I've seen this petition, https://www.change.org/p/u-s-senate...products-ae532682-770e-442b-b155-1c352c1241b6 , on this forum for quite awhile now and am really confused at its goals, besides not wanting "vapor products" classified as a tobacco product.
Disclaimer-- This is not meant to bash this petition, rather an opinion to make it more clear and well defined.
The main issue that immediately becomes clear once reading the petition is that a group of petitioners do not want "vapor products" classified as tobacco products, however, the petition does not give a clear answer as to what these petitioners want vapor products to be classified as. The petition concludes by saying, "Instead of relegating vapor products to tobacco control, a new category of product regulation can be implemented, one that could inspire innovation along with public health and safety. The best way to protect this life altering technology is to not place it under the auspices of the FSPTCA, by not deeming vapor products as tobacco products."
The claim is made that nicotine is NOT a tobacco product, however, in the petition a conciliatory statement is made, "While some vapor products do contain nicotine, many do not, and this is where the link to tobacco ends." It is here the petition clearly states that there is a link to tobacco. So my question is, how can these petitioners make a demand that vapor products should not be labeled as a tobacco product when it is clearly stated in the petition?
Later in the petition it reads, " Vapor products are free of tobacco..." Uhhhhh, read the above paragraph. The petition clearly admits a link to tobacco. I have asked this question before and received some really scathing remarks, however, I'll ask again, where does nicotine for consumer use come from? Yes it has been pointed out that nicotine occurs in other plants in nature such as nightshade, but the nicotine in e juice comes from tobacco. I am not aware of any synthetic nicotine that is used.
Besides the claim that nicotine is not a tobacco product, another issue with this petition that does not address what the real issue is, that being e juice. The petition lumps all vaping products into one, to include: batteries, clearomizers, tanks, etc... IMO the most important and "controversial" product of the "vaping debate" is clearly e juice and its contents, nicotine.
Besides what I've stated about this issue and what the petition has to say, there needs to be a more clear goal as to the classification of nicotine and e juice other than "a new category of product". Also, the claims made in the petition need to be fact and not "as suggested by studies". The references need to be incorporated into the petition itself. It is rather tedious to read a claim and then click on the link to read another article supporting the claim; especially the scientific study with a lot of "science speak" that most laymen, like myself, do not understand. Basically the petition reads like, "This is what we want, however, we're not exactly sure how we want it, but this is what we want..."
So what do the petitioners want "vapor products" to be classified as???
Disclaimer-- This is not meant to bash this petition, rather an opinion to make it more clear and well defined.
The main issue that immediately becomes clear once reading the petition is that a group of petitioners do not want "vapor products" classified as tobacco products, however, the petition does not give a clear answer as to what these petitioners want vapor products to be classified as. The petition concludes by saying, "Instead of relegating vapor products to tobacco control, a new category of product regulation can be implemented, one that could inspire innovation along with public health and safety. The best way to protect this life altering technology is to not place it under the auspices of the FSPTCA, by not deeming vapor products as tobacco products."
The claim is made that nicotine is NOT a tobacco product, however, in the petition a conciliatory statement is made, "While some vapor products do contain nicotine, many do not, and this is where the link to tobacco ends." It is here the petition clearly states that there is a link to tobacco. So my question is, how can these petitioners make a demand that vapor products should not be labeled as a tobacco product when it is clearly stated in the petition?
Later in the petition it reads, " Vapor products are free of tobacco..." Uhhhhh, read the above paragraph. The petition clearly admits a link to tobacco. I have asked this question before and received some really scathing remarks, however, I'll ask again, where does nicotine for consumer use come from? Yes it has been pointed out that nicotine occurs in other plants in nature such as nightshade, but the nicotine in e juice comes from tobacco. I am not aware of any synthetic nicotine that is used.
Besides the claim that nicotine is not a tobacco product, another issue with this petition that does not address what the real issue is, that being e juice. The petition lumps all vaping products into one, to include: batteries, clearomizers, tanks, etc... IMO the most important and "controversial" product of the "vaping debate" is clearly e juice and its contents, nicotine.
Besides what I've stated about this issue and what the petition has to say, there needs to be a more clear goal as to the classification of nicotine and e juice other than "a new category of product". Also, the claims made in the petition need to be fact and not "as suggested by studies". The references need to be incorporated into the petition itself. It is rather tedious to read a claim and then click on the link to read another article supporting the claim; especially the scientific study with a lot of "science speak" that most laymen, like myself, do not understand. Basically the petition reads like, "This is what we want, however, we're not exactly sure how we want it, but this is what we want..."
So what do the petitioners want "vapor products" to be classified as???
