That is How I Understand it Also.
And it could Also get passed to Congress for a Rubber Stamping, Hit the President Desk for a quick John Hancock and then be Off to the Federal Registry lickety-split.
Deeming Regulations have been released!!!!
- Thread starter Oliver
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
That is How I Understand it Also.
And it could Also get passed to Congress for a Rubber Stamping, Hit the President Desk for a quick John Hancock and then be Off to the Federal Registry lickety-split.
There are many--most nicotine base vendors carry one:
Nude Nicotine Test Kit - HIGH RESOLUTION - Nude Nicotine
Or check the forum for "nicotine titration." Plenty of advice, including from Kurt!
Played poker with friends tonight. Long time friends. I always vape at poker, am the only one that does, never been an issue. Wasn't tonight. Chose to not make FDA politics my topic of conversation, but certainly not opposed to discussing it. Just felt it didn't have to come up as open conversation, from me.
My dual using self was out later having a smoke with friend (who rarely smokes, but the occasional flavored cigar), and was talking to him a tiny bit about Final Rule. He was at least moderately curious. Told him, if I find out Trump supports eCigs, I can see me voting for him, which he found interesting (and so do I) and a few puffs later and we were done (discussing).
Later, at the table, one of my poker buddies, also a (cigarette) smoker asks me what I think about the FDA ruling. Most of me was ready to reply all politely about it while holding back oodles of near boiling point anger. Oh, I perhaps should also mention this friend is a highly expressive liberal. Before I say anything, the cigar smoking friend says, oh you don't want to ask Jman, he said he'd vote for Trump. Another buddy, sitting right next to me is like, yeah Jman posted a rant on his Facebook page.
And still this 'friend' has the nerve to say the FDA Ruling is probably a good thing considering how dangerous they are.
That pretty much got on my last nerve.
It's not like he hit on the - no really, those things could be bad for you - point just once or twice.
And it's not like I haven't had umpteen dozen conversations with these guys about all things vaping. But I get if you're non-vaper, you really don't know. They could be deadly for all you know. Yet, if you're a vaper, you kinda sorta know. Or put more correctly, you truly do know about 58 times more than the non-vaper will ever care to know.
Over the course of about an hour, we had a few minor exchanges on the topic, all initiated by him. Sure enough, there was a point where I went off. Curse words flying, passionate, heated debate. It was unpretty, but for sure necessary.
I honestly think the whole thing comes down to he hates Trump that much.
It really felt political for me. That same feeling I've had before where cornerstone of my beliefs was being tortured/poked at, at perhaps exactly the worst time.
I've been a proud non-voter for 2 decades running. But yeah, I would vote this time if Trump gave pretty good indication he favored vaping rights. Would love to hear him saying disparaging remarks, like only Trump can, about the FDA and/or Final Rule. That right there would probably have him convince me that it can't hurt to vote for him.
But we got a long way to go before that, and for me the Trump factor is interesting, but has a good 2% chance of working. I'd love to see that percentage go higher.
Just feels like war to me right now, I guess.
I think it behooves every non-vaper and anti-vaper to not express 'how dangerous eCigs are' while anywhere within 30 feet of a vaper. At least for the next 3 weeks. Especially if we are not the people initiating the discussion. If we live in a truly civilized society, that ought not to happen.
And if it does.....
Light fuse,
And get away.
My dual using self was out later having a smoke with friend (who rarely smokes, but the occasional flavored cigar), and was talking to him a tiny bit about Final Rule. He was at least moderately curious. Told him, if I find out Trump supports eCigs, I can see me voting for him, which he found interesting (and so do I) and a few puffs later and we were done (discussing).
Later, at the table, one of my poker buddies, also a (cigarette) smoker asks me what I think about the FDA ruling. Most of me was ready to reply all politely about it while holding back oodles of near boiling point anger. Oh, I perhaps should also mention this friend is a highly expressive liberal. Before I say anything, the cigar smoking friend says, oh you don't want to ask Jman, he said he'd vote for Trump. Another buddy, sitting right next to me is like, yeah Jman posted a rant on his Facebook page.
And still this 'friend' has the nerve to say the FDA Ruling is probably a good thing considering how dangerous they are.
That pretty much got on my last nerve.
It's not like he hit on the - no really, those things could be bad for you - point just once or twice.
And it's not like I haven't had umpteen dozen conversations with these guys about all things vaping. But I get if you're non-vaper, you really don't know. They could be deadly for all you know. Yet, if you're a vaper, you kinda sorta know. Or put more correctly, you truly do know about 58 times more than the non-vaper will ever care to know.
Over the course of about an hour, we had a few minor exchanges on the topic, all initiated by him. Sure enough, there was a point where I went off. Curse words flying, passionate, heated debate. It was unpretty, but for sure necessary.
I honestly think the whole thing comes down to he hates Trump that much.
It really felt political for me. That same feeling I've had before where cornerstone of my beliefs was being tortured/poked at, at perhaps exactly the worst time.
I've been a proud non-voter for 2 decades running. But yeah, I would vote this time if Trump gave pretty good indication he favored vaping rights. Would love to hear him saying disparaging remarks, like only Trump can, about the FDA and/or Final Rule. That right there would probably have him convince me that it can't hurt to vote for him.
But we got a long way to go before that, and for me the Trump factor is interesting, but has a good 2% chance of working. I'd love to see that percentage go higher.
Just feels like war to me right now, I guess.
I think it behooves every non-vaper and anti-vaper to not express 'how dangerous eCigs are' while anywhere within 30 feet of a vaper. At least for the next 3 weeks. Especially if we are not the people initiating the discussion. If we live in a truly civilized society, that ought not to happen.
And if it does.....
Light fuse,
And get away.
As far as I understand, that's unnecessay, and would have the same effect as Congress doing nothing.
Yes. I got mine off Ebay. I test a bottle that I have had stored for a little more than 5 years now about 2 x per year. Still the same as when I put it there.
True. Same Effect.
But How Long does Congress have to Do Nothing on this before it reverts to a "Pass"?
Wait for it... Wait for it... 90 Days? LOL.
If Trump takes up the cause, it could help, but it could also hurt.
Sorry you had to go though all that. Shouldn't be this way.
So if wrapping my own coils makes me a tobacco manufacturer, am I eligible for fat govt. subsidies?
I get what you're saying. So a quick rubber-stamping, if they can do that, would move the process along faster.
Only if you write papers on how terrible coil wraps are, and how they should be banned, and they were tested in a bucket of rocket fuel, and gave off toxic fumes, and think of the children......So if wrapping my own coils makes me a tobacco manufacturer, am I eligible for fat govt. subsidies?
Hey, was doing some in depth late night reading. Digest this and tell me if you think this means what I think it might mean:
(Comment 26) Many comments stated that a requirement to prepare PMTAs for all of the many parts and components that go into some of the newly deemed tobacco products would create an effective ban of these products.
(Response) The definition of a tobacco product includes components and parts, and these products are subject to the automatic provisions of the FD&C Act, including premarket authorization requirements. However, at this time, FDA intends to limit enforcement of the premarket authorization provisions to finished tobacco products. In this context, a finished tobacco product refers to a tobacco product, including all components and parts, sealed in final packaging intended for consumer use (e.g., filters or filter tubes sold separately to consumers or as part of kits). For example, an e-liquid sealed in final packaging that is to be sold or distributed to a consumer for use in a finished tobacco product will be subject to enforcement if it is on the market without authorization. In contrast, an e-liquid that is sold or distributed for further
manufacturing into a finished ENDS product is not itself a finished tobacco product. At this time, FDA does not intend to enforce the premarket authorization requirements against such eliquids or other components and parts of newly deemed products that are sold or distributed solely for further manufacturing without a marketing order.
(Comment 26) Many comments stated that a requirement to prepare PMTAs for all of the many parts and components that go into some of the newly deemed tobacco products would create an effective ban of these products.
(Response) The definition of a tobacco product includes components and parts, and these products are subject to the automatic provisions of the FD&C Act, including premarket authorization requirements. However, at this time, FDA intends to limit enforcement of the premarket authorization provisions to finished tobacco products. In this context, a finished tobacco product refers to a tobacco product, including all components and parts, sealed in final packaging intended for consumer use (e.g., filters or filter tubes sold separately to consumers or as part of kits). For example, an e-liquid sealed in final packaging that is to be sold or distributed to a consumer for use in a finished tobacco product will be subject to enforcement if it is on the market without authorization. In contrast, an e-liquid that is sold or distributed for further
manufacturing into a finished ENDS product is not itself a finished tobacco product. At this time, FDA does not intend to enforce the premarket authorization requirements against such eliquids or other components and parts of newly deemed products that are sold or distributed solely for further manufacturing without a marketing order.
Thanks for the last part. Appreciate it.
But gotta ask how it would hurt if Trump (or any presidential candidate) took up the cause?
I understand that part my wondering is....so, who is overseeing/monitoring thousands of retail vape shops after the 90 day period and over the next 2 years to make sure no new products are entering the market from overseas or that they are not making new eliquid flavors? How is that being implemented?
Well my point is that it does not really matter to the FDA how easy it is to prove. I mean vaping has already proven to be healthier than smoking by users and the FDA completely ignored all legitimate science already.
They can make any device, liquid, or component subject to their whim and whatever proof they seem fit to deem necessary. If nothing else they can force a manufactuer to suspend sales until they make a decision which can take as long as they want... Likely forever.
There are no checks and balances here. All they have to do is drop a ban hammer, for any reason, and its done. Proof of market existence or not.
Your liberal friend's reaction is a sign of what could possibly happen if Trump turns vape supporter. I keep seeing people in the media ready to attack things because Trump supports them. Kinda like many people seem to be automatically against anything Obama supports.
I like the way you're thinking. Especially with the highlighted part.
I don't see how science, as we know it, doesn't take a big hit over what we human (vapers) are currently experiencing. IMO, science of the non-FDA variety has to come through for us or science as I understand it, may be a myth. In reality, it already has come through for us. But I mean in a monumental way. The legal, political and economic (black market) fight are all fine and good, but the science aspect of this could change things really fast if science were being vocal and honest. Sure that's vaper spin, but we clearly live in a world where pseudo-scientific propaganda coupled with unplausible denial is allowed to be operating under the umbrella of 'science.'
And if I were practicing scientist, I'd be offended. As human being who understands science, I'm a little more than offended. I'm thinking science takes a huge hit over this if it allows the likes of FDA and CDC to be its only voice.
Similar threads
- Locked
