Deeming Regulations have been released!!!!

[mcol]

I did tweet. I just didn't ask them to consider something. I stated it as a way I see Trump getting more support. Hillary is welcome to do the same thing. Neither is speaking to vaping right now. I think whatever one of them says, the other is likely to take the opposite position, but all this assumes either one of them has spoken about it. I just chose to cut to the chase because I truly believe if Trump tweeted something like, "the FDA rule on eCigs is preposterous. They obviously don't want to make America great again. When I become president, we will keep the FDA in check and defund such nonsense. I'm appalled at what they are doing to American businesses."

If he had that message, vapers would sit up and take notice. Trump haters might not budge much, but independent types I think would.

Trump HAS stated that he's never smoked nor drank alcohol, so I dunno. He probably
is clueless when it comes to vaping is my guess. But Corey is one of those in his camp
to tweet, there are a few others I can't remember who they are at the moment. Fingers
crossed.
Hillary on the other hand has stated recently she would like to go after soda with sin
taxes, and Bernie disagreed saying it would punish the poor people. Just fyi.

 

[crxess]

Time to vote OUT all career politicians and also the ones who are nothing but shills for big gov't. There's a place for regulations and this is not it.

Career Political positions should have been Summarily Banned Decades ago. This is exactly what leads to Governmental Dictatorship.
The Few Controlling, rather than Serving the many.

If Two terms is good enough for a Countries Leader, it is good enough for the Rest of the Governing body.

 

[Kent C]

The FDA's New Tobacco Rules Will Be Terrible for Cigar Smokers Too

This, rather than ecigs, may be the determining factor of passing the Appropriations bill with the change in grandfather date.

 

[Jman8]

Woohoo, we cracked the 100 page mark! In about a half a week.

 

[sparkky1]

I did tweet. I just didn't ask them to consider something. I stated it as a way I see Trump getting more support. Hillary is welcome to do the same thing. Neither is speaking to vaping right now. I think whatever one of them says, the other is likely to take the opposite position, but all this assumes either one of them has spoken about it. I just chose to cut to the chase because I truly believe if Trump tweeted something like, "the FDA rule on eCigs is preposterous. They obviously don't want to make America great again. When I become president, we will keep the FDA in check and defund such nonsense. I'm appalled at what they are doing to American businesses."

If he had that message, vapers would sit up and take notice. Trump haters might not budge much, but independent types I think would.

Exactly ! We are an industry and he is an industry mogul, if those words ever came out of his mouth ( of the ladder part of your post ) that would only be a positive blow ..........

 

[drysprocket]

10,000,000 vapors, 10% know advocacy, the rest aren't even aware of the situation people

Yeah, this is the truly terrifying part. I'm trying to be patient...but I really hoped to wake up today and see some sort of plan in place to at least get the word out.

I sort of audited my local vape shop yesterday. Not a word about anything to me. They just sold me some juice and let me leave. I sort of lingered..."anything else goin on?" The guy mentioned some new flavors and seemed to have no clue.

I then got home and saw a prominent youtuber (with 90k subs) with another new review who has yet to mention anything yet, but just keeps on doing business as usual.

Things aren't looking promising.

 

[teemae]

Just sent a tweet to @ realDonaldTrump. Stated "I want to know where you stand inre vaping, FDA deeming and regulations...I vote, I Vape

Be interesting to see if I get a response

 

[Jazzman]

It looks like we also have a new "protected" class of people called young adults. Described by the FDA as between 18 and 29. It's no longer just for the children, it's for anyone under 30 that we must protect. Listed on page 185 of the regs under the cigar section. Here is an excerpt of a comment and response from the regs on pages 189-190.

"(Comment 94) A few comments also stated that premium cigar use among young adults
is irrelevant because Congress did not task FDA with protecting young adults who are lawfully
permitted to purchase tobacco products.

(Response) FDA is concerned with tobacco use by all age groups, including young adults
and adults who may lawfully purchase these products. The Tobacco Control Act charges FDA
with protecting the public health generally, not only the health of minors (section 3 of the
Tobacco Control Act). Nevertheless, FDA is particularly concerned with tobacco use by youth
and young adults, as they are uniquely more susceptible to becoming addicted to nicotine than
adults or older smokers. As discussed in the NPRM, most tobacco users begin using prior to the
age of 18 and believing they will be able to quit. However, most youth are unable to stop
tobacco use once they become addicted. Accordingly, FDA is taking steps to reduce the
potential harm to youth and young adults from tobacco products."

The way I was raised when you turn 18 you are a grown-assed adult and responsible for your own actions and decisions. But I guess the FDA figures we need to extend protected class status to anyone under 30.

The good news- it's no longer just about the children.

The bad news- we need to extend the protected class of people to close to half life expectancy.

Really FDA?

 

[sparkky1]

Yeah, this is the truly terrifying part. I'm trying to be patient...but I really hoped to wake up today and see some sort of plan in place to at least get the word out.

I sort of audited my local vape shop yesterday. Not a word about anything to me. They just sold me some juice and let me leave. I sort of lingered..."anything else goin on?" The guy mentioned some new flavors and seemed to have no clue.

I then got home and saw a prominent youtuber (with 90k subs) with another new review who has yet to mention anything yet, but just keeps on doing business as usual.

Things aren't looking promising.

I'm afraid your going to have to use social media to get to the numbers faster

 

[sparkky1]

Just sent a tweet to @ realDonaldTrump. Stated "I want to know where you stand inre vaping, FDA deeming and regulations...I vote, I Vape

Be interesting to see if I get a response

Awesome !
How about any of your friends ?
Also send one here Corey Lewandowski (@CLewandowski_) | Twitter

 

[ZeroedIn]

I agree. Plus, the SFATA teleconference took place at 9am Friday. Even if they did have a team of legal experts go over the documents, there is no way that they were able to determine that a lawsuit could not be won in that amount of time.

CASAA stated on their site that it will take a team several days to go through all of it and decipher all 499 pages.

I am a member of CASAA, I joined last year. Now, I'm thinking about how much I can afford to donate to them to fight off this tyranny.

 

[mcol]

Just sent a tweet to @ realDonaldTrump. Stated "I want to know where you stand inre vaping, FDA deeming and regulations...I vote, I Vape

Be interesting to see if I get a response

And I just tweeted to Corey.
Every now and again during a lull in the days I tweet to a few to try
to get a response.

 

[Kent C]

While taxes are probably a part of the equation, the real push for these rules came from BP/BT. THEY are the ones losing market share to vaping.

BP and BG mostly. BT is gaining market share with their ecig lines with cig sales basically flat for more than a decade (falling more recently). The States, via MSA and cig taxes are losing big time as well. The MSA bonds that the states sold (figuring on an infinitely stable market) are now junk and some states may have to pay out of general funds to pay for them.

 

[zoiDman]

Yeah, this is the truly terrifying part. I'm trying to be patient...but I really hoped to wake up today and see some sort of plan in place to at least get the word out.

I sort of audited my local vape shop yesterday. Not a word about anything to me. They just sold me some juice and let me leave. I sort of lingered..."anything else goin on?" The guy mentioned some new flavors and seemed to have no clue.

I then got home and saw a prominent youtuber (with 90k subs) with another new review who has yet to mention anything yet, but just keeps on doing business as usual.

Things aren't looking promising.

I Hate to Tell you this. But Many B&M's owner's know Exactly what is going on. And how Devastating it will be for their Vapers.

But Refuse to Inform their customers for fear they will Learn to do DIY. And see that it is Orders of Magnitude cheaper than buying "House Brand" B&M e-Liquids.

 

[sparkky1]

I vote, I vape
I love it
I think that will leave an inpresionable mark with

Corey Lewandowski

 

[ZeroedIn]

"Kristin Noll-Marsh is a Tobacco Harm Reduction activist and advocacy leader in Wisconsin.
She is a founding director of CASAA; elected by popular vote to the first board of directors
in 2009 and has served as vice president since 2011. Her ongoing efforts on behalf of CASAA
include member outreach; public service announcements; designing t-shirts, graphics and other
promotional materials; setting up and administrating CASAA's website, web store, email
system, phone app and social media outlets, such as Facebook and Twitter; and creating RSS
feeds and newsletters. She also writes and edits the many of the posts for the official CASAA
news blog and Calls to Action, and assists with writing and sending official press releases."

Thank you for this information. I wasn't aware that she was with CASAA.

Still, public outrage and speaking up, in various forms, is what sway opinions. Yes, I signed petitions and e-mailed legislators even before these regulations were released. I do not see how continuing to do so, or having others do so to even increase the numbers more, would hurt. Maybe someone can explain that to me?

 

[Jman8]

(Response) FDA is concerned with tobacco use by all age groups, including young adults
and adults who may lawfully purchase these products. The Tobacco Control Act charges FDA
with protecting the public health generally, not only the health of minors (section 3 of the
Tobacco Control Act). Nevertheless, FDA is particularly concerned with tobacco use by youth
and young adults, as they are uniquely more susceptible to becoming addicted to nicotine than
adults or older smokers. As discussed in the NPRM, most tobacco users begin using prior to the
age of 18 and believing they will be able to quit. However, most youth are unable to stop
tobacco use once they become addicted. Accordingly, FDA is taking steps to reduce the
potential harm to youth and young adults from tobacco products."

To me, this appears like a huge gamble the FDA is willing to take on the science of everything. If data bears out that non-smoking, non-leaf using tobacco users are not getting addicted, then FDA will have lost credibility with average folks. Obviously, they lost credibility with knowledgable vapers a long time ago. Right now, they can make this sort of assertion (that tobacco users start before 18 and are unable to quit) and people can see that as accurate. Never mind all the vapers who started smoking before age 18, tried every possible method to quit, weren't able to, but then DID when vaping came along. Average person may not be privy to that data. But long term data would have to show that all the young people who started vaping (or even dual using) in 2010 or later continued to be hopelessly addicted to tobacco products, for their response/justification to be seen as scientifically accurate.

The fact that many youth are currently vaping 0% nic eLiquids doesn't bode too well for the FDA going forward.

 

[Kent C]

I agree. Plus, the SFATA teleconference took place at 9am Friday. Even if they did have a team of legal experts go over the documents, there is no way that they were able to determine that a lawsuit could not be won in that amount of time.

I agree - total BS - or a desire to be part of the regulatory process. I suspect many of us will be contributing toward a lawsuit - perhaps brought by pro-vape lawyer Azim Chowdhury.

Keller Heckman | Professionals | Azim Chowdhury

" Mr. Chowdhury has also developed expertise in tobacco and e-vapor product regulation relating to the implementation of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, and spearheaded the FDA Tobacco and Electronic Cigarette practice at Keller and Heckman. Specifically, Mr. Chowdhury has experience representing tobacco, e-cigarette and e-liquid manufacturers, suppliers and trade associations in matters of FDA regulatory and corporate compliance."

Q&A: Keller Heckman's Azim Chowdhury on FDA e-cigarette rules
password protected for full access of the link

 

[Jman8]

Still, public outrage and speaking up, in various forms, is what sway opinions. Yes, I signed petitions and e-mailed legislators even before these regulations were released. I do not see how continuing to do so, or having others do so to even increase the numbers more, would hurt. Maybe someone can explain that to me?

It won't hurt. The question is will it help? And reasonable follow up question is, if the likes of you realize it doesn't help, will you be willing to help with the next call to action after realizing your first steps to petition an administration that is responsible for signing FSPTCA into law, didn't result in anything you had hoped for?

I think all of us would like to believe petitions could work, but thus far we haven't had any indication they might.

If I suggested we all pray to Thor for the next 50 days to help us with this mess. And we earnestly do that, but it appears to get worse, would people then listen to my next bright idea for how we can overcome this situation?

Incidentally, I think praying to Thor right now would be more effective than petitioning Obama's WH.

 

[Jazzman]

Any discdiscussions of future harm were part of the comment period. There is a supposed path in the deeming regs but health,safety and the chillin' concerns trump whether or not they regs are to.much of a burden and or you have to drop out of the market because of the burdens. In either case one is out of the picture with out legal recourse.
Regards
Mike

OK, but there is a rather lengthy section of the regs Section XVIII: Analysis of Impacts that if you can wrap your head around the gov-speak describes this pretty clearly I think.