CEASEFIRE | Tobacco Control Veteran Issues Call to End War Over Vaping | RegWatch

[Vapeon4Life]

"*Guest: Cliff Douglas, Former VP, Tobacco Control, American Cancer Society - It is a horribly one-sided battle, public health’s war against safer nicotine products such as vaping, heated tobacco products, and oral snus. After decades of hammering the message that smokers must quit or they will die, public health and the tobacco control community are now trying to eradicate the very products millions use to successfully quit smoking. The War on vaping seems illogical and intractable, why is that? Joining us today to answer this question and more is tobacco control insider Cliff Douglas, Adj. Prof. at University Michigan School of Public Health, and former Vice President of Tobacco Control at the American Cancer Society. Douglas says the mainstream tobacco control community lost its way and it’s time to end the misinformation and vitriol directed towards vaping and tobacco harm reduction.
Only on RegWatch by RegulatorWatch.com. Released: May 23, 2021 Produced by Brent Stafford

 

[zoiDman]

Way back in the 2016 Run-Up to Deeming, I posted that I believed after the Market was cleared, and the Only Ones left standing were BT (and maybe BV), that the FDA and the Tobacco Control Zealots would do a complete 180, and actually Support e-Cigarettes as viable THR.

Maybe we are Starting to get to that point?

 

[Vapeon4Life]

Way back in the 2016 Run-Up to Deeming, I posted that I believed after the Market was cleared, and the Only Ones left standing were BT (and maybe BV), that the FDA and the Tobacco Control Zealots would do a complete 180, and actually Support e-Cigarettes as viable THR.

Maybe we are Starting to get to that point?

Maybe, but it is a lot more complicated.
As a tobacco "hobbyist" {I still may have about 50 tobacco smoking pipes from pipe smoking days - And many pipe smokers have turned their habit into a hobby - Many pipes, though used are quite valuable}.

As we can see this has also happened with vaping even though collecting old vape devices is not particularly big - yet it will happen.

Pipe smoking is relatively rare now-a-days so the 'tobacco control freaks' don't pay too much attention too it and are apparently happy with taxing cigars to death. Vaping, and the resultant vape enthusiasts are a relatively new problem for them - It seems their current agenda is to figure out how to get the most tax money out of it without completely killing this new golden goose for tax revenue - So they keep the agenda going by sometimes admitting vapes may be safer than cigarettes {though many in the tobacco control industry don't want to admit it} but still there is some danger and it is addictive.

It wouldn't surprise me at this point with them dragging their feet on the USPS postal ban that they come up with some more expensive way to ship vape products USPS with another built in extra tax for shipping.

You see the complexity is fueled by the 'Prohibitionist' mentality - back a hundred or so years ago the anti-alcohol crowd fought with a no compromise mentality to outlaw alcohol - Today it is tobacco, any tobacco product and any product even tobacco related - The fact that vaping is much safer is all the more reason to attack it - On those 'tobacco control freaks' reason does not work !!!

 

[zoiDman]

Maybe, but it is a lot more complicated.
As a tobacco "hobbyist" {I still may have about 50 tobacco smoking pipes from pipe smoking days - And many pipe smokers have turned their habit into a hobby - Many pipes, though used are quite valuable}.

As we can see this has also happened with vaping even though collecting old vape devices is not particularly big - yet it will happen.

Pipe smoking is relatively rare now-a-days so the 'tobacco control freaks' don't pay too much attention too it and are apparently happy with taxing cigars to death. Vaping, and the resultant vape enthusiasts are a relatively new problem for them - It seems their current agenda is to figure out how to get the most tax money out of it without completely killing this new golden goose for tax revenue - So they keep the agenda going by sometimes admitting vapes may be safer than cigarettes {though many in the tobacco control industry don't want to admit it} but still there is some danger and it is addictive.

It wouldn't surprise me at this point with them dragging their feet on the USPS postal ban that they come up with some more expensive way to ship vape products USPS with another built in extra tax for shipping.

You see the complexity is fueled by the 'Prohibitionist' mentality - back a hundred or so years ago the anti-alcohol crowd fought with a no compromise mentality to outlaw alcohol - Today it is tobacco, any tobacco product and any product even tobacco related - The fact that vaping is much safer is all the more reason to attack it - On those 'tobacco control freaks' reason does not work !!!

Maybe I did a Pour Job of explaining the premise I was proposing back in 2016?

 

[Vapeon4Life]

Maybe I did a Pour Job of explaining the premise I was proposing back in 2016?

I mostly agree with what you said - Just wanted to point out the issue's complexity - Many keep saying BT is trying to take complete control of the industry.
Maybe this is true ???

 

[zoiDman]

... Many keep saying BT is trying to take complete control of the industry.
...

I Don't think there is Anyone, be it a Casual Vaper to a Hardcore ANTZ to a Junior Senate Member to the Head of the HSS or FDA, that Doesn't think this is so. It's kinda an Immutable Truth.

But what is Debatable is what kind of Market will BT have control over? And what will be the Slant that is used to Influence Heart's and Minds once they do.

Face it, all but the Most Emotionally Brainwashed ANTZ or the Uninformed know that e-Cigarettes are Orders of Magnitude Safer than Combustible Tobacco. So once BT has control of the Market, what would be the Purpose of continuing to Slam e-Cigarettes?

There Isn't Any.

Having 3 or 4 Mega BT Corporations controlling the e-Cigarette Market makes a Lot of Sense for Policy Makers. As well as Alphabet "Health" Groups.

They are Easy to Regulate because there aren't a Bizzion of them scattered in Every State.
They have their Own Distribution Networks.
They have such a Bad Rep they are Easy Tax Targets.
They also are Not Opposed to Cycling Dark Money into Campaigns via Established Lobbyists.
etc...

And if BT doesn't get at least a Quasi-Blessing from the Powers that be, don't you Run the Risk of everything just devolving into Black Markets? And that Doesn't stuff Tax Revenues into anyone's pockets.

With 4 Months to go until a Huge Axe Falls at the FDA in September, I would start doing the Pre-Emptive PR Spinning about how FDA PMTAed e-Cigarettes (and Only FDA PMTAed e-Cigarettes) aren't nearly as Bad as we may have previously thought. Kinda like what UK Health has been saying for Years.

 

[Vapeon4Life]

With 4 Months to go until a Huge Axe Falls at the FDA in September, I would start doing the Pre-Emptive PR Spinning about how FDA PMTAed e-Cigarettes (and Only FDA PMTAed e-Cigarettes) aren't nearly as Bad as we may have previously thought. Kinda like what UK Health has been saying for Years.

Funny thing about that axe - I just went full time vape maybe two years ago and this axe that was supposed to fall last September has caused me to spend what, maybe five hundred dollars on vape juices and back up devices I didn't really need and even some nicotine and PG/VG just in case I need to mix it up even though one of the main reasons I went fully to vape was its simplicity - was tired of cleaning pipes, etc.
A cynic might think that this axe, which you and others noticed way back in 2016 {or before} has become a selling point for vape sellers of all sorts
{I sitll have some Vuse Melon cartridges left when I bought up a hundred dollars worth when they outlawed flavored pods} - And from what I can see that is all they outlawed - But true they did outlaw flavors in a few states and online sales in a few others.
Now that I think about it weren't a few states like Kansas still dry {no drikning alcohol allowed} many years after the end of 'Prohibition'?
Maybe ithe axe is being wielded by a lunatic trying to chop away at an industry and habit they can't stand? Like I say with 'tobacco control freaks', like the 'Prohibitionists' from the last century, there is no reason - In this sense big tobacco may be the only ones with a enough money to keep the fight going
- And if they see enough profit to be made they will.

 

[zoiDman]

This Axe has Fallen Many Times.

Maybe it only took a Couple of Fingers the 1st Time.
And next it was only your Left Foot.
And the Next Time it took your Hand at the Wrist.
But make No Mistake, the Next Time the Axe Falls, it is aimed Squarely at your Neck.

I mean FFS. Look Around. How Many Big Vape Companies have Gone Out of Business since January? Not to Mention how many Small Shops.

And of Who's Left, how many of those will Survive if 99.99% of the e-Liquids they are selling can No Longer be sold because the 1 Year Grace Period has come and passed?

The FDA NEVER Said that they had to make an Any Evaluation within 1 Year of the PMTA Submission Deadline. Only that they would Allow Products to be sold for Up to 1 Year if a Valid PMTA was submitted.

After that 1 Year, you would Need a Special Extension to continue selling in the US Market. And How Many of those do you think the FDA is going to Issue?

One Hundred?
Two Dozen?
Enough for BT and few BV Companies?

 

[Vapeon4Life]

This Axe has Fallen Many Times.

Maybe it only took a Couple of Fingers the 1st Time.
And next it was only your Left Foot.
And the Next Time it took your Hand at the Wrist.
But make No Mistake, the Next Time the Axe Falls, it is aimed Squarely at your Neck.

I mean FFS. Look Around. How Many Big Vape Companies have Gone Out of Business since January? Not to Mention how many Small Shops.

And of Who's Left, how many of those will Survive if 99.99% of the e-Liquids they are selling can No Longer be sold because the 1 Year Grace Period has come and passed?

The FDA NEVER Said that they had to make an Any Evaluation within 1 Year of the PMTA Submission Deadline. Only that they would Allow Products to be sold for Up to 1 Year if a Valid PMTA was submitted.

After that 1 Year, you would Need a Special Extension to continue selling in the US Market. And How Many of those do you think the FDA is going to Issue?

One Hundred?
Two Dozen?
Enough for BT and few BV Companies?

My opinion:
Part of the companies closing shop was an inevitable consequence of an industry being built on a big expanding market - Well the gold rush is over. Both government regulation and the fact that the market was bloated are to blame. Obviously the vape industry was gong to contract and maybe even consolidate some - this may not be all bad

Now the PMTA is another story - Your guess is as good as mine, but we are guessing. My first guess is that many of the companies that paid and did their homework submitted applications in group manner
- Another words they took a bunch of their more modern devices that would not even qualify and said and tried to demonstrate technology was the same as older models and therefor.........Probably did the same with many flavored liquids - tried to say they were also 'harm reduction products' as they helped smokers quit and the flavors did not make the product less safe.
But like I say, what the FDA will accept is just a guess - no one knows for sure.

 

[zoiDman]

My opinion:
Part of the companies closing shop was an inevitable consequence of an industry being built on a big expanding market - Well the gold rush is over. Both government regulation and the fact that the market was bloated are to blame. Obviously the vape industry was gong to contract and maybe even consolidate some - this may not be all bad

Now the PMTA is another story - Your guess is as good as mine, but we are guessing. My first guess is that many of the companies that paid and did their homework submitted applications in group manner
- Another words they took a bunch of their more modern devices that would not even qualify and said and tried to demonstrate technology was the same as older models and therefor.........Probably did the same with many flavored liquids - tried to say they were also 'harm reduction products' as they helped smokers quit and the flavors did not make the product less safe.
But like I say, what the FDA will accept is just a guess - no one knows for sure.

I just Don't see it as Guessing.

Because the Purpose of the PMTA Process was Never to make a Pathway for New Tobacco Products to Enter the Market. It's Purpose was to Keep New Tobacco Products Out of the Market.

Why do you think the FSTCA is referred to as "The Marlboro Protection Act" ?