Deeming Regulations have been released!!!!

[Lessifer]

Here, I'll quote more of what you said:

The first 2007 you typed must have been a typo, and I figure you meant to type 2009. You replied to me as though I had quoted the 2nd 2007 in your paragraph, but I had quoted the first one (bolded above).

So, no, they weren't marketed widely all over the world in 2007, and yes there is a problem finding a predicate, and no, they weren't fully technologically developed at that time.

I believe Katya is saying that in 2007 cigarettes were widely marketed, and so had no problem with the predicate date, which is true. Ecigs on the other hand didn't really exist then, and so there are no real predicate products, which is also true.

My argument is that aside from the predicate date, which isn't really "part" of the regulation(it was a bone given to the tobacco companies), the regulations for cigs and ecigs are nearly identical. So from the view of the FDA, all ecig products are mislabeled tobacco products, all new, all supposed to go through PMTA according to the FSPTCA. I actually can't fault the logic in that IF you consider ecigs to be tobacco products. That doesn't mean the TCA regulations aren't ridiculous in and of themselves, but that's a separate issue.

I, however, don't believe ecigs ARE a tobacco product, so applying the same regulations to them is wrong.

 

[nicnik]

Actually she is correct. Once Ecigs were deemed a tobacco product, which is what they just did, they automatically fell under the 2007 date just as cigarettes are. That is the 'reason' that the FDA Claims they cannot change the date and it has to go through congress to get changed.

So you, too, are saying that they were marketed all over the world in 2007, and no problem finding predicates?

Edit. Never mind. I'm sorry, I see that I didn't read that right. Cigs, not ecigs. Oops.

 

[Robino1]

So you, too, are saying that they were marketed all over the world in 2007, and no problem finding predicates?

Edit. Never mind. I'm sorry, I see that I didn't read that right. Cigs, not ecigs. Oops.

That's ok. This whole thing just is insane and we are desperate to find Something, Anything that can help.

 

[Sir Kadly]

So you, too, are saying that they were marketed all over the world in 2007, and no problem finding predicates?

Edit. Never mind. I'm sorry, I see that I didn't read that right. Cigs, not ecigs. Oops.

Edit, due to your edit.

 

[zoiDman]

Doesn't a Predicate Product have to have been Sold in a US Market?

A predicate tobacco product is one that was commercially marketed in the United States (other than in a test market) as of Feb. 15, 2007, or a product previously found to be substantially equivalent by FDA and in compliance with the requirements of the Food Drug & Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act).

Substantial Equivalence

 

[nicnik]

I think in the bolded part you're reading 'cigarettes' as ecigarettes.

Yup. Another goof up, and another point in favor a my slow and tedious way of reading and posting, rather than trying to be more speedy, as I've been considering trying.

 

[Kent C]

Yup. Another goof up, and another point in favor a my slow and tedious way of reading and posting, rather than trying to be more speedy, as I've been considering trying.

I wondered that on your first reply to Katya, but dropped it. Everyone has those moments.... I did on "naïve" in the one sense you pointed out, but not in the second sense in my reply above.

 

[nicnik]

I thought it was funny.



I watched the Colbert clip a couple of days ago, but honestly, it didn't hold my attention. He's a comedian, so I take everything he says as an attempt at humor. He doesn't seem as funny as he used to be.

Samantha Bee's show did a vaping story:
Samantha Bee: Big Tobacco vs Little Vape

 

[rosesense]

Edit: wrong forum

 

[Kent C]

Pardon if this has already been posted

Tobacco tax bill advances in House of Delegates

That part is more appropriate for this forum, which I didn't see posted yet:

Legislation News

on the new sponsors :- )

 

[r055co]

I don't trust one bit what will come from our bought and paid for Government will enact. The last 6+ months I've been prepping, I've got a freezer of 100mg nic and this is part of my stash.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

 

[nicnik]

Edit: wrong forum

Really good to see!

Too bad, the proposal that included exempting smokeless failed, though. No Tobacco Harm Reduction products should be taxed heavily.

 

[nicnik]

I don't trust one bit what will come from our bought and paid for Government will enact. The last 6+ months I've been prepping, I've got a freezer of 100mg nic and this is part of my stash.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

May you live to be 120. I'd hate to see any of it go to waste.

 

[YoursTruli]

You guys are reading too much into it. First off there are too many "leaves". Look a little less tainted at it and you'll see that it's a poor attempt at making the vapor look like a firework. Goes along with the RWB atty/mod. Just overall poor execution of a rather unique idea.

I don't think they are reading too much into it and it's no mistake it looks like a seven pointed leaf... even the spokesperson from the FDA has thrown the "leaf" card out of the table connecting it to vaping and it has been the highlight of many teens using vaping to vape "leaf" connections in the new as of late, just one more part of a smear campaign.

 

[MaxwellPink]

I don't think they are reading too much into it and it's no mistake it looks like a seven pointed leaf... even the spokesperson from the FDA has thrown the "leaf" card out of the table connecting it to vaping and it has been the highlight of many teens using vaping to vape "leaf" connections in the new as of late, just one more part of a smear campaign.

I'm assuming we're talking about the Newsweek magazine? I think it was Newsweek, at least. I was appalled when I saw the cover. Browsed through it and it's more of the same. Disappointing.

 

[bigdancehawk]

I don't think they are reading too much into it and it's no mistake it looks like a seven pointed leaf... even the spokesperson from the FDA has thrown the "leaf" card out of the table connecting it to vaping and it has been the highlight of many teens using vaping to vape "leaf" connections in the new as of late, just one more part of a smear campaign.

Maybe next they'll try to ban brownies.

 

[retired1]

Let's be careful where we go with this please.

Why we don't allow drug talk

 

[YoursTruli]

I guess it makes sense in the larger scheme of deeming next step, aiming for closed systems... the spokesperson from the FDA used the argument as a counter to teen vaping when it was stated by Greg Conley that the majority % of teens who have tried vaping used nicotine free eliquid, that nicotine can be removed from eliquids making them nicotine free.... the spokesperson for the FDA responded if someone can easily take something out of eliquid, such as nicotine, they can also easily put something into eliquid... she wanted to be sure that point was out there, plus, the big push on reporting teen use in the news as of late.... I honestly see it as the fuel for their next agenda, closed systems, because honestly if you look back the opposition has always laid their cards out on the table as to what they are aiming for if you listened close enough.

 

[zoiDman]

... the spokesperson for the FDA responded if someone can easily take something out of eliquid, such as nicotine, they can also easily put something into eliquid. ...

Unfortunately, this is going to be one of the Greatest Hurdles to keeping Open Systems on the Market.

 

[YoursTruli]

I do not see how the FDA can have full control over eliquids if thy are allowed to be sold by the bottle for open systems. If presently per the new rules you have to have approval for each flavor/each nic level and so on, there is no possible way to control changes in eliquid other than to make vaping systems one complete closed unit eliquid included.