Nicotine is NOT a drug or controlled substance. It is an organic pesticide. Simply put, a poison. And its sold in bulk as a pesticide (poison).
Yet, according to the logic of the FDA, all drugs are also poison?
How does the law define a drug?
The FD&C Act defines drugs, in part, by their intended use, as "articles intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease" and "articles (other than food) intended to affect the structure or any function of the body of man or other animals" [FD&C Act, sec. 201(g)(1)].
Are poisons intended to affect the structure or any function of the body?
No, but they do because they are poison.
Regular cigarettes are tobacco products now to be eventually regulated by the FDA that contain nicotine and other
added poisons and are or at least should be labeled as such... But they are NOT subject to FDA approval (FDA are not authorized to ban them via the new bill). You'd think that all manufacturers would have to get a new drug approval because something has been added. Once again, defying all logic.
Electronic cigarette cartridges and liquids, or at least ones that would not be considered drug devices or tobacco products contain glycerin, flavor and poison...nicotine distilled from tobacco (or some other plant) and ARE labeled as such.
But if you mix a drug with something else it must then have new drug approval? Ok, so what about poison? No wait, poisons are drugs and not food? Can't foods be poison or drugs? Ah the logical fallacies of the FDA are limitless it seems.
What other products are sold as a known poison to be intentionally ingested and not subject to FDA approval?
The moral of the story is, you can intentionally ingest poison or more commonly known as 'drugs' through only FDA approved methods.