Deeming Regulations have been released!!!!

[Sugar_and_Spice]

@skoony

To my knowledge BT never deliberately altered their product in any way to make
it more addictive. Regardless of what they knew or more importantly what there opponents
accused them of knowing at any given time any alterations were due to controlling the
quality and consistency and accuracy of the product and reporting to the government of the amount
of nicotine in the tobacco,voluntarily making recommended changes that government agencies
were recommending to be changes in the law and,requirements to enter new products onto the
market.

I will tell you that you are sadly misinformed and BT did indeed deliberately add addictive components to tobacco. A Man I knew, now dead from lung cancer (smoking), who worked for RJReynolds for 40 years informed me that it did indeed happen that way.

I have said for years that BT took a lesson from the drug dealers in that they found the way to target the pleasure centers in the brain. The younger generation of course would not know that because they probably started smoking after that change was made.. Before they did that, I always knew I could quit smoking. After that, I knew then I could never quit, no matter what.
But with ecigs, I did......yay..lol

I still don't understand how this nation can become so enlightened on drug addiction, yet fail to recognize the smokers addiction, still thinking that its no big deal to quit smoking and why don't we just do it already. At least that is the attitude I have encounter not only from family members but anyone who disapproves of smoking. And, sadly they are not interested in anything we have to say on the subject either. They just don't want to be bothered with it.

 

[buffaloguy]

How about then making supporting the FDA in its past, current, and future rampage unpalatable ?

We don't need to throw dirt. We just need to point at the pile, or maybe even rub some pols noses into it:

FAERS Reporting by Patient Outcomes by Year

It's their very own data.
And the blue bar ( which shows cases called 'serious' - i.e. not dead , providing never ending income for BP for treating what they botched up in the first place ) is steadily rising. What is the FDA doing ??!!
Caring for the Americas health ? Or running some clandestine euthanasia program ?

The yearly body count tops American casualties of the Korean and Vietnam Wars combined.

A 9-11 roughly every ten days - from FDA-approved drugs.

If any of these crazed outfits wreaking havoc in the Middle East and elsewhere would rack up so many US citizens, the military would come down on them with everything at their disposal, including the kitchen sink.

Make THAT clear to the public.

Make it clear to the 'so-called' representatives is failing abysmally on its designated task.

If we dont throw the dirt there will be no pile to point to. Right now they have bulldozed the field flat.

We need to dig up the dirt as you have with facts like these and keep throwing until it becomes an immovable mountain.

That starts with unified messaging. Facts like the ones you just laid out aid to that mountain, bit they must 1st be laid out with one message:

Murder.

 

[zoiDman]

Indeed. Don't expect it from Georgia though. But what I can gather, the state lawmaker's problem is more ignorance based. In other words, they don't know the beneficial aspects of vaping. Whereas on the federal level, it has nothing to do with the merits (or demerits) of vaping and everything to do with BT and BP lining the pockets of federal regulators and politicians.

I haven't followed Georgia much.

But I know for All but a VERY few State Legislators, they Know Much More about things than Most will let on to.

Sometimes acting Ignorant or Parroting a "Company Line" or Catch Phrase is like a Shield. And if enough people do it, there is perceived Strength in Numbers.

And it can Many Times Mask what the Real Intention of what a Piece of Legislations Intent is for. Or what Money is behind things.

 

[Bruce C]

I am a 57-year-old middle class constituent, who has voted in every election since I was 18. I am also an ex-smoker. Almost 4 years ago I quit a 40-year smoking habit by using electronic cigarettes.

I strongly urge you to support the amended Agriculture Appropriations Bill for 2017 and to co-sponsor the FDA Deeming Authority Clarification Act of 2015 (H.R. 2058) that would amend the Food, Drug, and Cosmetics Act to change the predicate date for newly deemed tobacco products to the date when the deeming regulation is finalized.

A predicate date of February 15, 2007 doesn’t benefit public health, it benefits Big Tobacco companies, as the tobacco cigarettes on the market today are “Substantially Equivalent” to those sold in 2007 and will be “grandfathered” in. The e-cigarettes and e-liquids currently on the market are not Substantially Equivalent to what was available in 2007. Accordingly, every product is considered new and will require a pre-market tobacco application (PMTA).

E-cigarette products are being held to a much higher standard than tobacco cigarettes. Manufacturers of e-cigarettes and related products must, among other things: quantify the likelihood that nonsmokers will start using the product; the likelihood that former smokers will relapse back to nicotine use by using the product; the likelihood that nonsmokers who do start using the product will progress to cigarette smoking; the likelihood that former smokers who relapse back to nicotine use will then progress to smoking; the likelihood that consumers will use the product in conjunction with other tobacco products; and the likelihood that smokers who start using the product would otherwise have quit smoking.

The FDA requires a separate PMTA for every product. Thus, if an e-cigarette manufacturer produces four types of starter kits, four types of cartomizers, five types of mods, and 40 e-liquid flavors, each coming in three nicotine strengths, then that manufacturer will have to submit 133 PMTAs! This is a conservative estimate, as there are many companies that sell more than 100 flavors of e-liquids. These companies are being required to submit approximately 300 different product applications.

To submit a PMTA will require a huge research undertaking lasting several years and costing millions of dollars. I don't even think that existing NIH research - in its totality – would be able to provide all of the necessary data by the regulations deadline. Small businesses will not be able to comply.

And even if a company came up with the funds to submit a PMTA, there is no guarantee it will be approved. As Mitch Zeller, director of the FDA's Center for Tobacco Products, told U.S. News, it's impossible to say if any e-cigarette product will be approved.
A 2007 predicate date does nothing to serve the public; it does the opposite. By making legal tobacco harm reduction products unobtainable, vapers like myself will be forced to buy from the black market or go back to smoking cigarettes.

Please support the amended Agriculture Appropriations Bill for 2017 and to co-sponsor the FDA Deeming Authority Clarification Act of 2015 (H.R. 2058) and allow me the legal means to stay off of tobacco.

I vote, and I will support politicians who support my right to harm reduction, even if it means I will have to vote Republican for the first time in 39 years.

Sincerely,

I came across this in my desperate attempt to catch up in here lol. Thank you Ocelot, this sums it up very nicely. I will be bombing all my congress people with this, state and federal. I will pass it on to my daughter and her friends also if that's ok?

 

[zoiDman]

I came across this in my desperate attempt to catch up in here lol. Thank you Ocelot, this sums it up very nicely. I will be bombing all my congress people with this, state and federal. I will pass it on to my daughter and her friends also if that's ok?

 

[buffaloguy]

Thats astonishing. Someone should share that with the CASAA folks and have them punch in their figures of they have them.

Id have no idea where to start figuring it out. I think one lost soul to tobacco is one too many.

Missed the link in my reply. Referring to thr Murder calculator:
Who cares about a few thousand dead? Defending EU limits on the strength of nicotine e-liquids

 

[jmur]

Couldn't find the original post, but, The Ocelot said:
"even if it means I will have to vote Republican for the first time in 39 years."

Know what you mean! I'm 64 and have voted Dem since I first registered, all those many decades ago. Earlier this year I switched parties, first time in my life. And besides the deeming stupidity there were a lot of other reasons that compelled me. Mainly my desire to not have a governmental nanny directing my life.

But, and I think it's funny, when I voted in our state's primary last month I first went to the table to check credentials/ID. They directed me to the adjacent area which was for Dems. I said No, I want to go there, the Republican table. They looked VERY surprised and directed me on. Got to that table, and the woman and younger kid there said, "Oh, you're a Republican", and smiled, liked they hadn't had much interaction all day! So, gave me my folder, directed me to another table (CT voting is weird) where I was to get my actual ballot. Guy hands me a sheet and says "Democratic?" I said, NO, Repub and he said OH and looked quite surprised. I DID get a good chuckle out of this, but it does kinda illustrate what the folks who want to control their own lives are up against. Funny, tho.

 

[Katya]

Couldn't find the original post, but, The Ocelot said:
"even if it means I will have to vote Republican for the first time in 39 years."

Know what you mean! I'm 64 and have voted Dem since I first registered, all those many decades ago. Earlier this year I switched parties, first time in my life. And besides the deeming stupidity there were a lot of other reasons that compelled me. Mainly my desire to not have a governmental nanny directing my life.

But, and I think it's funny, when I voted in our state's primary last month I first went to the table to check credentials/ID. They directed me to the adjacent area which was for Dems. I said No, I want to go there, the Republican table. They looked VERY surprised and directed me on. Got to that table, and the woman and younger kid there said, "Oh, you're a Republican", and smiled, liked they hadn't had much interaction all day! So, gave me my folder, directed me to another table (CT voting is weird) where I was to get my actual ballot. Guy hands me a sheet and says "Democratic?" I said, NO, Repub and he said OH and looked quite surprised. I DID get a good chuckle out of this, but it does kinda illustrate what the folks who want to control their own lives are up against. Funny, tho.

I know. I still don't understand why they are so rabidly against science and progress and the concept of harm reduction.

And, according to these Senators, the FDA didn't go far enough.

SENATE DEMS: FDA Rule is Critical Step to Protecting Children and Teens from Tobacco Products | The U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor & Pensions

"In addition, tobacco companies are producing e-cigarettes and other products in fruit and candy flavors, a practice not prohibited under the deeming rule. This is particularly concerning because children are more likely to use products with these types of flavors, and because children can purchase these previously unregulated products online without their parents’ knowledge. It is unacceptable that tobacco companies are once again targeting children using the same tactics they once used to promote cigarettes."

Senators signing the letter:

Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Richard J. Durbin (D-IL), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Al Franken (D-MN), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Patrick Leahy (D-VT),Edward J. Markey (D-MA), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Jack Reed (D-RI), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Charles Schumer (D-NY), Tom Udall (D-NM), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI).

I wrote to my Senators (Boxer and Feinstein) multiple times--they never bothered to respond.

 

[The Ocelot]

I came across this in my desperate attempt to catch up in here lol. Thank you Ocelot, this sums it up very nicely. I will be bombing all my congress people with this, state and federal. I will pass it on to my daughter and her friends also if that's ok?

Feel free to use any of it that expresses what you want to say. There is also a shorter version:

I'm a 57-year-old constituent who has voted in every election since I was 18. I am also an ex-smoker. After 40 years of smoking, I have been tobacco free for almost 4 years by using e-cigarettes. I will vote for candidates who support tobacco harm reduction, not for those who would block a path to health for millions of people in a misguided attempt to "Protect the Children."

 

[The Ocelot]

Couldn't find the original post, but, The Ocelot said:
"even if it means I will have to vote Republican for the first time in 39 years."

Know what you mean! I'm 64 and have voted Dem since I first registered, all those many decades ago. Earlier this year I switched parties, first time in my life. And besides the deeming stupidity there were a lot of other reasons that compelled me. Mainly my desire to not have a governmental nanny directing my life.

But, and I think it's funny, when I voted in our state's primary last month I first went to the table to check credentials/ID. They directed me to the adjacent area which was for Dems. I said No, I want to go there, the Republican table. They looked VERY surprised and directed me on. Got to that table, and the woman and younger kid there said, "Oh, you're a Republican", and smiled, liked they hadn't had much interaction all day! So, gave me my folder, directed me to another table (CT voting is weird) where I was to get my actual ballot. Guy hands me a sheet and says "Democratic?" I said, NO, Repub and he said OH and looked quite surprised. I DID get a good chuckle out of this, but it does kinda illustrate what the folks who want to control their own lives are up against. Funny, tho.

I don't know what to think anymore. When I was 18 the Republican party was my parents party. They were affluent, against "socialized medicine" and wanted the poor hidden away somewhere. The Democratic party made more sense to me. Their focus seemed to be a government that addressed the needs of all citizens, not just the monied elite. As I grew older, my opinion on certain subjects changed and I found myself looking at candidates who supported my beliefs, no matter their party.

I never envisioned that addressing the needs of all citizens would lead to a nanny government, nor that Donald Trump would be the alternative.

ETA:

I am strongly Pro-Choice, anti-gun control, pro-vaping, anti-nanny and terrified of a government that no longer respects the separation of church and state. What party am I?

 

[Bruce C]

I don't know what to think anymore. When I was 18 the Republican party was my parents party. They were affluent, against "socialized medicine" and wanted the poor hidden away somewhere. The Democratic party made more sense to me. Their focus seemed to be a government that addressed the needs of all citizens, not just the monied elite. As I grew older, my opinion on certain subjects changed and I found myself looking at candidates who supported my beliefs, no matter their party.

I never envisioned that addressing the needs of all citizens would lead to a nanny government, nor that Donald Trump would be the alternative.

ETA:

I am strongly Pro-Choice, anti-gun control, pro-vaping, anti-nanny and terrified of a government that no longer respects the separation of church and state. What party am I?

Thank you for letting me and mine use your letter as a basis for ours.

I am all those things you call yourself, and I think that makes us the Party of Aware Citizens, of which the number is probably less than 20 million citizens of our once great country.

The problem isn't the party so much as I can't find any politician that isn't crooked and paid for by someone anymore. Even my own NH rep Frank Guinta has been investigated for corruption, bribery and graft.

 

[jmur]

I am strongly Pro-Choice, anti-gun control, pro-vaping, anti-nanny and terrified of a government that no longer respects the separation of church and state. What party am I?

Oceloticals. I will be looking for this on the ballot...

 

[Lessifer]

I am strongly Pro-Choice, anti-gun control, pro-vaping, anti-nanny and terrified of a government that no longer respects the separation of church and state. What party am I?

Democrats - Corporate interests
Republicans - Religious right

I'm right there with you, whatever you are.

 

[Kent C]

I never envisioned that addressing the needs of all citizens would lead to a nanny government, nor that Donald Trump would be the alternative.

ETA:

I am strongly Pro-Choice, anti-gun control, pro-vaping, anti-nanny and terrified of a government that no longer respects the separation of church and state. What party am I?

Depending on what quotes one uses, and which time frame:

Pro-Choice ✔
Anti-gun control ✔
Pro-vaping ?
Anti-nanny ✔

Trumpist?

 

[mcol]

Add me in the party too.
Pro-Choice ✔
Anti-gun control ✔
Pro-vaping ?
Anti-nanny ✔

 

[Woofer]

I am strongly Pro-Choice, anti-gun control, pro-vaping, anti-nanny and terrified of a government that no longer respects the separation of church and state. What party am I?

I know, I know... you are a party pooper!

 

[bigdancehawk]

I don't know what to think anymore. When I was 18 the Republican party was my parents party. They were affluent, against "socialized medicine" and wanted the poor hidden away somewhere. The Democratic party made more sense to me. Their focus seemed to be a government that addressed the needs of all citizens, not just the monied elite. As I grew older, my opinion on certain subjects changed and I found myself looking at candidates who supported my beliefs, no matter their party.

I never envisioned that addressing the needs of all citizens would lead to a nanny government, nor that Donald Trump would be the alternative.

ETA:

I am strongly Pro-Choice, anti-gun control, pro-vaping, anti-nanny and terrified of a government that no longer respects the separation of church and state. What party am I?

You and I are members of the Rand Paul party. Until now I thought I was the only member.

 

[Katya]

You and I are members of the Rand Paul party. Until now I thought I was the only member.

I want a Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff Party.

 

[Katya]

Democrats - Corporate interests
Republicans - Religious right

I'm right there with you, whatever you are.

A plague on both your houses party?

 

[coldgin96]

"The Wild Party" - Alice Cooper