Deeming Regulations have been released!!!!

[KODIAK (TM)]

And how would that differ from Nicoderm / Nicorette, they are all derived from the same pure form liquid,

Bingo. This in itself shows why the Deeming regs are about controlling "behavior". In today's socially engineered culture it's quite acceptable to chew nic or slap it on one's azz cheek in patch form because it simply doesn't look like smoking. This guise can only be revealed through slow, careful and deliberate litigation IMO.

Like so many here, I'm not a lawyer but I play one on the internets.

 

[wiredlove]

Bingo. This in itself shows why the Deeming regs are about controlling "behavior". In today's socially engineered culture it's quite acceptable to chew nic or slap it on one's azz cheek in patch form because it simply doesn't look like smoking. This guise can only be revealed through slow, careful and deliberate litigation IMO.

Like so many here, I'm not a lawyer but I play one on the internets.

You can only chew it if it is processed and put into flavorful gums.

 

[Endor]

I read it. Heavily slanted "reporting" with save-the-cheeeldrun talking points from the usual BP funded ANTZ.

Agreed. Although I will agree that removal of flavors with the original deeming release was certainly a minor win for us, I contend that the FDA will be under tremendous pressure from these ANTZ groups to release updated regulations to ban flavors later on down the road.

Now that they're deemed, the vaping world is the FDA's oyster.

If the science is so strong that flavors attract youth, then where is the real data? The CDC data is flawed in that the question is "ever used" and does not have any data around REGULAR use (which is what everybody is concerned about). It also doesn't address the use of nicotine (versus 0-nic) use at all, assuming they all contain nicotine.

Why is the FDA completely ignoring the studies and data coming out of the UK? Cancer Research UK did a study of 1,205 children aged 11-16 that showed the complete opposite of what American ANTZ groups are touting, and has detail that the CDC data doesn't. Only 12% have tried one, 2% regularly use more than monthly and 1% use more than weekly. From the summary:

Professor Linda Bauld, Cancer Research UK scientist at the University of Stirling , said: "There's a common perception that the rise we've seen in the use of electronic cigarettes will lead to a new generation of adults who have never smoked but are dependent on nicotine. This fear is based on the expectation that due to the appeal of the products, children who have never used tobacco will be attracted to e-cigarettes and start to use them regularly.

"Our survey is in line with others in the different parts of the UK that show this is not happening. Young people are certainly experimenting with e-cigarettes, some of which do contain nicotine. However, our data show that at the moment this experimentation is not translating into regular use."

So, CFTFK and ALA, why is this data being ignored? Simple... it doesn't fit their rhetoric and can be easily disposed of as not applying to American children.

 

[VNeil]

Agreed. Although I will agree that removal of flavors with the original deeming release was certainly a minor win for us, I contend that the FDA will be under tremendous pressure from these ANTZ groups to release updated regulations to ban flavors later on down the road.

Now that they're deemed, the vaping world is the FDA's oyster.

If the science is so strong that flavors attract youth, then where is the real data? The CDC data is flawed in that the question is "ever used" and does not have any data around REGULAR use (which is what everybody is concerned about). It also doesn't address the use of nicotine (versus 0-nic) use at all, assuming they all contain nicotine.

Why is the FDA completely ignoring the studies and data coming out of the UK? Cancer Research UK did a study of 1,205 children aged 11-16 that showed the complete opposite of what American ANTZ groups are touting, and has detail that the CDC data doesn't. Only 12% have tried one, 2% regularly use more than monthly and 1% use more than weekly. From the summary:

Professor Linda Bauld, Cancer Research UK scientist at the University of Stirling , said: "There's a common perception that the rise we've seen in the use of electronic cigarettes will lead to a new generation of adults who have never smoked but are dependent on nicotine. This fear is based on the expectation that due to the appeal of the products, children who have never used tobacco will be attracted to e-cigarettes and start to use them regularly.

"Our survey is in line with others in the different parts of the UK that show this is not happening. Young people are certainly experimenting with e-cigarettes, some of which do contain nicotine. However, our data show that at the moment this experimentation is not translating into regular use."

So, CFTFK and ALA, why is this data being ignored? Simple... it doesn't fit their rhetoric and can be easily disposed of as not applying to American children.

The gov't can say anything, ignore any data if they have a compliant lapdog press... that is all there is to know about this

 

[wiredlove]

Agreed. Although I will agree that removal of flavors with the original deeming release was certainly a minor win for us, I contend that the FDA will be under tremendous pressure from these ANTZ groups to release updated regulations to ban flavors later on down the road.

Now that they're deemed, the vaping world is the FDA's oyster.

If the science is so strong that flavors attract youth, then where is the real data? The CDC data is flawed in that the question is "ever used" and does not have any data around REGULAR use (which is what everybody is concerned about). It also doesn't address the use of nicotine (versus 0-nic) use at all, assuming they all contain nicotine.

Why is the FDA completely ignoring the studies and data coming out of the UK? Cancer Research UK did a study of 1,205 children aged 11-16 that showed the complete opposite of what American ANTZ groups are touting, and has detail that the CDC data doesn't. Only 12% have tried one, 2% regularly use more than monthly and 1% use more than weekly. From the summary:

Professor Linda Bauld, Cancer Research UK scientist at the University of Stirling , said: "There's a common perception that the rise we've seen in the use of electronic cigarettes will lead to a new generation of adults who have never smoked but are dependent on nicotine. This fear is based on the expectation that due to the appeal of the products, children who have never used tobacco will be attracted to e-cigarettes and start to use them regularly.

"Our survey is in line with others in the different parts of the UK that show this is not happening. Young people are certainly experimenting with e-cigarettes, some of which do contain nicotine. However, our data show that at the moment this experimentation is not translating into regular use."

So, CFTFK and ALA, why is this data being ignored? Simple... it doesn't fit their rhetoric and can be easily disposed of as not applying to American children.

My study shows that american teens are completely disinterested in vaping but did try cigarettes once but it was to blow smoke rings. My sample size was of 1 and he's now 19 and doesn't vape or smoke. Outside of the scope of the study, none of his friends seemed that interested in vaping either.

 

[bigdancehawk]

I did, and also commented - my original comment was:



But they kept deleting it. You can guess who left the second comment calling them out on it, if that hasn't also been deleted.

Both of your perfectly truthful and polite comments are gone. My little reply to what some jackass said remains for some reason, maybe because yours was more persuasive.

 

[wiredlove]

Both of your perfectly truthful and polite comments are gone. My little reply to what some jackass said remains for some reason, maybe because yours was more persuasive.

Yeah, I've seen that same person commenting on other articles with the same line of bull about embalming fluid. I seethe every time I see it, especially since the source study is incorrectly being repeated and was wrong to begin with - so much so, that I believe one of the researchers expressed regret about even having published their findings.

 

[Endor]

Both of your perfectly truthful and polite comments are gone. My little reply to what some jackass said remains for some reason, maybe because yours was more persuasive.

When I've commented on news stories in the past, I found that adding links to your comment will often either a) delay the post, or b) result in the post never showing up. I think it's an anti-spam thing.

 

[bigdancehawk]

Yeah, I've seen that same person commenting on other articles with the same line of bull about embalming fluid. I seethe every time I see it, especially since the source study is incorrectly being repeated and was wrong to begin with - so much so, that I believe one of the researchers expressed regret about even having published their findings.

Scary reports about such things as formaldehyde draw headlines, clicks and retweets. Retractions and corrections rarely get any attention at all.

 

[bigdancehawk]

When I've commented on news stories in the past, I found that adding links to your comment will often either a) delay the post, or b) result in the post never showing up. I think it's an anti-spam thing.

Must have some robot screening comments.

 

[wiredlove]

When I've commented on news stories in the past, I found that adding links to your comment will often either a) delay the post, or b) result in the post never showing up. I think it's an anti-spam thing.

Yeah, I had tried reposting w/out the links. It posted and then was deleted within a couple of minutes.

 

[phephner]

Nevermind.

 

[bigdancehawk]

Yeah, I had tried reposting w/out the links. It posted and then was deleted within a couple of minutes.

You're a marked man (or woman) now. Try posting a mac & cheese recipe on a Yahoo cooking site and we'll see what happens.

 

[VNeil]

Yeah, I had tried reposting w/out the links. It posted and then was deleted within a couple of minutes.

Thus proving the media is not stupid, lazy or just compliant...

 

[wiredlove]

You're a marked man (or woman) now. Try posting a mac & cheese recipe on a Yahoo cooking site and we'll see what happens.

last time I checked I was still male. "Nicotine and Formaldehyde Mac and Cheese a la Wired" think that'd make it through?

 

[crxess]

Gawd you kids and your urban slang, making me Google your posts.

Thank you , Pushing 63yrs

The point of this story is this: we have assumed that because someone vapes that they understand what is at stake. Don't make this assumption; you see someone vaping bring it up!! 9 million is a strong political number which cannot be ignored but if 8.5 million don't even know how much the world has changed since 05/05/16 then why in the world would a politician stick their neck out for us? No politician does anything "because it's right". TALK TO EVERYONE!!

Doubtful mush more than 20% of Vapers in the US are even casually aware.

That's a no brainer. You purchase another freezer just for vape supplies.

Unintended Economic Boost

Agreed. Although I will agree that removal of flavors with the original deeming release was certainly a minor win for us, I contend that the FDA will be under tremendous pressure from these ANTZ groups to release updated regulations to ban flavors later on down the road.

Needs to go to a court of law. Free Speech vs. Slanderous accusations.
ADULT Product - Age Restricted
Adult Advertising - Age Restricted

Sort of makes Made to Attract Children - B.S.

*thought of the day*

What do Lobbying Groups and terrorist have in common?

Both use Children when it fits their Aganda

 

[Jorge22]

Ok. When this came out I sent the FDA an email. I wasn't exactly gentle. I'd forgotten all about it by now.

Their answer has just arrived:

"Thank you for contacting the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regarding its recently finalized rule, “Deeming Tobacco Products to be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, as Amended by the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act” (Deeming rule). It matters to us to hear how these products affect everyone, and your view is important in providing another perspective.


You may be interested to know that the FDA Center for Tobacco Products is responsible for carrying out the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, which Congress passed in 2009. This law—commonly called the Tobacco Control Act—gives us broad authority to regulate the manufacturing, distribution, and marketing of tobacco products. The FDA’s mandate is to protect Americans from tobacco-related disease and death. Ultimately, we hope that regulating all tobacco products will have a positive impact on public health. That is the motivation for finalizing the rule.


We appreciate every comment that we receive and hope that you find this information useful. Thanks again for taking the time to share your thoughts with us."

So, it's "tobacco products". Same thing here. You take something, call it a "tobacco product" and that's it.

 

[crxess]

Yeah, I had tried reposting w/out the links. It posted and then was deleted within a couple of minutes.

I have also posted and it seems to have been removed. I have posted a challenge to explain as I know for Fact I have not Violated Posting policy. I have been on Yahoo for over a Decade.

 

[VNeil]

I have also posted and it seems to have been removed. I have posted a challenge to explain as I know for Fact I have not Violated Posting policy. I have been on Yahoo for over a Decade.

 

[VNeil]

I have also posted and it seems to have been removed. I have posted a challenge to explain as I know for Fact I have not Violated Posting policy. I have been on Yahoo for over a Decade.

You Violated Their Point Of View

We're now an official Third World Banana Republic Dictatorship