Deeming Regulations have been released!!!!
- Thread starter Oliver
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
I would guess not much.
juul is the one company I'm thoroughly confident will have an acceptable PMTA filed by the deadline. Their partners at Altria clearly know how to write one, as evidenced by the fact that the one they submitted for IQOS ended up getting approved. By "acceptable" I don't mean it will be approved quickly, I just mean that the FDA won't be able to reject it out-of-hand as incomplete.
If you were Juul, would you want to give the rest of the industry a reprieve? Wouldn't you rather be the only one (or one of very, very few) that has product that remains legal to sell after next May?
That is Exactly what went thru my mind when I started to see the Headlines that JUUL & VTA were suing the FDA.
Now I have read the whole complaint, and I'd like to revise and extend my remarks:
Page 5:
8.As a result of FDA’s arbitrary and capricious proposal of a new ten-month deadline, Vapor Stockroom and the VTA’s other members face the immediate conundrum ...
How was it "arbitrary and capricious"? Judge Grimm demanded a schedule from the FDA.
Pages 33-37:
The complain argues that the FDA should not have proposed 10 months, but simply asked Judge Grimm to remand the whole thing back to the FDA so they could go through proper rule-making procedures. Well, that's not what the judge required of them, and my sense is that if the FDA had not made a counter-proposal with a revised deadline, Judge Grimm would simply have ruled in favor of the plaintiff's motion, thus setting the deadline at 4 months instead of 10 months (i.e. this November instead of next May).
Pages 38-40:
These contain some really good arguments stating how/why it's effectively impossible for anyone to actually complete the work the FDA is demanding a PMTA.
This seems to be the crux of the complaint: That it's not possible to submit a PMTA that meets the FDA's poorly defined requirements and thus, the FDA is essentially banning an entire class of tobacco products, which they prohibited from doing by the TCA. The plaintiffs want more clearly defined requirements and more time. I can't say I blame them for wanting that.
Thinking about this some more, there's an interesting dynamic at play here. The FDA didn't want to pull the date forward from the previous 2021/2022. They were forced to do so by the ruling in the previous suit brought by the American Academy of Pediatrics et al. They were the defendants in that suit, and they are the defendants in this suit as well. If the plaintiffs in this suit prevail, then we have two federal district courts in two different districts demanding that the FDA take two diametrically opposing actions. I think at that point, this would have to get kicked up to federal appeals court, which would give the FDA (and the industry) more time, which seems to be what the FDA would prefer. So I have to wonder just how vigorously the FDA is going to defend itself against this suit?
yeah, I imagine giving a cbd treat to a cat (lazy type), it will prob. goes 2 "sleep mode" completely.
and I believe you need to check the rules for advertising on the forum.
Try walking your neighborhood wearing a sandwich board. This isn't the place for you. Thank you.
Last edited by a moderator:
Jeeze Bernie... Right when this thread starts to get Back out Track, you come along and Spam It Up.
And in Non-... Related News.
New Look For Cigarettes? FDA Proposes Graphic Warnings On Packages And Ads
New Look For Cigarettes? FDA Proposes Graphic Warnings On Packages And Ads
We have those here. At least 2/3 of the pack has to be health warnings here.
I know people who request the "Smoking when pregnant harms your baby" ones every time they shop.
You really only notice them a very short time.
@Rossum I kind of think you should send them your remarks, seriously and I have had some excellent lawyers in my time but like, I wish you had been the lawyer for my kid's parental severance but he bilked me. On purpose. I wound up paying double.
I am wondering where this lawsuit will wander to now, also. Fingers crossed because IDK the courts these days.
My son's final judge
Pima county decided to make it so that NON lawyers could be JUDGES and she WAS NOT.I will never forget her addressing the plaintiff before mine as "My son's name," and being corrected by BOTH lawyers (very politely) but still ploughing ON, until her court stenographer literally GRABBED the file out of her hands, and pulled the correct one out of her pile and muttered, "I am going off RECORD. THIS is the file you need."
Then the judge was like, "Oh my that has never happened before..." And I was like SURE lady, SURE.
I was getting kind of worried that my son would be jailed for a year, because prior plaintiff had done horrible things... Fortunately it was resolved.
The lawyers HATE IT WITH BURNING HATE. It's got to be super hard to go from arguing the law to politely educating it without making the judge look bad.
Send this lawsuit to Pima County is what I am saying. LOL. It should do well there.
Anna
Hmmm... and yet a lot of us were still smoking and surpassed the age of 34. Guess we were all just lucky?this one irked me the longest
I think I first saw that on the WHY QUIT website, which is actually a pretty great website IF you are ready to cold turkey cigarettes or die trying. It's got a TON of useful info.
I think the pics sort of made me want to smoke more... then commit suicide.
Vaping is way better.
VAPING IS WAY BETTER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Anna
I think the pics sort of made me want to smoke more... then commit suicide.
Vaping is way better.
VAPING IS WAY BETTER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Anna
Yeah. It came out later that while the people in the pics did smoke. The tumors etc were mostly unrelated to the smoking. They just used shocking looking ones.
There are different types of lung cancer including those not associated with smoking. Even if that individual was a smoker, at that age it is possible, if not probable, it was a type of cancer not even related to any tobacco use. But of course they don't mention the kind of lung cancer the person suffered from.
I saw my first real life voice box machine at Walmart. The ads are less scary FAR less scary. After I saw that dude, I was like "Oh my I understand why my docs were so freaked out."
I'm pretty sure it was smoking. However, if I had to use one I might never speak again. What a crime against humanity THAT would be.
Anna
I'm pretty sure it was smoking. However, if I had to use one I might never speak again. What a crime against humanity THAT would be.
Anna
You could still type.
Yes, that's a terrible place to develop cancer. What's really worse than someone using a voice box machine is watching someone smoking trough their tracheotomy tube in their neck.That's a sobering sight about the addictiveness of smoking.
Oh I'd smoke through my trach hole alright. AT THAT POINT in my smoking I would figure "nothing to lose."
I wonder if you can vape through one?
Anna
I wonder if you can vape through one?
Anna
Similar threads
- Locked
