This is very good news indeed...a big thank you to all that have worked so hard to spread the good news regarding e-cigs. No matter what, they have certainly changed my life for the better.
Thank you Kristin. There is no doubt e-cigs will fall under some type of regulation. It's much better to be regulated as a tobacco product then a drug for obvious reasons. When (if) e-cigs are officially categorized as a tobacco product the question remains as to what those regulations will be, but if anyone thinks the situation can continue as is they're living in a fantasy world.
This is Ok ruling for vapers in general. However, one stunningly bad thing that does come from it is that we now are just classified as tobacco users again(with all the restrictions and social shunning that comes with it). We will now never be able to say that vaping is or may be safer than smoking. There will never be any rigorous testing done, so we will never actually know if , in fact, vaping is safer(all anectdotal evidence and assumptions aside). Flavors are out the window. Indoor banning restrictions back. Taxes are definitely in. And now Big Tobacco is free to take over the entire industry as it is now in their purview.
When I started vaping back in June 2009, this is exactly what we did not want.
Well at least we know now who was the "evil mastermind" behind all of this(of the 3 possible conspirators - FDA, Big Tobacco, and Big Pharma). Congratulations, it was Big Tobacco..... Oh, and also, congratulations to Matt Salmon(who was AWOL and in hiding there for a bit - we now know the whole time he was dumping ECA, he was actually positioning himself as CEO of NJOY- What a guy!!!!!!)
And congratulations to all vapers. We are now back to being, legally and officially "smokers"
What a victory?!?!?! I know this was not what I wanted back when I started vaping.
There is a huge difference to smoking and using "tobacco products." People who use smokeless, "spitless" tobacco products have not found themselves to be "right back with the smokers." The fact that e-cigarettes can be considered a tobacco products doesn't make them any more "smoking" and us "smokers" than using a tobacco Orb or snus does.
We must continue to fight for the government to recognize the vast difference in health risks associated with smoked vs. smokeless tobacco products - in regard not only public use, but to tax rates ("sin" tax vs. regular sales tax) and discriminatory actions such as higher insurance policies and refusal of employment. Smokeless nicotine users should be no more "punished" than caffeine users are, because the health risks are too similar.
Once they are officially tobacco products, we will start to see an increase in indoor air studies in response to challenging inclusion in the indoor smoking bans or trying to support them. These studies will have to show that the "second hand" vapor is safe (or not) and that will answer a lot of questions for vapers as to the safety of using e-cigarettes as well.
This ^^^ is so much horse crap. There is no evidence that Big Tobacco had any part in this at all. They are investing millions in snus type products. It was Big Pharm that had the most to lose and funds most of the anti groups that came out against PV's. It was Big Pharm that was the largest contributor to Senator Lautenberg's campaign and who requested a ban early last year. It was Big Pharm's Trade Association that published a news letter calling for a ban of PV's. It is Big Pharm where many upper management FDA personnel go to work for after leaving the FDA.
We know the original judge in the case that ruled in favor of SE and NJOY was appointed by the previous administration. Anyone know who appointed the Appeal's Court judges?
This is Ok ruling for vapers in general. However, one stunningly bad thing that does come from it is that we now are just classified as tobacco users again(with all the restrictions and social shunning that comes with it). We will now never be able to say that vaping is or may be safer than smoking. There will never be any rigorous testing done, so we will never actually know if , in fact, vaping is safer(all anectdotal evidence and assumptions aside). Flavors are out the window. Indoor banning restrictions back. Taxes are definitely in. And now Big Tobacco is free to take over the entire industry as it is now in their purview.
When I started vaping back in June 2009, this is exactly what we did not want.
Well at least we know now who was the "evil mastermind" behind all of this(of the 3 possible conspirators - FDA, Big Tobacco, and Big Pharma). Congratulations, it was Big Tobacco..... Oh, and also, congratulations to Matt Salmon(who was AWOL and in hiding there for a bit - we now know the whole time he was dumping ECA, he was actually positioning himself as CEO of NJOY- What a guy!!!!!!)
And congratulations to all vapers. We are now back to being, legally and officially "smokers"
What a victory?!?!?! I know this was not what I wanted back when I started vaping.
Anyone care to help me decipher what the appellate judge meant by the underlined portion this paragraph? Sounds like an insult but it must have went over my head... why cant these guys write in a way that people can understand...
"In the absence of an authoritative agency interpretation, I
conclude that, unless a product derived from tobacco is marketed
for therapeutic purposes, the FDA may regulate it only under the
provisions of the Tobacco Control Act. Accordingly, because
NJOY’s electronic cigarettes are derived from tobacco, I join my
colleagues’ disposition. What the result would be were the FDA
to offer a contrary statutory interpretation in the form of a
regulation, I leave for the day the agency decides to take that
step."
~last paragraph of the appellate courts opinion
The only 'fantasy' here is the idea that e-cigs could have ever been considered/classified in a separate category from either drug/device or tobacco product -
Not to pick on you again (since I just did in the other thread), but this is patently wrong. NJOY has been on the shelves in retail stores since long before the lawsuit. Nobody's hiding the products. It's just that a lot of major retailers were not willing to carry it. That may change now.The main problem here(and it's been mentioned a zillion times since I started on this forum) is that way the product was originally stealth marketed in the USA(via mall kiosks and internet) while, at the same time, making unsubstantiated safety/health claims.
This is a fear that I never quite understood people having; at least, not unless it would also apply to other tobacco products.Much lower nicotine levels.
Is this the case everyone was waiting to see the outcome? Its been a long time...so can anyone refresh my memory of this particular case? TIA
from my blog The Lone FoggerThe FDA has several options at this point and can take any one or all actions simultaneously:
» Appeal the current decision to the US Supreme Court, and ask for an emergency stay until the case is heard.
» Continue to block the importation of other distributors products until ordered to stop.
» Continue to garner negative publicity with the help of their current Anti E-Cig surrogates; ASH, ALA, AHA, etc.
» Lobby the US Congress to pass specific legislation regarding these devices.
Provisions
* Creates a tobacco control center within the FDA and gives the FDA authority to regulate the content, marketing and sale of tobacco products.
* Requires tobacco companies and importers to reveal all product ingredients and seek FDA approval for any new tobacco products.
* Allows the FDA to change tobacco product content.
o The ban on flavoring applies to any product meeting the definition of a "cigarette" according to section 3(1) of the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act. This includes any tobacco that comes rolled such as cigarettes and cigars, and added to this definition in the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act is any tobacco with the purpose to be rolled such as rolling tobacco.
* Calls for new rules to prevent sales except through direct, face-to-face exchanges between a retailer and a consumer.
* Limits advertising that could attract young smokers.
* Requires cigarette warning labels to cover 50 percent of the front and rear of each pack, with the word warning in capital letters.
* Requires FDA approval for the use of expressions such as "light, "mild" or "low" that give the impression that a particular tobacco product poses less of a health risk.[21]
The bill makes no provisions that ban the import of the banned items for personal consumption, only for "sale or distribution". (Division A Title II Section 201) [22]
From the FSPCA Wiki:
So my question is, however silly, can we as consumers still legally buy our premixed e-juice from China should the FDA ban American made flavored e-juice?