E-cigs top list of complaints and inquiries made to FDA's CTP Ombudsman

[Bill Godshall]

Since the FDA has been targeting e-cigs since 2009, e-cigs predictably top list of complaints and inquiries to the CTP Ombudsman
http://www.fda.gov/downloads/AboutF...ivery&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

 

[Kent C]

I'm actually surprised there are so few, unless I'm reading it wrongly.

At one point it says: Types of Contacts Received: 121(In 2012, there were 109.)

Further down: The number of contacts increased from 109 in 2012 to 121 in 2013.

I could see if 'types of contacts' were 121, and then the number of contacts within each type was x, but then the 'number of contacts' are the same numbers. And if there were only 121 actual contacts, then 'all the false and misleading fear mongering claims' didn't cause much of a stir - at least in that office. Perhaps I'm missing some specialized nomenclature. Very possible with Gov'tSpeak.

 

[KODIAK (TM)]

Aren't these just "contacts"? Many could be inquires about e-cigs. It doesn't specifically say they are complaints.

 

[Kent C]

Aren't these just "contacts"? Many could be inquires about e-cigs. It doesn't specifically say they are complaints.

No it doesn't say complaints or 'reports' but it would seem that a contact would be a singular entity.

 

[YKruss]

The subject matter of the calls reflects a high level of engagement from outside FDA with CTP: contacts wanted to know about e-cigarettes, retailer compliance, deeming, and substantial equivalence. These made up 79% of the topics included in calls or emails to the Ombudsman’s Office in 2013.

Not all were complaints but a "I want to know" type of things.

 

[Stosh]

There are lies, damn lies, and statistics.....

From their comments at the end of the article....

In 2013, 39% of contacts were consumers/general public, while those contacts made up just 24% of contacts in 2012.

The categories they used precludes any other result. Within the top tier, tobacco Company or their Reps, State/Local Governments, Retailers or their Reps account for 51% and then you have the "Everyone Else" category 39% (Consumers/General Public), it covers 90% of all contacts. If you split the groups up by age instead, say Teenagers, Senior Citizens and Everyone Else, it would be as statistically significant....DOH!....

The subject matter of the calls reflects a high level of engagement from outside FDA with CTP: contacts wanted to know about e-cigarettes, retailer compliance, deeming, and substantial equivalence. These made up 79% of the topics included in calls or emails to the Ombudsman’s Office in 2013.

Every consumer would be dying to know about "retailer compliance, deeming, and substantial equivalence". More likely the tobacco companies, retailers, governments would want to know about policies that would effect their bottom lines. I also wonder how many reporter inquires are lumped into the "general public" category of contacts, some may have actually tried to gather factual information regarding what the FDA is doing or intends to do.

 

[Bill Godshall]

I've never contacted the CTP Ombudsman because their job is to protect and promote their agency and bosses (by feigning empathy with those who contact them).

 

[Roger_Lafayette]

Uh if we started w/ 121 "contacts" and over half were described as "inquiries" ... then we have no more than about 60 data points.

(When does a data set get so minuscule that we can no longer refer to it as anything other than a list of anectdotes?)

 

[pamdis]

Uh if we started w/ 121 "contacts" and over half were described as "inquiries" ... then we have no more than about 60 data points.

(When does a data set get so minuscule that we can no longer refer to it as anything other than a list of anectdotes?)

Don't think the number really matters. If it's positive towards vaping, it's anecdotal, even if it's thousands. If it's negative, it's data, if even it's one.