So, surely the FDA will grant one or two uninspiring vaping devices, built from the ground up, that are likely highly "medicalized," have tiny liquid capacities and most certainly will be lacking in ascetics, and overall desirability. A sort of "there, you got something." If so, the irony being that they will probably be less sophisticated, capable and "safe" as, say, a DNA 200 (let's say the DNA chip on their review table would hypothetically be limited to 30 watts to leave high power out of the equation). My prediction of the FDA's offering likely not being as "safe," is in the sense of temperature control not overheating and releasing undesired components in the e-liquid. I somehow suspect a mature chip like the DNA, or similar, would outperform whatever the FDA oversees, approves, funds or nurtures.
My question is, does anyone expect even one license will be granted for, and let's get specific, a DNA 200 device (say in a lower wattage form factor)? Let's also assume a paired tank with this device is under 2ml and not a cloud chucker, reasonable and modest in all respects and is of high material and manufacturing quality.
I keep having this negative, cynical, defeatist attitude that the approval process may not even allow one current, best-of-class device on the market (not even if simply wattage limited).
Because if one such device gets the green light, it opens the door to "substantial equivalency" claims and potentially unravels all the hard work the FDA has done to (presumably, and in my opinion) kill the industry.
I seem to recall reading a quote from the FDA front guy, when asked a similar question, saying something along the lines of "we can't predict and will have to see the testing results on a case-by-case basis." (paraphrasing)
Yeah, right.
