FDA Sen Johnson (R-Wis) demands answers from FDA RE deeming

[Mossy]

Reading this made me feel a lot better after what's been going on in Europe and the U.S recently...........being down under is like living in a stalag.........you know simple simon et al...............we are depending on the rest of the world to help us continue to vape......go get em

 

[EBates]

I just sent my email to the committee.

 

[Jingles]

Just sent my thank you note!

 

[Vaslovik]

“Unfortunately, the FDA’s attempt to improve the public’s health by scrutinizing the e-cigarette industry could ultimately result in negative unintended health consequences,” Johnson wrote in the letter.

Er... Pardon me Senator, but that's not what the FDA is attempting to do, they are attempting to make sure their BT and BP cronies are the only ones who can profit from nicotine.

 

[B2L]

I suggest swampin the Senator and the committee with emails of support
Contact | Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs Committee

Letter of support with encouragement to follow through sent.

“Unfortunately, the FDA’s attempt to improve the public’s health by scrutinizing the e-cigarette industry could ultimately result in negative unintended health consequences,” Johnson wrote in the letter.

Er... Pardon me Senator, but that's not what the FDA is attempting to do, they are attempting to make sure their BT and BP cronies are the only ones who can profit from nicotine.

I get the impression that the Senator understands this but his wording will probably have a much better reception than if he were to say "alright you scum sucking dirt bags, stop throwing the American public under the bus so you can continue to suck at the industry lobbyists teat"

 

[Just Me]

Woo hoo!!!!!! Great news!

Too late for me tonight, but I'll be sending a letter of thanks and praise tomorrow.

 

[Lessifer]

I want this on a bumper sticker:

1. How is the FDA’s regulation of e-cigarettes not a premature restriction on an industry given the FDA’s admission that it does not have “sufficient data” about e-cigarettes to determine the effects on the public’s health?

 

[nomore stinkies]

I think that is an Excellent Idea.

Thank you for the FDA contact Info too. Sent my support for Senator Johnson. I finally made a form letter that I modify for the subject content. Easier to edit, copy and paste. I feel like the character in the movie Shawshank when Andy sends a letter to congress once a week for 3 years to get books for the prison library. Lets hope it has the same outcome.

 

[OldBatty]

I want this on a bumper sticker:

1. How is the FDA’s regulation of e-cigarettes not a premature restriction on an industry given the FDA’s admission that it does not have “sufficient data” about e-cigarettes to determine the effects on the public’s health?

Bit long for a bumper sticker but would look good on a billboard! Or the side of a 53' big rig trailer.

 

[Buckeyevapen]

Thank you for the FDA contact Info too. Sent my support for Senator Johnson. I finally made a form letter that I modify for the subject content. Easier to edit, copy and paste. I feel like the character in the movie Shawshank when Andy sends a letter to congress once a week for 3 years to get books for the prison library. Lets hope it has the same outcome.

I absolutely agree that creating a form letter is helpful idea. I also agree that we should just be filling the inboxes and voicemails of these leaders who are fighting for us with support. Perhaps we can create a thread with a collection of form letters that folks could quickly cut and paste.

 

[Canadian_Vaper]

Whether or not something becomes of it I'd have to say this is pretty epic!

 

[cat58]

Sent an email to the senator and committee with my thanks and support! Interesting to see what, if anything, the FDA has to say in response to the senator's request.

 

[wiredlove]

I sent Ron and the committee a link to Bill Godshall's reply to the FDA from August 2014 which includes Bill's compiled list of lies by the FDA, to give them something to read while they're awaiting the FDA's response back.

 

[Lessifer]

I have a feeling I know how the FDA will respond, I just hope the committee sees through the BS.

1. The final rule notes that the FDA does “not currently have sufficient data about e-cigarettes and similar products to fully determine what effects they have on the public health.” Further, the final rule states that “comments were divided on the safety and toxicity of e-liquids, e-cigarettes, and the exhaled aerosol.”

1. Will the FDA issue a revised rule if there is sufficient data that finds that e-cigarettes are a safer alternative to traditional cigarettes? Please explain. Tobacco products are subject to the regulations set forth in the FSPTCA. If ecigs are a safer product, they are welcome to apply for MRTP marketing authorization.
2. How is the FDA’s regulation of e-cigarettes not a premature restriction on an industry given the FDA’s admission that it does not have “sufficient data” about e-cigarettes to determine the effects on the public’s health? While the data is inconclusive, there is enough evidence to suggest a threat to overall public health, see teen usage(just don't look too closely).

2. Some stakeholders claim that the FDA’s rule on e-cigarettes will stifle innovation and result in the closure of many small businesses that create and sell e-cigarette products.

1. Did the FDA determine how many e-cigarette businesses will be affected by the rule? If not, why? The FDA fully expects market attrition and consolidation, the exact numbers are impossible to determine, but we feel this is in the best interest of the regulatory procedure.
2. If so, please provide that data. See above.
3. Of the e-cigarette businesses that will be affected by the rule, how many of those businesses does the FDA predict will exit the market as a result of the new requirements? See above.

3. Has the FDA considered the unintended consequences if decreased access to e-cigarettes leads to increased consumption of traditional cigarette and tobacco products? Please explain. The FDA is responsible for considering effects on Public Health as a whole, including users of tobacco products and non-users. We feel the potential effects on non-users outweigh the consequences on tobacco users, because they stink, see teen use(but again don't look too closely).

 

[snork]

I have a feeling I know how the FDA will respond, I just hope the committee sees through the BS.

1. The final rule notes that the FDA does “not currently have sufficient data about e-cigarettes and similar products to fully determine what effects they have on the public health.” Further, the final rule states that “comments were divided on the safety and toxicity of e-liquids, e-cigarettes, and the exhaled aerosol.”

1. Will the FDA issue a revised rule if there is sufficient data that finds that e-cigarettes are a safer alternative to traditional cigarettes? Please explain. Tobacco products are subject to the regulations set forth in the FSPTCA. If ecigs are a safer product, they are welcome to apply for MRTP marketing authorization.
2. How is the FDA’s regulation of e-cigarettes not a premature restriction on an industry given the FDA’s admission that it does not have “sufficient data” about e-cigarettes to determine the effects on the public’s health? While the data is inconclusive, there is enough evidence to suggest a threat to overall public health, see teen usage(just don't look too closely).

2. Some stakeholders claim that the FDA’s rule on e-cigarettes will stifle innovation and result in the closure of many small businesses that create and sell e-cigarette products.

1. Did the FDA determine how many e-cigarette businesses will be affected by the rule? If not, why? The FDA fully expects market attrition and consolidation, the exact numbers are impossible to determine, but we feel this is in the best interest of the regulatory procedure.
2. If so, please provide that data. See above.
3. Of the e-cigarette businesses that will be affected by the rule, how many of those businesses does the FDA predict will exit the market as a result of the new requirements? See above.

3. Has the FDA considered the unintended consequences if decreased access to e-cigarettes leads to increased consumption of traditional cigarette and tobacco products? Please explain. The FDA is responsible for considering effects on Public Health as a whole, including users of tobacco products and non-users. We feel the potential effects on non-users outweigh the consequences on tobacco users, because they stink, see teen use(but again don't look too closely).

I'm sure a response will be vague as vague can be, and I hope the committee chair doesn't let them get away with it.

 

[jdrewry]

I'll be curious to read the double-talk that comes from the FDA, or to see if they're arrogant enough to say that they don't need to respond to this...

 

[retired1]

I'd love it if they ignored the request. Hell hath no fury as a Senator ignored. Watch the subpoena's fly for them to appear before the committee if they do ignore it.

 

[Rickajho]

I'd love it if they ignored the request. Hell hath no fury as a Senator ignored. Watch the subpoena's fly for them to appear before the committee if they do ignore it.

Speaking of: How will we know or track the result(s) of this request? Both whether or not the FDA replies, and what - if any - will be the result of this inquiry?

 

[retired1]

Hopefully they'll "publish" the response. Otherwise, we'll be pretty much in the dark as to what's going on.

 

[Tommy-Chi]

I absolutely agree that creating a form letter is helpful idea. I also agree that we should just be filling the inboxes and voicemails of these leaders who are fighting for us with support. Perhaps we can create a thread with a collection of form letters that folks could quickly cut and paste.

Agree 100% and the form letters should be stickied on ECF.