Does this seem right to you?

[AndriaD]

As far as I know, VG is considered an alcohol.
Same as PG is.

If I'm wrong, which I don't think I am, please let me know.

Which is why both propylene glycOL and glycerOL end in -ol. Fortunately neither is like enough to ethanol to cause my liver any problems, nor the part of my brain that became sensitized to it.

Andria

 

[caramel]

It is basically what is happening in America today.

It was a lawyer's conspiracy to bring it to this situation.

 

[caramel]

the term use to be a derivative of, pre-ecig.
its now derived from. as in copying,mimicking,
replacing,taking the place of in whole or part.
derivative of and,derived from do not mean the same
thing.
biodegradable plastic bags are a derived from the
plastic bag even though there is no plastic in them.
plastic is a derivative of oil.
e-cigarettes are derived from the tobacco product
the cigarette which is a derivative of tobacco.
regards
mike

Nicotine extracted from tobacco is a tobacco product.

Based on this thinking pattern, I'm wondering what kind of product Dr. Antz is.

 

[bluecat]

It was a lawyer's conspiracy to bring it to this situation.

Nah.. not possible. Attorneys are only looking out for your welfare... not a CA lawsuit.

 

[Lessifer]

why do you think they are switching to the term
tobacco products. when the CDC released there
underage youth study of cigarette and e-cig use
they did not say cigarette use was at a record low
9.xx%,they said the use of tobacco products is
about the same and rising.tobacco products.
regards
mike

To Included products that have an Ingredient that is Derived from Tobacco Plants. That is what the word "Deem" is for in "Deeming".

Hey... If you Believe that the FDA can Regulate products that Can't Legally be "Deemed" a Tobacco Product and then Enforce Regulations using the FSTCA, That cool.

I have some Patio Chairs to Re-Web.

I guess we'll just have to Disagree.

At the recent FDA conference the switched to the phrase Nocotine Use, and many of the surveys in the studies, especially concerning teens, never asked if nicotine was actually IN the e-cigarettes being used.

I'm pretty sure the goal of the deeming is to deem e-liquid, and any device used to vaporize it, nicotine or no, as a tobacco product. Once that happens, they don't have to quibble over the details.

 

[AndriaD]

At the recent FDA conference the switched to the phrase Nocotine Use, and many of the surveys in the studies, especially concerning teens, never asked if nicotine was actually IN the e-cigarettes being used.

I'm pretty sure the goal of the deeming is to deem e-liquid, and any device used to vaporize it, nicotine or no, as a tobacco product. Once that happens, they don't have to quibble over the details.

And I'm pretty sure that the reason for that hasn't one ONE IOTA to do with health, public use, clouds, cartoons on the eliquid, or what the ANTZ think... IT'S ALL ABOUT THE MONEY!!!!!!!!

Andria

 

[spacekitty]

I don't know where you're from but hello kitty hasn't been for kids since it came out

IDK if you have any kids (especially girls!!) but when is the last time you were in a Sanrio store???

 

[zoiDman]

I'm pretty sure the goal of the deeming is to deem e-liquid,

Yeah... That's a Big Part of it.

and any device used to vaporize it, nicotine or no, as a tobacco product. Once that happens, they don't have to quibble over the details.

If there is No "Tobacco Product" included with a PV, and there is No Marketing implying that the PV is being sold to Vaporize a Tobacco Product, under what Authority does the FDA have to Regulate this product?

 

[Lessifer]

Yeah... That's a Big Part of it.



If there is No "Tobacco Product" included with a PV, and there is No Marketing implying that the PV is being sold to Vaporize a Tobacco Product, under what Authority does the FDA have to Regulate this product?

There you go being all rational. Thinking back to the proposed deeming regs there was a section that seemed to hint at covering hardware, there was a very murky distinction between accessory and whatever else they called it. Like for a hookah, the tongs used to hold the charcoal would not be under regulation, the bowl that holds the tobacco would be.

According to the National Youth Tobacco Survey(and by extension the FDA), teen e-cigarette use has tripled, nowhere is the distinction made about 0mg vs nicotine e-liquid.

Will it hold up in court? Probably not, but first they'll get to take it away, put people out of business, and then someone is going to have to pay to fight to get it back.

 

[caramel]

If there is No "Tobacco Product" included with a PV, and there is No Marketing implying that the PV is being sold to Vaporize a Tobacco Product, under what Authority does the FDA have to Regulate this product?

Under the authority of Deeming. They can Deem anything they please. Like when they deemed ecigs to be a drug. And your only redress is through the courts.

 

[Lessifer]

This seems to be the one area where they realize that vaping is different, it's not just about the consumable, I fully believe their intention is to regulate the device as well. They just don't really know how to go about doing it yet.

 

[zoiDman]

There you go being all rational. Thinking back to the proposed deeming regs there was a section that seemed to hint at covering hardware, there was a very murky distinction between accessory and whatever else they called it. Like for a hookah, the tongs used to hold the charcoal would not be under regulation, the bowl that holds the tobacco would be.

According to the National Youth Tobacco Survey(and by extension the FDA), teen e-cigarette use has tripled, nowhere is the distinction made about 0mg vs nicotine e-liquid.

Will it hold up in court? Probably not, but first they'll get to take it away, put people out of business, and then someone is going to have to pay to fight to get it back.

It really Doesn't Matter what the FDA Wants to Do. Or What the FDA Would Like to Do. Or what people on Forums think the FDA might Do.

It Really comes down to what the FDA has the Legal Authority to Do.

I remember when all the Talk of Synthetic Nicotine was all the Rage. Mr. Zeller has been Very Clear that the FDA does Not have the Legal Authority to Regulate the Recreational use of ANY Nicotine that does Not Come from Tobacco Plants.

The FDA Isn't like the IRS or the DMV. Where they Give themselves their Own Power. The Only Power the FDA has is what come to it from Laws Passed in Congress.

This was Proven by Sottera Inc. v. Food & Drug Administration. And had its bases in FDA v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp.

Court Says FDA Authority Over E-Cigarettes Is Limited - WSJ

FDA V. BROWN & WILLIAMSON TOBACCO CORP.

 

[Lessifer]

It really Doesn't Matter what the FDA Wants to Do. Or What the FDA Would Like to Do. Or what people on Forums think the FDA might Do.

It Really comes down to what the FDA has the Legal Authority to Do.

I remember when all the Talk of Synthetic Nicotine was all the Rage. Mr. Zeller has been Very Clear that the FDA does Not have the Legal Authority to Regulate the Recreational use of ANY Nicotine that does Not Come from Tobacco Plants.

The FDA Isn't like the IRS or the DMV. Where they Give themselves their Own Power. The Only Power the FDA has is what come to it from Laws Passed in Congress.

This was Proven by Sottera Inc. v. Food & Drug Administration. And had its bases in FDA v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp.

Court Says FDA Authority Over E-Cigarettes Is Limited - WSJ

FDA V. BROWN & WILLIAMSON TOBACCO CORP.

Right, that is all correct. I was under the impression, and maybe I've misread things, that the purpose of the proposed deeming is to "deem" electronic cigarettes, in the way that they define them, as "tobacco products." If that is approved, then the FDA will have the authority to apply all tobacco related regulations to e-cigs, or craft more specific ones if they choose. It's the "tobacco product" designation that is key.

 

[DC2]

But if they can regulate products whose intended use is for vaping.
Then they either can or can not regulate them as if the intended use is for vaping nicotine.

That's where I lose my sanity.

 

[zoiDman]

BTW - Does the FDA even after Deeming is Finalized have the Authority to Regulate this Flashlight.

 

[Lessifer]

I don't know, order a thousand from china and see if they get seized by customs.

 

[zoiDman]

Right, that is all correct. I was under the impression, and maybe I've misread things, that the purpose of the proposed deeming is to "deem" electronic cigarettes, in the way that they define them, as "tobacco products." If that is approved, then the FDA will have the authority to apply all tobacco related regulations to e-cigs, or craft more specific ones if they choose. It's the "tobacco product" designation that is key.

Deeming really Isn't about Hardware. It's more about including Nicotine in Liquid for that has Come from Tobacco Plants.

You have to Remember, before e-Cigarettes, there Really wasn't Nicotine in a PG:VG solution. All nicotine Individuals could buy for Recreational Use came in the Form of Chopped Up Plant Matter.

 

[zoiDman]

I don't know, order a thousand from china and see if they get seized by customs.

What Authority would Customs have to Seize them? And who would Order Customs to do this?

You can't set the Way-Back Machine to 2009 just because you Don't Like Flashlights.

 

[Lessifer]

Deeming really Isn't about Hardware. It's more about including Nicotine in Liquid for that has Come from Tobacco Plants.

You have to Remember, before e-Cigarettes, there Really wasn't Nicotine in a PG:VG solution. All nicotine Individuals could buy for Recreational Use came in the Form of Chopped Up Plant Matter.

From here: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/TobaccoProducts/NewsEvents/UCM397724.pdf

"FDA’s proposed rule also would include tobacco product components or parts that are used in the consumption of a tobacco product, like e-cigarette cartridges. It would not include tobacco product accessories, like cigar cases."

 

[beckdg]

There you go being all rational. Thinking back to the proposed deeming regs there was a section that seemed to hint at covering hardware, there was a very murky distinction between accessory and whatever else they called it. Like for a hookah, the tongs used to hold the charcoal would not be under regulation, the bowl that holds the tobacco would be.

According to the National Youth Tobacco Survey(and by extension the FDA), teen e-cigarette use has tripled, nowhere is the distinction made about 0mg vs nicotine e-liquid.

Will it hold up in court? Probably not, but first they'll get to take it away, put people out of business, and then someone is going to have to pay to fight to get it back.

And giving up ground willing only promotes more ground to fight to get back and more time and money doing so.

Tapatyped