FDA US House Appropriations Cmte bill would prevent FDA from banning e-cigs now on the market

[DC2]

Far too much to even make it worth an effort to keep track of.

I understand your point, and want to agree.

But new products will have to be approved one way or the other.
Unless the FDA just throws in the towel.

I'm not sure I see them throwing in the towel though.

 

[Kent C]

If you read up on "substantial equivalence" even the slightest changes would theoretically require it.

You'll have to prove that one more watt of power will not induce more people to use them.
Or that slight changes to the design of the battery tube will not make it more attractive.

Yeah, grandfathered in is very good.
Substantial Equivalence is still what it is though.

But there are so many devices out there now, it would be equivalent to rounding up all the illegal aliens. (sorry if that offends anyone). A lot harder than if it were only three cigalikes and a Ruyan ecigar that were predicate products. And the FDA would have to hire a lot more people, which I'm sure they wouldn't be against doing.

 

[englishmick]

This is the first good news we've had in a long time. And it came out of the blue.

It occurs to me that the pressures on federal level pols might be a lot different from the pressures on State levels pols. For the fed folks it's just the campaign donations they get from BT and BP, which I imagine is a fairly small part of their income, plus whatever pressure groups are up their rear ends about it. At State level it's existential. If they lose the cigarette taxes and MS payments they could be in serious trouble, so they will likely fight much harder. Maybe that's why this one slipped through.

Like someone said above the States still have the ability to make our lives difficult. And nicotine is another possible fight in the future. But let's enjoy the moment. I feel good right now.

 

[caramel]

But there are so many devices out there now, it would be equivalent to rounding up all the illegal aliens. (sorry if that offends anyone). A lot harder than if it were only three cigalikes and a Ruyan ecigar that were predicate products. And the FDA would have to hire a lot more people, which I'm sure they wouldn't be against doing.

Where there's a will, there is a way.

 

[WorksForMe]

This Agriculture Subcommittee bill has been scheduled for full Appropriations Committee markup on Wednesday 7/8/15. We’ll see if Sec. 747 survives.

 

[Stubby]

Edited this and passing for now until more information comes to light on the committee hearing.

Opps

 

[Painter_]

It looks like the provision is still there. The dems tried to push an amendment to remove the provision and it failed.

Spending bill exempts e-cigs from FDA review | TheHill

 

[DC2]

My entire world view is being challenged by this.
My left hand feels dirty, but my right hand is trying to find someone to high-five right now.

 

[grandmato5]

Do we have a list of the 26 legislators that voted to reject the proposal to remove the language from the bill ? I want to let each of them know that I approve of their action todays.

DC2- Couldn't find a high-five icon, but sending you a high-five anyways

 

[Kent C]

My entire world view is being challenged by this.
My left hand feels dirty, but my right hand is trying to find someone to high-five right now.

 

[madangus]

So I wonder now does this make it more oikely the 2007 date will never happen? Or do we just have another year to stockpile?

A nice wee bit of news fir the day in any event

 

[nicnik]

So I wonder now does this make it more oikely the 2007 date will never happen? Or do we just have another year to stockpile?

A nice wee bit of news fir the day in any event

My prediction is that the 2007 date is gone for good. I cannot see the Democrats forcing a government shutdown later this year over the issue. I doubt they'd keep fighting for it after that.

 

[nicnik]

My prediction is that the 2007 date is gone for good. I cannot see the Democrats forcing a government shutdown later this year over the issue. I doubt they'd keep fighting for it after that.

Am I perhaps mistaken about how this works? Is that a possibility, that if agreement is not found, that it would stand in the way of keeping government open?

 

[Kent C]

Am I perhaps mistaken about how this works? Is that a possibility, that if agreement is not found, that it would stand in the way of keeping government open?

We only know this. If the Dems shut down the gov't, the press would applaud that action widely and would report no issues whatsoever with the gov't being shut down. Rather than holding the action against them at election time, they would be praised for their bravery, integrity and ability to hold the line for the sake of the children and public health.

 

[madangus]

If they are weeks away from issuing the final rule, with so much pressure to get something out, I - albeit uninformed - would guess they would just change the date in the rule and not delay all regulation further... I know they had said they couldn't but then a bunch of folks told them they could. They being the fda.

I suspect that the technicalities of this woukd make a shutdown very hard to sell indeed, just my opinion .

Not that freezing the market at 2015 is all roses either, not at all, but at least it would give new vapers the same access to the provari etc and not just vuse etc...

 

[nicnik]

We only know this. If the Dems shut down the gov't, the press would applaud that action widely and would report no issues whatsoever with the gov't being shut down. Rather than holding the action against them at election time, they would be praised for their bravery, integrity and ability to hold the line for the sake of the children and public health.

No, I think the Democrats would subject themselves to a beating from the public, if they were to let their desire to remove life-saving products from the market stand in the way of keeping the government open.

 

[nicnik]

I suspect that the technicalities of this woukd make a shutdown very hard to sell indeed, just my opinion .

Yup. That's what I think, too. I think the public would start taking an interest in what this war between the Harm Reduction advocates and the Abstinence Only advocates is all about, if the Democrats push it too far.

Not that freezing the market at 2015 is all roses either, not at all, but at least it would give new vapers the same access to the provari etc and not just vuse etc...

Agreed.

 

[Luisa]

Exactly what I am saying. I do not support this one or the 2007 grandfathering. Both are illogical.

We are not talking about rolled up leafs here. In the context of vaping, this grandfathering nonsense makes no sense.

Take a win when you can get it. The only wins we have received in 7 or 8 years have been in Federal Court. Who has several million to go back to Federal Court?

 

[Stubby]

This still has a ways to go. Hopefully someone up on the budget process can clue us in on the next step. I would assume at this point this will go to congress for the usual wrangling when they get the whole budget somewhat together.

 

[Kent C]

No, I think the Democrats would subject themselves to a beating from the public

Maybe for the people that post here, but not if the general public doesn't know about it (hence my cite of the 'press/media') or if the media spins it as a positive thing as I said. Throw in some fear mongering from Zeller, Glantz, Prue Talbot, Tom Frieden and that lady on the Gutfeld show, run them on CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC with article in the NYT, WaPo, Huffington, Media Matters, and it's a cinch no backlash would occur.