I signed up a while back

[dadlovsyall]

I signed up a while back. Hello everyone. I hope you are all doing well and enjoying your Saturday. I just read the article concerning the FDA and their embargo agreement with several major news outlets concerning pending regulations. It certainly raises my ire. To think major independent journalists are willing to forgo their freedom to independently verify or investigate an upcoming regulation just to be first to get a story is outrageous. The FDA violating their own regulations is also very aggregious but not surprising. Deeming regulations on vaping is and should be well beyond their scope of authority.

 

[Eskie]

Hi and welcome! There are several threads on the deeming regs in the general discussion area as well as a regulatory subforum for FDA stuff. While it's not directly related to e cig regs, I agree with you that a governmental agency shouldn't have embargo agreements on information that belongs to the public. After all, their actions and regulations are paid for by our taxes, and it violates the very principle of a free press in this country.

 

[bacc.vap]

Hello and welcome. My sig tells the FDA's tale, short and sweet.

 

[BrotherBob]

Welcome and glad your back. "the idea that a government's legitimacy and moral right to use state power is only justified and legal when consented to by the people or society over which that political power is ... "
Might like to read:
https://www.heartland.org/policy-documents/research-commentary-e-cigarette-smoking-bans
The tobacco control high command has lost its way – what we learn from its views on FDA priorities « The counterfactual
Bluffer’s guide to FDA regulation of tobacco and nicotine products « The counterfactual

 

[dadlovsyall]

Welcome and glad your back. "the idea that a government's legitimacy and moral right to use state power is only justified and legal when consented to by the people or society over which that political power is ... "
Might like to read:
https://www.heartland.org/policy-documents/research-commentary-e-cigarette-smoking-bans
The tobacco control high command has lost its way – what we learn from its views on FDA priorities « The counterfactual
Bluffer’s guide to FDA regulation of tobacco and nicotine products « The counterfactual

So what you are saying is we the people have conceded our power to the federal Governments control??? I have signed every petition on this issue. I am but one voice. United we stand divided we fall. Just saying. ;-)

 

[dadlovsyall]

Welcome and glad your back. "the idea that a government's legitimacy and moral right to use state power is only justified and legal when consented to by the people or society over which that political power is ... "
Might like to read:
https://www.heartland.org/policy-documents/research-commentary-e-cigarette-smoking-bans
The tobacco control high command has lost its way – what we learn from its views on FDA priorities « The counterfactual
Bluffer’s guide to FDA regulation of tobacco and nicotine products « The counterfactual

I have read your links. I perceive a follow the money vibe here. I read some of it before from CASAA. My point on the blackout article is When they release their (FDA) regulations the reporters are contacted and told they are not allowed to investigate, research or get an outside comment from anyone or any scientific body until the blackout expires. If they do not agree with the terms they are excluded. So the reporters wrap themselves in chains for a crack at the "BREAKING NEWS FROM THE FDA". Sad but true.

 

[mcclintock]

I don't understand why they don't just print news of the embargo instead, call out their competition. Every time.

 

[BrotherBob]

So what you are saying is we the people have conceded our power to the federal Governments control??? I have signed every petition on this issue. I am but one voice. United we stand divided we fall. Just saying. ;-)

So what you are saying is we the people have conceded our power to the federal Governments control-In a sense.------------ I'm just saying that, we, the petitioners need to stress this point before we ask for change. To say it another way, make it crystal clear that you the petitioner will do everything in your (our) power to remove the respondent from office if your points are not addressed nor considered fairly.