E-Cigs Are Going Tobacco-Free With Synthetic Nicotine
- Thread starter guambred
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Something funny about these characters. A ton of B&M's are advertising their
products. They have a facebook page but,only a one page website with virtually
no information about products or who they are.
SQN360
This seems rather low key for something that has the potential to take
off big time.
Regards
mike
products. They have a facebook page but,only a one page website with virtually
no information about products or who they are.
SQN360
This seems rather low key for something that has the potential to take
off big time.
Regards
mike
It's my understanding that synthetic nicotine will also fall under the deeming regulations. It's one of the reasons why the FDA made the ugly thing so broad and encompassing.
Prices on synthetic nicotine are comparable to that derived from tobacco, and depending on quantities purchased, could even be cheaper in the long run.
Prices on synthetic nicotine are comparable to that derived from tobacco, and depending on quantities purchased, could even be cheaper in the long run.
There's a couple of ways the FDA could go after synthetic nicotine. One, they could just deem it a "component" which seems to be their strategy for zero-nic and pretty much anything that clearly isn't a "tobacco product". If they really wanted to get nasty, they could go after it as a drug, since the FDA is only prohibited from banning "tobacco" products.
I think the FDA has an "intent for use" thing. If it walks like a duck therefore it must be a duck. If a company that makes synthetic nic even has a chance for a remote relationship with a regular ejuice company it will be constituted as a duck.
The nic I buy for $50 will last about 4 years x 13 = $650 / 4 = $162 per year instead of $12. Still dirt cheap compared to smoking in Michigan. But there's no product yet and the FDA is determined to do what ever it takes to keep people smoking.
Alot of the deeming regulations are wishful thinking on the FDAs part, and will be decided in a courtroom.
Expect legal challenges.
Just because they want authority outside their scope doeant mean they can legally exert it.
Expect legal challenges.
Just because they want authority outside their scope doeant mean they can legally exert it.
This is how the FDA deeming looks at things: (Pg 338)
For products that do not contain nicotine (i.e., no nicotine at detectable levels), the rule provides for an alternative warning statement, "This product is made from tobacco."
What throws some people off is the wording of the FDA with regard to WARNINGS.... so they read this:
The health warning provisions apply to "covered tobacco products," cigarette tobacco, and roll-your-own tobacco. The term "covered tobacco products" includes all newly deemed tobacco products except those components and parts that are not made or derived from tobacco.
They take that 'not made or derived from tobacco' and extend it to the FDA's definitions of "tobacco products" - that's a mistake :- )
That wording meant for warnings doesn't apply to the definitions of tobacco products - some of which are stated below: (my emphasis on underline, bold, color and font size)
(pg 162)
A few comments expressed concern that the rule would create incentives for manufacturers to separate nicotine-containing components from nonnicotine-containing components to evade regulatory requirements.
(Response) FDA understands these concerns. However, this deeming rule covers tobacco
product components and parts intended or reasonably expected to be used with or for the human consumption of a tobacco product.
(pg7)
This final rule has two purposes: (1) To deem all products that meet the definition of "tobacco product" under the law, except accessories of a newly deemed tobacco product, and subject them to the tobacco control authorities in chapter IX of the FD&C Act and FDA's implementing regulations;
The final rule defines "component or part" and "accessory" to provide additional clarity as to which products are subject to FDA’s tobacco product authority. With respect to these definitions, FDA notes that "component" and "part" are separate and distinct terms within chapter IX of the FD&C Act. However, for purposes of this final rule, FDA is using the terms "component" and "part" interchangeably and without emphasizing the distinction between the terms. FDA may clarify the distinctions between ‘component’ and ‘part’ in the future. Specifically, "Component or Part" means "any software or assembly of materials intended or reasonably expected: 1) to alter or affect the tobacco product’s performance, composition, constituents or characteristics; or 2) to be used with or for the human consumption of a tobacco product. The term excludes anything that is an accessory of a tobacco product."
The following is a nonexhaustive list of examples of components and parts used with electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) (including ecigarettes): e-liquids; atomizers; batteries (with or without variable voltage); cartomizers (atomizer plus replaceable fluid-filled cartridge); digital display/lights to adjust settings; clearomisers, tank systems, flavors, vials that contain e-liquids, and programmable software.
This final deeming rule deems all tobacco products as they are defined in section 201(rr) of the FD&C Act, except accessories of newly deemed products, but including components and parts as defined in this rule. The wires, screws, and silica meet the definition of component or part, as they are an assembly of materials intended or reasonably expected to be used with or for the human consumption of a tobacco product and are not accessories of a tobacco product.
For products that do not contain nicotine (i.e., no nicotine at detectable levels), the rule provides for an alternative warning statement, "This product is made from tobacco."
What throws some people off is the wording of the FDA with regard to WARNINGS.... so they read this:
The health warning provisions apply to "covered tobacco products," cigarette tobacco, and roll-your-own tobacco. The term "covered tobacco products" includes all newly deemed tobacco products except those components and parts that are not made or derived from tobacco.
They take that 'not made or derived from tobacco' and extend it to the FDA's definitions of "tobacco products" - that's a mistake :- )
That wording meant for warnings doesn't apply to the definitions of tobacco products - some of which are stated below: (my emphasis on underline, bold, color and font size)
(pg 162)
A few comments expressed concern that the rule would create incentives for manufacturers to separate nicotine-containing components from nonnicotine-containing components to evade regulatory requirements.
(Response) FDA understands these concerns. However, this deeming rule covers tobacco
product components and parts intended or reasonably expected to be used with or for the human consumption of a tobacco product.
(pg7)
This final rule has two purposes: (1) To deem all products that meet the definition of "tobacco product" under the law, except accessories of a newly deemed tobacco product, and subject them to the tobacco control authorities in chapter IX of the FD&C Act and FDA's implementing regulations;
The final rule defines "component or part" and "accessory" to provide additional clarity as to which products are subject to FDA’s tobacco product authority. With respect to these definitions, FDA notes that "component" and "part" are separate and distinct terms within chapter IX of the FD&C Act. However, for purposes of this final rule, FDA is using the terms "component" and "part" interchangeably and without emphasizing the distinction between the terms. FDA may clarify the distinctions between ‘component’ and ‘part’ in the future. Specifically, "Component or Part" means "any software or assembly of materials intended or reasonably expected: 1) to alter or affect the tobacco product’s performance, composition, constituents or characteristics; or 2) to be used with or for the human consumption of a tobacco product. The term excludes anything that is an accessory of a tobacco product."
The following is a nonexhaustive list of examples of components and parts used with electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) (including ecigarettes): e-liquids; atomizers; batteries (with or without variable voltage); cartomizers (atomizer plus replaceable fluid-filled cartridge); digital display/lights to adjust settings; clearomisers, tank systems, flavors, vials that contain e-liquids, and programmable software.
This final deeming rule deems all tobacco products as they are defined in section 201(rr) of the FD&C Act, except accessories of newly deemed products, but including components and parts as defined in this rule. The wires, screws, and silica meet the definition of component or part, as they are an assembly of materials intended or reasonably expected to be used with or for the human consumption of a tobacco product and are not accessories of a tobacco product.
I did a little quick googling. I found a discussion from here from 2009 indicating
Johnson Creek had looked into synthetic nicotine and all they could find was that
there was some research in the 70's and 80's that resulted in at best industrial
grade nic at an adjusted prohibitive cost.
So I googled; 'synthetic pharmaceutical grade nicotine.'
The result; synthetic pharmaceutical grade nicotine. - Google Search
Doesn't appear to be a whole lot of companies in the business.
i could find nothing to make a price comparison.
Regards
Mike
Depends on how you search. I've found a few sources and the price is extremely comparable to buying it pre-mixed. Especially when you start looking at strengths that can't be discussed on ECF.
And therein lies the problem. If you purchase the synthetic stuff, it's most likely going to be in strengths approaching what we consider "pure". Which means the full hazmat ensemble, etc. as well as not being able to source/discuss on ECF.
And therein lies the problem. If you purchase the synthetic stuff, it's most likely going to be in strengths approaching what we consider "pure". Which means the full hazmat ensemble, etc. as well as not being able to source/discuss on ECF.
@retired1 Besides SQN the only other one I can find is NextGenLabs.
no products, quantities, or, strengths listed. Process Patents Pending
and contact info. I know it's available full strength in Pharmaceutical grade
only to qualified buyers. The natural stuff that is. It's funny that considering
how some boutique brands of e-juice have taken off TFN hasn't hit the market
big time already.Certainly vendors such as Johnson Creek or Mt. Baker are
qualified to handle nicotine at any strength.
Regards
Mike
no products, quantities, or, strengths listed. Process Patents Pending
and contact info. I know it's available full strength in Pharmaceutical grade
only to qualified buyers. The natural stuff that is. It's funny that considering
how some boutique brands of e-juice have taken off TFN hasn't hit the market
big time already.Certainly vendors such as Johnson Creek or Mt. Baker are
qualified to handle nicotine at any strength.
Regards
Mike
I did some more digging around. Apparently the two labs in conjunction with others are
having some world wide first ever No Tobacco Nicotine thingy going on.
This could be ha-uge.
Seems legit.
Mike
having some world wide first ever No Tobacco Nicotine thingy going on.
This could be ha-uge.
Seems legit.
Mike
I think SQN is the company making a line of juice using Next Gen Labs synthetic nicotine...
E-Cigs Are Going Tobacco-Free With Synthetic Nicotine
Not positive though, so don't quote me.
Rediculously ironic isnt it?
A major issue we as vapers face, is a lack of education, information and discussion.
The issue I see with the vid is the clue in the vid (Skooky's post above). It could be argued that ( yes this will be ridiculous, but this is what the FDA has done to us) the RX200 and/or tank (couldn't identify tank) could reasonably have been designed for use with newly deemed tobacco products, therefore are tobacco products therefore any TFN used by them would then be considered tobacco products.
Jaybo would have to leave Wismec and break any and all ties with any "tobacco product personnel in any capacity". Design a type of device that could only be used with TFN and not be able to use "tobacco products" and all sorts of labeling stating the fact to be able for it to potentially not be considered a tobacco product. Please someone correct me if I am not right. I welcome that.
I would like to try the juice though.
Jaybo would have to leave Wismec and break any and all ties with any "tobacco product personnel in any capacity". Design a type of device that could only be used with TFN and not be able to use "tobacco products" and all sorts of labeling stating the fact to be able for it to potentially not be considered a tobacco product. Please someone correct me if I am not right. I welcome that.
I would like to try the juice though.
I would imagine that synthetic nicotine would be treated just like zero nicotine.
So yeah, I can't find anything in your post to correct.
- Status
Similar threads
