FDA Commissioner warns it could be ‘game over’ for popular e-cigarettes if use continues to rise among y

[Storm52]

I'm not a conspiracy theorist. The underage vaping "issue", if in fact it is an issue, began appearing as front page news with the Juul and possibly other pod systems. The nic-salt craze, which was to provide higher nic without the harshness from free-base, exploded with the Juul. 50+ mg of nic was unheard of for those of us vaping for awhile. You now have devices with high nic for first time users.
We all know higher percentages of anything remotely addictive, will usually "hook" the user. The tobacco companies have known this for decades. Their loss of cigarette users is a cause for concern to them, so they look for new possibilities to hook a new generation of users. Youth aren't turning to cigarettes (not cool), so how does the tobacco company find a life long new user and market? E-cigs, with high enough nicotine to keep the pool using the devices. So let's partner with them and influence their development, without scrutiny. Then purchase the e-cig company and viola another generation of consumers.
Limit the nic, to say 18mg, in the pre-filled pod market and eliminate many of the flavors and you'll see a reduction in the youth market. My

 

[dripster]

I'm not a conspiracy theorist.

Me neither. But just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not after your cloud.

 

[Storm52]

Me neither. But just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not after your cloud.

We have a saying on this side of the pond, "cold dead hands".

 

[Rossum]

50+ mg of nic was unheard of for those of us vaping for awhile.

Actually, no, it wasn't. Some of the early cigalikes used 48. We've also had several members here who were only able to quit smoking by using DIY'd 50 mg juice in fairly high-powered devices.

Limit the nic, to say 18mg, in the pre-filled pod market and eliminate many of the flavors and you'll see a reduction in the youth market. My

I think that would be a mistake. 18 was just barely sufficient for me in eGo type devices, which produced as much or more vapor than a Juul does, and I smoked "ultra lights".

People are different. I know folks who quit using low-powered devices with 6-12 mg liquids, while others who needed 36 or more.

In any case, 50 mg is not excessive in a low-powered device if you intend to achieve a rate of rise in plasma nic levels that match that obtained by smoking a cigarette.

 

[Storm52]

Actually, no, it wasn't. Some of the early cigalikes used 48. We've also had several members here who were only able to quit smoking by using DIY'd 50 mg juice in fairly high-powered devices.
I think that would be a mistake. 18 was just barely sufficient for me in eGo type devices, which produced as much or more vapor than a Juul does, and I smoked "ultra lights".
People are different. I know folks who quit using low-powered devices with 6-12 mg liquids, while others who needed 36 or more.
In any case, 50 mg is not excessive in a low-powered device if you intend to achieve a rate of rise in plasma nic levels that match that obtained by smoking a cigarette.

Makes sense. I quit with 24mg with an kanger evod, but the offering at the store was maxed at 32. I was 3 pad kool smoker. I also made the decision that vaping was going work and I was finished with smoking. Definitely, mind over matter. Way off topic though!

 

[sofarsogood]

The tobacco companies know more about smokers than smokers or researchers. They know better than anybody that vaping, etc. has the potential to end the tobacco age and is likely to do that. Their public statements are all to the effect they support that and want to participate. I'll take them at their word on that. It's the beneficiaries of tobacco taxes who are freaking out. Follow the money.

I'm agreeable to a total ban on ecigs so long as there is a simultaneous ban on all tobacco products. Or, how about ALL tobacco products are subject to the PTMA process the same as vape products, as though all of them were new products. No combustible tobacco products could meet any standard of safety, so ban them.

I keep saying it, ecigs should have been around when I was a kid.

 

[dripster]

The tobacco companies know more about smokers than smokers or researchers. They know better than anybody that vaping, etc. has the potential to end the tobacco age and is likely to do that. Their public statements are all to the effect they support that and want to participate. I'll take them at their word on that. It's the beneficiaries of tobacco taxes who are freaking out. Follow the money.

I'm agreeable to a total ban on ecigs so long as there is a simultaneous ban on all tobacco products. Or, how about ALL tobacco products are subject to the PTMA process the same as vape products, as though all of them were new products. No combustible tobacco products could meet any standard of safety, so ban them.

I keep saying it, ecigs should have been around when I was a kid.

IMO there's still a very reasonable chance that the tobacco companies could be secretly funding the anti-vaping crusade in order to burn the whole (or almost) vaping industry to ashes so that, next, they would be able to pretty much effortlessly take control of the soil that would lie beneath these ashes, and then finally they could start to build a gargantuan tower on this soil to rake in all the revenue streams that no-one could have ever imagined they could. I believe the city of Troy was captured in a similar fashion, only this time there's a cowboy sitting on the back of the horse.

 

[MacTechVpr]

No sense re-writing history there @dripster. There's no one cowboy to shake a stick at. If only it were that simple. Closer to home look for your answer in the EU.

In my estimation, the slippery slope began with the "for the children" fantasy which didn't exist then and doesn't exist now. When places like FL got underage restrictions passed piggy-backed onto non-tobacco statutes without any consideration of a definition for vaping, its quantified risk or harm and that this was simply dispensed with as self-evident…we were done. Actually years before when vaping was thrown into the same pan with tobacco in the TCA. That was the time to take exception and for objection from every quarter, when process and lawful structure still somewhat mattered. How quickly things have changed. Or perhaps it's just that now more of us have come to really finally see it.

No the fashionable trend of these times is fiction. It's official. And what remains for the rest of us is proper orientation to the standards of its peddlers. For some the illusion of process must at least be maintained and as such is quite adequate.

Good luck.

 

[dripster]

No sense re-writing history there @dripster. There's no one cowboy to shake a stick at. If only it were that simple. Closer to home look for your answer in the EU.

In my estimation, the slippery slope began with the "for the children" fantasy which didn't exist then and doesn't exist now. When places like FL got underage restrictions passed piggy-backed onto non-tobacco statutes without any consideration of a definition for vaping, its quantified risk or harm and that this was simply dispensed with as self-evident…we were done. Actually years before when vaping was thrown into the same pan with tobacco in the TCA. That was the time to take exception and for objection from every quarter, when process and lawful structure still somewhat mattered. How quickly things have changed. Or perhaps it's just that now more of us have come to really finally see it.

No the fashionable trend of these times is fiction. It's official. And what remains for the rest of us is proper orientation to the standards of its peddlers. For some the illusion of process must at least be maintained and as such is quite adequate.

Good luck.

Sorry I was a bit cryptic about that. I wasn't trying to suggest that Big Tobacco is the only cowboy at play, as IMO it's plenty obvious the fact Big Pharma is also extremely deeply involved in all this, and then there's also a whole bunch of corrupt health organizations and research centers and the like, and of course all the yellow journalism to distract public opinion in every possible direction that's pointing away from harm reduction like usual, but instead I was trying to point out that Big Tobacco could very well be using a trojan horse tactic to conquer the vaping industry by covertly attacking it from the inside, whilst we (in the US and in the EU) are having a good night sleep thinking Big Tobacco are trying to support it with their investments in it and by making vaping products also.

 

[MacTechVpr]

Sorry I was a bit cryptic about that. I wasn't trying to suggest that Big Tobacco is the only cowboy at play, as IMO it's plenty obvious the fact Big Pharma is also extremely deeply involved in all this, and then there's also a whole bunch of corrupt health organizations and research centers and the like, and of course all the yellow journalism to distract public opinion in every possible direction that's pointing away from harm reduction like usual, but instead I was trying to point out that Big Tobacco could very well be using a trojan horse tactic to conquer the vaping industry by covertly attacking it from the inside, whilst we (in the US and in the EU) are having a good night sleep thinking Big Tobacco are trying to support it with their investments in it and by making vaping products also.

Agree and believe collaboration with gov here has always been the plan. Suspected as much as far back as 1965. Regulation as a form of insurance. Independence, the price for immunity and guaranteed market share. But hey, pardon my skeptical cynicism about gov. Altogether too many who'd rather believe "collusion" between industry and bureaucracy just doesn't happen or that it will be adverse to them at all. As long as we persist in that kind of delusion gov and big enterprise have all the freedom and power in the world to do as they will.

It's saddening to me we didn't evolve from smoking into as passionate a zealot class as the cult of anti-smokers. Certainly our benefit is far greater than the fiction the latter worship and practice. However, there is a cost for such privilege.

There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him. —Robert A. Heinlein

But it looks to me like a one-pod-fits-all future at this point (BG, BP and BT approved). And those who'll believe they are presented a choice shall be the biggest losers of all.

Good luck.

 

[Bill Godshall]

I attended and presented at FDA's January 18 public hearing, where Scott Gottlieb read his speech (which was intended to generate lots of news headlines, as it did) and promptly left the hearing.

The hearing was as surreal as its hysterical news coverage.

Seven vapor prohibitionists presented very little data/evidence about youth vaping, expressed no concern for youth or adult smokers, further exaggerated fear mongering claims about “vaping addiction” (Ruthanne McCormick claimed half of all 4th graders at her local school were vaping three pods of JUUL daily), and demanded that FDA immediately ban ALL vapor product sales (to adults) in the US.

The half dozen FDA panelists appeared only interested in finding potential drugs and therapies to treat youth who are purportedly addicted to JUUL/vaping/nicotine. None of them asked any of the vapor prohibitionists if banning all vapor sales to US adults might increase cigarette smoking rates and/or create huge black markets

My presentation was entitled "Still No Evidence of a Youth Nicotine Vaping Epidemic" and showed lots of CDC youth vaping survey data that refuted/disproved Gottlieb's false fear mongering claims. So of course, none of the FDA panelists asked me any questions (but Mitch Zeller was in the front row, and he knew my presentation was accurate and spot on). Spike Babaian (representing the NY vapor trade association) and Mark Anton (representing SFATA) also gave excellent presentations that refuted Gottlieb's claims.

Unfortunately, the only objective article I’ve seen (by a vaping advocate) about the hearing is at
The FDA hearing that wasn’t | Vaping Post

The preview and summary slide from my Power Point presentation is printed below.

According to DHHS data and scientific evidence:
•Many/most youth who vape are NOT vaping nicotine.
•Many high school students who vape are 18 year old adults.
•Very few never smoking youth vape daily or frequently.
•Youth smoking has sharply declined as youth vaping increased.
•Vaping is far less harmful than cigarette smoking.
•No evidence daily nicotine use increases human disease risk.
•Nicotine is very similar to caffeine.
•Chantix and Zyban pose more risks than nicotine.
•Youth engage in many far more harmful behaviors than nicotine use.

 

[Katya]

Thanks again for all you're doing on behalf of the vaping community, Bill.

 

[Ipster]

I attended and presented at FDA's January 18 public hearing, where Scott Gottlieb read his speech (which was intended to generate lots of news headlines, as it did) and promptly left the hearing.

The hearing was as surreal as its hysterical news coverage.

Seven vapor prohibitionists presented very little data/evidence about youth vaping, expressed no concern for youth or adult smokers, further exaggerated fear mongering claims about “vaping addiction” (Ruthanne McCormick claimed half of all 4th graders at her local school were vaping three pods of JUUL daily), and demanded that FDA immediately ban ALL vapor product sales (to adults) in the US.

The half dozen FDA panelists appeared only interested in finding potential drugs and therapies to treat youth who are purportedly addicted to JUUL/vaping/nicotine. None of them asked any of the vapor prohibitionists if banning all vapor sales to US adults might increase cigarette smoking rates and/or create huge black markets

My presentation was entitled "Still No Evidence of a Youth Nicotine Vaping Epidemic" and showed lots of CDC youth vaping survey data that refuted/disproved Gottlieb's false fear mongering claims. So of course, none of the FDA panelists asked me any questions (but Mitch Zeller was in the front row, and he knew my presentation was accurate and spot on). Spike Babaian (representing the NY vapor trade association) and Mark Anton (representing SFATA) also gave excellent presentations that refuted Gottlieb's claims.

Unfortunately, the only objective article I’ve seen (by a vaping advocate) about the hearing is at
The FDA hearing that wasn’t | Vaping Post

The preview and summary slide from my Power Point presentation is printed below.

According to DHHS data and scientific evidence:
•Many/most youth who vape are NOT vaping nicotine.
•Many high school students who vape are 18 year old adults.
•Very few never smoking youth vape daily or frequently.
•Youth smoking has sharply declined as youth vaping increased.
•Vaping is far less harmful than cigarette smoking.
•No evidence daily nicotine use increases human disease risk.
•Nicotine is very similar to caffeine.
•Chantix and Zyban pose more risks than nicotine.
•Youth engage in many far more harmful behaviors than nicotine use.

 

[Ipster]

Scott Gottleib is a useless lame duck. Not the metaphorical lame duck, either, but a real duck that was actually lame,
maybe from stepping on a land mine or hit by passing farm equipment. This is after a couple years of attempts seeking signs of intelligent life on another project.

 

[marianna]

I don't see any problem, cause most youngsters are able to order and pay on line.

 

[marianna]

When I was a kid of about 10 years, my mother often gave me money to buy cigarettes for her.
No problem whatsoever.