agreeable, however I see a huge potential for the e-cig market to get bullied by big tobacco here. Hear me out.

Pipe tobacco, snuff and snus are niche tobacco markets. As of right now e-cig are a similar, if not smaller, niche market but that is only because a large portion of the population has only known e-cigs as those mall kiosk ripoffs and gas station cheapos. Most people still view the electronic cigarette market as a whole to be a ripoff scam at worst or a lame fad in the least. However as more and more people are exposed to the quality PVs/juice e-cigs will become more than a niche market. I think we all agree this method of "smoking" has a very real potential to out preform traditional cigarettes and other tobacco products in the market. This will negatively impact the amount of money being made by big tobacco since their product is only being used to extract flavors and nicotine. Thus I feel they will play a very active role in lobbying for high prices/taxes and strict regulation on ejuice.

I also feel it's a fair assumption to say that we as a community do not have the resources to compete with the level of lobbying and back room deals big tobacco is capable of. If big tobacco gets their way in the end I'm almost positive vaping will be significantly more expensive than smoking analogs. Oh, you want to be healthier? Well then you're gonna pay out the nose for it.

Similarly I can definitely see big tobacco lobbying for strict regulations on the ejuice mixing facilities to effectively knock out the small time juice makers we have seen flourish under the current scene. The FDA will basically set up guidelines that state ejuices can only be produced in facilities that meet certain criteria. How high these quality assurance criteria are set will directly determine who can and can't make juice through the resources required to purchase and operate a facility that meets guidelines. This could very well lead to big tobacco taking the sole reins of the ejuice market. Like StormFinch, I don't trust big tobacco to not put additional additives into the juices exactly like they have with traditional cigarettes. Not to mention, that when anything is mass produced corners are cut to boost profits, that is just how corporate business is run. That fact doesn't bode well with me when it comes to ejuice I'm inhaling, especially with big tobacco's track record. I can honestly say I'm more comfortable trusting small time mixers than mass production and big tobacco.

Targeting internet sales will be another effective method of shutting down the mom and pop mixers. Although the PACT act only applies to cigarettes right now (thanks for clearing that up yvilla) I guarantee they will be attempting to amend that law to include ejuice soon enough. Like I said before, e-cigs will quickly grow out of the niche market and become a threat in the larger tobacco market at this rate. Ordering online, even with a federal tobacco tax would still skip out on the consumer's state tax and county tax if applicable. They're not going to let those taxes slide, and I forsee a huge mess in trying to add the applicable state/county taxes of the consumer to the internet order. In other words, it would just be easier for the government to ban internet sales and force e-cig smokers into brick and mortar stores where all of the required taxes could be directly applied to the purchase.

I'm sorry for the essay, but I feel I need to explain why I'm not breaking out the champaign at this press release. Too long, didn't read version: I agree nothing is going to change right away and above all the good news is that e-cigs are here to stay, but I still stand by the idea that this announcement has the very real potential to become a wolf in sheep's clothing. I'll admit I'm more of a pessimistic person but the writing is on the wall. If they go unchecked, the impending regulations will likely grant big tobacco control of the ejuice market, vaping will become significantly more expensive than smoking, and "mom and pop" mixers as well as internet orders will become a thing of the past. Our only hope to preserve the scene is to become active and vocal in your support of vaping as an alternative to smoking right now. Convert your friends and acquaintances who are smokers to e-cigs, because we will need as many voices as possible to get a fair shake when the regulations are actually drafted. Until then, keep on vaping and don't lose hope.

 

[Secti0n31]

Thanks Dicot, and good essay, but keep in mind that there are a whole boatload of tobacco products that you can still buy online, including cigars and RYO tobacco. They won't be able to stop e-cigs from being sold online as long as there are ACTUAL TOBACCO sales on such a large scale.

 

[vpgtd]

so what about the vapers that do not use nicotine in their juice will they still get stuck paying a tobacco tax even if the is no tobacco product.

 

[pigelty]

One way to look at it is: If they do stop the flavored liquids and just limit them to regular and menthol tobacco flavors, then all we would have to do is buy our tobacco juice and mix our own flavors. Not something I realy want to do, but if it comes to that then so be it.

Then again, "hookah" is a real tobacco product which is "smoked" through a pipe. "Hookah" also comes in a VARIETY of flavors and let's not forget there are "hookah lounges".

IMO, I think it's just pure stupidity to have flavored tobacco available, but to ban it for use of e-liquid. I don't even vape flavored liquid. I just use the NJOY menthol flavor. But like ksmith said, "if it comes to that then so be it".

 

[MaxUT]

So I don't understand the many doom and gloom postings.

Maybe it's because the Golden Age of Vaping is coming to an end?

Thank you for your efforts Bill. You've been focused on this particular issue, I haven't.
I look at it overall terms: another little bit of my freedom to decide is going to disappear.

 

[GregH]

I'm quite convinced now that I have been transported to some sort of weird alternate universe, where people on this forum actually wanted the FDA to win this case. Because in the universe I was in on Monday morning, we wanted them to concede and not appeal to the Supreme Court.

 

[rothenbj]

So true Greg, so very true. I did learn something these last two days though. I always considered myself somewhat cynical. Now I know I'm not nearly as much so as I thought.

 

[GMoney]

I'm quite convinced now that I have been transported to some sort of weird alternate universe, where people on this forum actually wanted the FDA to win this case. Because in the universe I was in on Monday morning, we wanted them to concede and not appeal to the Supreme Court.

Frankly, I don't understand the doom and gloom or the celebration. The odds were almost non-existent that SCOTUS would grant certiorari/ much less overturn the Court of Appeals on a case involving the interpretation of an enabling statute of an administrative agency while there are legislative remedies available.

We need to see exactly what FDA proposes for regulations. Everyone should have already been anticipating, at the very least, some "fair" regulation - documentation, tests, inspections, fees and taxation - no legal product used by humans could escape these for long. However, I honestly found their "memo" somewhat petulant and I doubt they have any interest in playing fair.

I think it needs to be made clear to everyone that we need to be preparing for battle and not celebrating as if the war was won. It is not "mission accomplished".

 

[randyith]

Yesterday's announcement by the FDA is without any doubt the most important victory in the world for e-cigarettes, e-liquid, vendors, consumers, smokers and tobacco harm reduction.

It was also a humiliating defeat for tobacco/nicotine prohibitionists, drug companies, and cigarettes.

So I don't understand the many doom and gloom postings.

It will be at least several months before the FDA proposes any regulations for e-cigarettes (and all other currently unregulated tobacco products), and the process is likely to take one or two years (before any regulations are approved). There will be many opportunities to participate in the process (hearings & public comments), and the burden of proof is on the FDA to demonstrate that any proposed regulation will benefit public health before it can be approved.

Since there is no evidence that e-cigarettes have harmed any users, since there is no evidence that youth use the products, since there is lots of evidence that e-cigarettes are less hazardous than cigarettes, and since there is lots of evidence that e-cigarettes have helped many smokers quit or reduce cigarette consumption, it will be very difficult for the FDA to impose unwarranted regulations.

In the mean time, it's GAME ON, as e-cigarettes can now be truthfully marketed as far less hazardous smokefree alternatives to cigarettes (as the modified risk provision and all other Chapter IX regulations in the FSPTCA don't apply to e-cigarettes).

If e-cigarette sales/consumption continues to double, triple, quadruple in the next year (as I suspect it will), we'll have even more folks to advocate against unwarranted regulations, against state/local sales ban proposals, and against state/local usage restrictions.

We're now in the driver's seat, while FDA/CTFK/ACS/AHA/ALA/ALF and the drug companies are devastated and licking their wounds.

With everything that has happen in the news with Acorn and Planned Parenthood I envision the following scenario:

Extreme left wing liberals with backing from Harry and Nancy hire an illegal immigrant. They give this illegal immigrant 30 Joyce 510 e-cigs filled with low grade e-juice from China with an extremely high arsenic value. They instruct this immigrant to stop one morning at a large junior high school bus stop and pass out the fully operational e-cigs to the children to try. After a few minutes a pre-arranged police squadron will arrive and detain the children and the illegal immigrant and take them down to the police station. The FDA, CDC or other agency will discover that 16 young 13 year old children were inhaling bad e-juice clearly dangerous to their health. The main stream news media will be outraged and the 6:00 news will broadcast the evils of the e-cig community to the nation. This will continue on the Sunday news talk shows. The NY Times, LA Times and other left wing newspapers will print stories for months to come. The e-cig industry will be made to be a villain to the entire nation. Politicians will proclaim they will ban all e-cigs if the get re-elected. The anointed one, President Obama will pick up the issue and talk about it at every opportunity during his re-election campaign promising to fix the situation. President Obama will be re-elected. E-cigs and e-juice will be banned in the USA. Large contributions from tobacco companies will flow into Nancy's and Obama's campaign. In 4 years the USA will be bankrupt and we will have the gross national product of Greece.


Sounds far-fetched but something similar is surely possible when so much money is involved and how everyone hates smokers. Think about it. Some group probably has plans in the works.

 

[sjrily]

With everything that has happen in the news with Acorn and Planned Parenthood I envision the following scenario:

Extreme left wing liberals with backing from Harry and Nancy hire an illegal immigrant. They give this illegal immigrant 30 Joyce 510 e-cigs filled with low grade e-juice from China with an extremely high arsenic value. They instruct this immigrant to stop one morning at a large junior high school bus stop and pass out the fully operational e-cigs to the children to try. After a few minutes a pre-arranged police squadron will arrive and detain the children and the illegal immigrant and take them down to the police station. The FDA, CDC or other agency will discover that 16 young 13 year old children were inhaling bad e-juice clearly dangerous to their health. The main stream news media will be outraged and the 6:00 news will broadcast the evils of the e-cig community to the nation. This will continue on the Sunday news talk shows. The NY Times, LA Times and other left wing newspapers will print stories for months to come. The e-cig industry will be made to be a villain to the entire nation. Politicians will proclaim they will ban all e-cigs if the get re-elected. The anointed one, President Obama will pick up the issue and talk about it at every opportunity during his re-election campaign promising to fix the situation. President Obama will be re-elected. E-cigs and e-juice will be banned in the USA. Large contributions from tobacco companies will flow into Nancy's and Obama's campaign. In 4 years the USA will be bankrupt and we will have the gross national product of Greece.


Sounds far-fetched but something similar is surely possible when so much money is involved and how everyone hates smokers. Think about it. Some group probably has plans in the works.

With all due respect, I don't think this is about liberals, or Acorn and Planned Parenthood, or even Harry, Nancy and Obama. Maybe we should put down our political party arms on this one

 

[sjrily]

Frankly, I don't understand the doom and gloom or the celebration. The odds were almost non-existent that SCOTUS would grant certiorari/ much less overturn the Court of Appeals on a case involving the interpretation of an enabling statute of an administrative agency while there are legislative remedies available.

We need to see exactly what FDA proposes for regulations. Everyone should have already been anticipating, at the very least, some "fair" regulation - documentation, tests, inspections, fees and taxation - no legal product used by humans could escape these for long. However, I honestly found their "memo" somewhat petulant and I doubt they have any interest in playing fair.

I think it needs to be made clear to everyone that we need to be preparing for battle and not celebrating as if the war was won. It is not "mission accomplished".

Well stated! First battle - won!! (as we expected) Now comes the next phase, which may be more difficult to follow and fight back against, especially when play isn't fair.

I think part of the gloom may be that two days ago, there were no regulations - yes, technically we knew they were looming somewhere, but maybe-someday-in-the-unknown-future doesn't have the same impact. Today regulations are real, inevitable and in the works, us excluded.

The victory of the battle is awesome, but the realization that follows is sobering.