It all comes down to money. The fda doesn't care about people's health, they only care about money.
FDA Big news coming out of FDA
- Thread starter Oliver
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
All businesses are operated to make a profit. That's why they are businesses.
It's nice if the by-product of making profit is doing a service to others, but government regulatory bodies cannot safely count on the good nature of retail corporations, or the people that run them.
It CAN be accepted and probably will after some legitimate scientific studies are done.
We have to follow the proper procedure.
Vaping helped me stop smoking, but it takes more than that to make it documented, scientifically accepted fact.
Flavourings can be purchased here : http://www.capellaflavors.com/
These flavourings are not produced for vaping, and never were, and cannot be regulated as such.
I made a point of saying in a previous post that anything associated with vaping can be purchased by absolutely anybody. What i mean is that vaping is something anyone of the 7 billion people in global society can do. And it shouldn't be compared to smoking, and not designed exclusively to smokers who want to quit. The proposed regulations are based on a ridiculous assumption that only smokers who want to quid will be buy vaping associated goods, but it should really be considered a recreational activity. Vaping has nothing to do with smoking cessation, health, addiction to nicotine or any other supposed reason for vaping. It's just a hobby any non smoker can take up !.
Right. Wow - going to be a merde-storm in Europe next year. I imagine 90% of vapers don't know that the products they currently use are about to be outlawed.
That really sucks. You should stock up on crap load of devices and RDA/tanks.
Sort of a non-sequitur. Surely the principal concern regulators should have is these businesses marketing to non-smokers? The irony of this rule is that, in a sense, that's the only marketing message available to vape companies!
It's massively in vapestore's interests to transition smokers - that's overwhelmingly their core business model, and I can't see it being any different.
There's decades of research on this front. Ever since Michael Russell said: "smokers smoke for the nicotine but die from the tar" in the 1970s, nicotine supplementation has been the principal tool for helping smokers to stop. It's totally non-controversial. So the only question, then, is "do e-cigarettes deliver nicotine" - this is not difficult research, and the answer was in over 2 years ago: "yes, they do".
Part of the FDA's "continuum of harm" project requires that the public be re-educated about the relative safety of nicotine - I heard Mitch Zeller say these exact words at the FDLI conference in DC earlier this year. So, the question is: Who is going to do this?
Seems to me a massive own goal not to allow businesses to do it.
A little like saying if a particular food stuff could alleviate the symptoms of a disease then it should be regulated as medicinal and only available by prescription. Even though that particular food stuff is available to absolutely everyone because they enjoy eating it. I mean if chocolate cured the common cold would it mean that no one would be allowed to purchase chocolate anymore unless they've been diagnosed with a cold ?.
Edit : While i'm on the subject of the common cold, even though it's off topic, i feel the need to make an ammendment to the common belief that there is no cure for the common cold.
If someone contracted an incurable disease/virus, maybe you could think of one, then obviously there is no cure.
The diference with an incurable disease/virus and a common cold virus/strain is that the common cold has a cure built into it, and it fades away after a few days.
I'm pretty confident most people completely over look this fact.
Edit : While i'm on the subject of the common cold, even though it's off topic, i feel the need to make an ammendment to the common belief that there is no cure for the common cold.
If someone contracted an incurable disease/virus, maybe you could think of one, then obviously there is no cure.
The diference with an incurable disease/virus and a common cold virus/strain is that the common cold has a cure built into it, and it fades away after a few days.
I'm pretty confident most people completely over look this fact.
Last edited:
And what about the millions of vapers who don't yet know, and the millions of smokers yet to get into the market?
This is what is Frustrating here also.
Because when I leave the ECF and go out into the Real World, if I mention "Deeming" or "Grandfather Dates", vaper's look at me like a Dog does when it Hears a New Noise.
And many/most B&M Vape Shops dismiss or discourage talk of FDA Regulation for fear their Customers will learn how to do DIY.
The FDA cannot just decide who or which demographic chooses to buy vaping associated goods, and then regulated based on that assumption. No matter how retailers choose to market their goods it's still up the the consumer, whoever they may be, to purchase those goods for whatever reason they want, not because the FDA says you have to be a smoker who wants to quit smoking.
There are health food shops in the high street that sell goods such as vitamin supplements and all kinds of health foods designed to improve your health. None of those items are regulated as medicinal !. I mean low fat foods are a healthy alternative to high cholesterol foods, but they are not regulated as medicinal. The same arguement can be made that low fat foods are eaten to avoid the ill health caused by high cholesterol, but these food stuff aren't regulated, anyone can buy them, even thin people, imagine that, why would a thin person buy low fat food ?, who cares, but they do !. So why would a non smoker choose to start vaping ?. That's their business, not the FDA's.
@evan le'garde Probably a much better analogy than my fatuous Beer/Whiskey version. I don't know whether there's a grandfathering provision for food health claims, but under the "structure/function prong" those certainly are medicinal claims.
There are more non smokers in global society that there are smokers and vapers. Why should the FDA be allowed to prevent the majority of the human population to choose to start vaping if they want to ?.
A Dutch webshop owner visited the French vape expo recently where he got to try the new 2ml tanks and he said the flavour and easy of rebuilding is on par with what's available now. You just have to refill more often. Some of the tanks he tested were made in China and he also said the Chinese are well aware of the pending regulations and are prepared for it. Another thing he said is that his company has a filling machine and that the price of nic base will increase by a small margin to cover the cost of having to use extra bottles.
Other than that, people are highly creative animal and will always find ways to do what they want to do. Once something has been invented, it cannot be uninvented.
And btw, nowhere in the TPD does it say that RBA's will be illegal. RDA's will be illegal but as long as the tank has a leak free refilling mechanism, it's good to go.
I don't think that's what they are doing. I simply think the mentality has been captured by the anti-thr crowd.
I tried them there too. They're good, but there's a good chance they won't be legal - the technical document for "leak free refilling" has not yet been compiled. Doesn't change the fact that 90% of what people are currently using will be prohibited for completely arbitrary reasons (deals done behind closed doors).
I could be wrong, but as I understand it the FDA doesn't have regulatory dominion over supplements. They do have authority over drugs, so as long as you don't make a health claim that would turn your supplement into a "treatment" you're good.
However, thanks to the fsptca the FDA has regulatory authority over tobacco products, so either way they have the authority. You DO need FDA approval to manufacture and sell a tobacco product.
@SmokeyJoe,
The regulations are standard fare for every consumable product.
The FDA isnt going to shut the industry down.
If they were, they could have done it already, by regulating/banning nicotine extract sales.
Here's where the money comes Into play:
If you want to make the claim that vaping is a medical smoking cessation device/system you must pay for and receive FDA approval.
This costs billions of dollars.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthew...truly-staggering-cost-of-inventing-new-drugs/
They are setting themselves up for a potential payday.
The regulations are standard fare for every consumable product.
The FDA isnt going to shut the industry down.
If they were, they could have done it already, by regulating/banning nicotine extract sales.
Here's where the money comes Into play:
If you want to make the claim that vaping is a medical smoking cessation device/system you must pay for and receive FDA approval.
This costs billions of dollars.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthew...truly-staggering-cost-of-inventing-new-drugs/
They are setting themselves up for a potential payday.
What hasn't been discussed much in this thread, but which I personally see as a big issue, is the modified risk tobacco product category. Not even the FDA understands what they consider to be MRTP, but they do know that they won't let you use language like "safer" "less harmful" "no tar" "low nicotine" etc.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
