ECF Newsletter - FDA Considering Ban on Online Ecig Sales

[billthetroll]

The FDA has the authority to regulate how ecigarettes and vaping products are marketed. So it can ban online sales.

So true, they can do whatever they want at this point and I don't think people get how much power in all this they really have.

 

[capthook]

Glad to see you post this and it get noticed.
I was surprised to see no discussion on this, and posted last night.
Seemed to go 'unnoticed' as well.

Scott Gottlieb seems a reasonable individual from a few interviews I've seen.
Food and Drug Administrator Scott Gottlieb is an advocate of ecigs for current smokers as harm reduction.
But is adamantly against creating a new generation of nicotine dependence with kids.
To the point where he is considering the current environment to be that the risks of underage users outweigh the benefits to current smokers.
Especially after decades of declining cigarette use.
But to ban online sales?
I mean it IS the internet...would be hard to do.
(not impossible... but hard)
And this IS the USA, not China.
**The site you are trying to reach has been banned by the FDA **** Ha!
Thus my thought it is more bark than bite, for the moment.

And yes, I'm going to buff-out my 5 year supply to 10 years soon!

 

[papergoblin]

LoLook back they already ban vaping years ago lol.I can find the link but you can look it up.they just started allowing it and it became the norm.Congress and the house already voted and gave the fda the rights to kill wherever they want i kinda thought everyone that's been vaping for years knew this.we can't keep on saying "but but but they can't do this"because they are.

I'm not saying they can't ban somethings like nicotine base but they cannot ban everything. No they haven't voted to give the FDA power to ban vaping, they cannot vote in a blanket what ever comes up law.

Let's say you're right though the FDA can ban whatever they want. Well, where's the ban? It would have already happened if they could or wanted to by what you're saying. So why wait for a report, why not just do it.

Here's another way to look at it. Making distilled alcohol is illegal without a license, yet you can go on Amazon and buy a still, it's legal. They haven't banned selling corn or sugar either. So all the things needed can be easily bought and legally obtained and that's with something banned.

No there's money to be made here and that's what will happen. Vaping will be taxed to death just like tobacco. The government doesn't turn down free money and never will, lol. They will increase the fines on underage sales, ask for better verification and tax nic base. This tax will be done to fund education of children/PSA's (so they say), just like tobacco. The cost will be passed on to us the consumers and there will be many who will quit vaping because smoking and/or dipping will be cheaper.

 

[billthetroll]

Glad to see you post this and it get noticed.
I was surprised to see no discussion on this, and posted last night.
Seemed to go 'unnoticed' as well.

Scott Gottlieb seems a reasonable individual from a few interviews I've seen.
Food and Drug Administrator Scott Gottlieb is an advocate of ecigs for current smokers as harm reduction.
But is adamantly against creating a new generation of nicotine dependence with kids.
To the point where he is considering the current environment to be that the risks of underage users outweigh the benefits to current smokers.
Especially after decades of declining cigarette use.
But to ban online sales?
I mean it IS the internet...would be hard to do.
(not impossible... but hard)
And this IS the USA, not China.
**The site you are trying to reach has been banned by the FDA **** Ha!
Thus my thought it is more bark than bite, for the moment.

And yes, I'm going to buff-out my 5 year supply to 10 years soon!

If one wants to they can use a crypto currency to order.but who has that kinda money to buy a bitcoin right lol.but yea most Chinese online sellers don't have a shipping option to countrys that don't allow it.I know fasttech don't ship to country's that don't allow it and I do think Scott is for vaping but when you have a lot of people pushing him to stop then he has to do something.plus they're always Facebook high-end vaping device's,mods,rda,rta,rdta and especially sqonking high-end devices will keep going long after they kill vaping because not a lot of people are in the secret Facebook groups.so there is always that.ooo and you can 3-d printe mods.so they're options

 

[billthetroll]

I'm not saying they can't ban somethings like nicotine base but they cannot ban everything. No they haven't voted to give the FDA power to ban vaping, they cannot vote in a blanket what ever comes up law.

Let's say you're right though the FDA can ban whatever they want. Well, where's the ban? It would have already happened if they could or wanted to by what you're saying. So why wait for a report, why not just do it.

Here's another way to look at it. Making distilled alcohol is illegal without a license, yet you can go on Amazon and buy a still, it's legal. They haven't banned selling corn or sugar either. So all the things needed can be easily bought and legally obtained and that's with something banned.

No there's money to be made here and that's what will happen. Vaping will be taxed to death just like tobacco. The government doesn't turn down free money and never will, lol. They will increase the fines on underage sales, ask for better verification and tax nic base. This tax will be done to fund education of children/PSA's (so they say), just like tobacco. The cost will be passed on to us the consumers and there will be many who will quit vaping because smoking and/or dipping will be cheaper.

Here’s the back story. In 2009, Congress gave the FDA power to regulate cigarettes and a few other tobacco products. Congress didn’t put e-cigarettes under FDA’s regulation, but it gave the FDA the option to extend its powers to cover e-cigarettes. In April 2014, FDA issued a proposal to do just that. FDA appears to be poised to finalize that proposal, putting e-cigarettes under the same rules as cigarettes.

Some of the FDA rules that apply to cigarettes should apply to e-cigarettes, like those that restrict access by minors. But, one part of the regulatory regime – the rules governing the introduction of new tobacco products – won’t work for e-cigarettes.

If a tobacco product wasn’t on the market on February 15, 2007, then the rules allow only two ways to introduce it. The manufacturer can show that the new product is substantially equivalent to something on the market on February 15, 2007. Or, the manufacturer can go through the costly and arduous process of filing a pre-market review application, which requires a large amount of scientific data.

Applying these rules to e-cigarettes would devastate the smaller vaping companies that account for much of the innovation in the industry. The problem is that there were almost no e-cigarettes on the market on February 15, 2007. So, almost no products would be grandfathered in and almost none of them could find a February 2007 product to which they’re substantially equivalent. In most cases, the only way to keep an e-cigarette product on the market would be to file a pre-market review application.

 

[billthetroll]

What i just posted is proof yea they did r be them power over all tobacco products including e cigs which that part is writing but it still happened.so all they have to do is say "you no what?no new e cig devices.no new nothing and it all covers anything that is to be used with a cigs.I don't think battery wraps count but pretty much anything else

 

[papergoblin]

Here’s the back story. In 2009, Congress gave the FDA power to regulate cigarettes and a few other tobacco products. Congress didn’t put e-cigarettes under FDA’s regulation, but it gave the FDA the option to extend its powers to cover e-cigarettes. In April 2014, FDA issued a proposal to do just that. FDA appears to be poised to finalize that proposal, putting e-cigarettes under the same rules as cigarettes.

Some of the FDA rules that apply to cigarettes should apply to e-cigarettes, like those that restrict access by minors. But, one part of the regulatory regime – the rules governing the introduction of new tobacco products – won’t work for e-cigarettes.

If a tobacco product wasn’t on the market on February 15, 2007, then the rules allow only two ways to introduce it. The manufacturer can show that the new product is substantially equivalent to something on the market on February 15, 2007. Or, the manufacturer can go through the costly and arduous process of filing a pre-market review application, which requires a large amount of scientific data.

Applying these rules to e-cigarettes would devastate the smaller vaping companies that account for much of the innovation in the industry. The problem is that there were almost no e-cigarettes on the market on February 15, 2007. So, almost no products would be grandfathered in and almost none of them could find a February 2007 product to which they’re substantially equivalent. In most cases, the only way to keep an e-cigarette product on the market would be to file a pre-market review application.

Oh I know the deeming regulation stuff but remember as I said, to ban online vape sales they will have to ban online tobacco as well. They can't pick and choose, if they do then they are saying vaping isn't tobacco. That would open the door to many lawsuits and possibly a walk back on their rules.

Then they still haven't hard set the date to 2007, that date just kicks back to the original tobacco bill that failed and later on was enacted. This date while they could use, poses a huge problem due to the amount of things already out there. They could stop future sales but not force people to turn in devices.

The biggest issue they face is how to legally ban one thing online but not another, when "they" are saying they are the same thing (vaping/tobacco). They will have trouble with stats because they will show a decline in underage smoking but they may say a rise in vaping. What happens in a year after a ban when smoking goes on the rise again?

They also will have to provide some proof of online sales causing this epidemic. They would have to show that there is a blatant abuse of the system. If they can't they again leave the door open for lawsuits.

That's why I see this as a money grab over a ban. I'm not saying people shouldn't be prepared, far from it. I'm just saying it isn't going to be the end of the world, just an evolution of sorts. I see there being bad and good come from it.

There is no federal law banning the online sale of tobacco, so vaping will be the first. Once they offically come out and say ban it, they have no choice but to do the same with traditional and then BT will call out the dogs and they will be fighting a 2 sided front.

 

[Philabos]

As others have said, I think he already has the authority to do what he wants based on the Tobacco Control Act passed in 2009.
Shutting down online retailers would be the first step. After that, shutting down the B&M shops would be next.
He has made abundantly clear he could not care less about ex smokers, or future ex smokers, so that argument goes nowhere.
As for passing legislation, Congress now prefers the vague approach. Telling the bureaucracy to do whatever they think is right is the much preferred method. They ceded their authority to the bureaucrats long ago.
Dick Durbin has said he considers Ecigarettes just a reinvention of smoking. He could be back in power as soon as January. He opposes vaping, period.
No politician is going to want to be hung with the "you hate the children" tag, so who would oppose him?
You can write all the letters and emails you want. We are just too small a group to matter to any of them.Sorry for the negativity, but that's the way I see it now.
Some will undoubtedly see this as the sky is falling option. You can certainly put your faith in Washington and hope for fair treatment and the best outcome.

 

[JCinFLA]

I know flavored, ready-made eliquids have been in the FDA's crosshairs for several months now. But I've personally not seen anything yet...about DIY ingredients being mentioned, even as potential targets for any type of ban. If/when they do get around to those ingredients though, IMO nic base might be the only target of a ban. I'd bet money it would probably be for all sales of it, too, unless for "FDA approved uses" (whatever those might be). The other ingredients are used for too many other products that have nothing to do with vaping. Without nic base though, there is no DIY for those of us who want/need nicotine in ours. Because of that, along with many others since 2016...I've seen to it that they won't be able to stop me from DIYing and vaping for as long as I want to.

Even this newest info. though, isn't about a potential "ban" on ecig sales, only online sales. We don't have any info on what things they'd consider to be "ecig" items. Would it be mods...any/all RDAs, RBAs, RDTAs, and clearomizer type tanks...and whole kits? Would it also include other items that are only useful for vaping...like factory coils, drip tips, and replacement parts like glass, positive pins, etc.? I don't think they'd even try to ban online sales of o-rings, batteries, battery chargers, Micro USB cables, etc. that aren't used only for vaping purposes. But, who knows?

Honestly though, even if the FDA doesn't outright ban the sale of nic base anytime soon...I wouldn't be surprised if they'd include it in an online ecig sales ban if one does take effect. There are far fewer places to go and physically buy it in the US.

 

[billthetroll]

As others have said, I think he already has the authority to do what he wants based on the Tobacco Control Act passed in 2009.
Shutting down online retailers would be the first step. After that, shutting down the B&M shops would be next.
He has made abundantly clear he could not care less about ex smokers, or future ex smokers, so that argument goes nowhere.
As for passing legislation, Congress now prefers the vague approach. Telling the bureaucracy to do whatever they think is right is the much preferred method. They ceded their authority to the bureaucrats long ago.
Dick Durbin has said he considers Ecigarettes just a reinvention of smoking. He could be back in power as soon as January. He opposes vaping, period.
No politician is going to want to be hung with the "you hate the children" tag, so who would oppose him?
You can write all the letters and emails you want. We are just too small a group to matter to any of them.Sorry for the negativity, but that's the way I see it now.
Some will undoubtedly see this as the sky is falling option. You can certainly put your faith in Washington and hope for fair treatment and the best outcome.

No, lol I agree 100% with everything you just wrote.completely that's why I wrote e-mail and calling is pretty much the last step but I really think that's even futile.it's funny that vaping has had so many chances but time and time again we "we" as a community have dropped the ball.we should have been doing photo id long ago but no.I wrote a long piece about a month ago because about two months ago a bunch of people was .... hurt having to photo id verify on a couple popular online stores like 10 members in this was going on and on.I'm for the whole thing, so I made the post and of course people just called me paranoid.it's here now and it's happening and there's nothing we can do about it.I mean some of us can stay in a state of denial and that's ok.I don't think it's going too be tomorrow or next month but really really soon.

 

[billthetroll]

I know flavored, ready-made eliquids have been in the FDA's crosshairs for several months now. But I've personally not seen anything yet...about DIY ingredients being mentioned, even as potential targets for any type of ban. If/when they do get around to those ingredients though, IMO nic base might be the only target of a ban. I'd bet money it would probably be for all sales of it, too, unless for "FDA approved uses" (whatever those might be). The other ingredients are used for too many other products that have nothing to do with vaping. Without nic base though, there is no DIY for those of us who want/need nicotine in ours. Because of that, along with many others since 2016...I've seen to it that they won't be able to stop me from DIYing and vaping for as long as I want to.

Even this newest info. though, isn't about a potential "ban" on ecig sales, only online sales. We don't have any info on what things they'd consider to be "ecig" items. Would it be mods...any/all RDAs, RBAs, RDTAs, and clearomizer type tanks...and whole kits? Would it also include other items that are only useful for vaping...like factory coils, drip tips, and replacement parts like glass, positive pins, etc.? I don't think they'd even try to ban online sales of o-rings, batteries, battery chargers, Micro USB cables, etc. that aren't used only for vaping purposes. But, who knows?

they said e cigs and e cig related products.I'm sure battery wraps are ok.as you said vg/pg is used in other things not to many as far as at home use but I've seen people day that and I don't really get it.im.sure if you make at home breathing treatments or addictives for huge amounts of good then you're ok.flavorings are ok but as someone said they will just change that formula or they won't be permitted to sell it tell this does down.the battery industry is ever revolving so they could change our batteries. the only thing that our batteries go in at this time being lose is flashlights.not laptops,battery "packs" are used in light mechanical devices.nothing takes lose 18350/18500/18650/20650/20700/21700 and so on.lol both like they're AA/AAA batteries.

 

[billthetroll]

My point is it's not like lights are going to go off, cars won't run, people will stop going to work, good will no longer get made, airplanes will be grounded because people can no longer buy, vg/pg 18650 batteries lol it's just not.

 

[bnrkwest]

Also when states get involved they can ban onlines sales before federal. That happened in my state. When I smoked I ordered online. One day I couldn't and my order was cancelled because my state outlawed it. Prices went up at gas stations and that is when I stated vaping and never looked back. Now this could happen anytime to vaping, look what happened to Indiana, no ejuice allowed in from other states. They just keep yanking our chain over and over. Just be prepared is the best defense.

 

[JCinFLA]

as you said vg/pg is used in other things not to many as far as at home use but I've seen people day that and I don't really get it.im.sure if you make at home breathing treatments or addictives for huge amounts of good then you're ok.flavorings are ok but as someone said they will just change that formula or they won't be permitted to sell it tell this does down

There are many more, but here are a few uses of the products:

VG: Used by crafters, home-based small businesses, and large companies in making soaps, bath oils, shampoos, lotions, lip balms, etc.; in some baked goods and frostings

PG: Used by the same people above for lotions and other personal care products; by cattle owners with breeding stock; by the entertainment industry and others to create "fake" smoke at concerts, for theater plays, haunted houses at Halloween, etc.; as the carrier of medicine in many inhalers for humans, in animal medications, in some cough remedies, etc.

Flavorings we use in DIY: Used by large industries, but also everyday people, small home-based business owners, etc. for cooking, candy making, baking, frostings, to flavor drinks, making flavored syrups for shaved ice and snow cones, etc.

As far as big flavoring companies having to change the formulas of their flavorings to stop people from using them for DIY...I absolutely doubt that'll ever happen. Companies like The Flavor Apprentice, Capella, Flavour Art, LorAnn, etc...each manufacture hundreds and hundreds of flavorings used by other industries and everyday people, and have been doing so with the same formulas long before vaping!

 

[papergoblin]

There are many more, but here are a few uses of the products:

VG: Used by crafters, home-based small businesses, and large companies in making soaps, bath oils, shampoos, lotions, lip balms, etc.; in some baked goods and frostings

PG: Used by the same people above for lotions and other personal care products; by cattle owners with breeding stock; by the entertainment industry and others to create "fake" smoke at concerts, for theater plays, haunted houses at Halloween, etc.; as the carrier of medicine in many inhalers for humans, in animal medications, in some cough remedies, etc.

Flavorings we use in DIY: Used by large industries, but also everyday people, small home-based business owners, etc. for cooking, candy making, baking, frostings, to flavor drinks, making flavored syrups for shaved ice and snow cones, etc.

As far as big flavoring companies having to change the formulas of their flavorings to stop people from using them for DIY...I absolutely doubt that'll ever happen. Companies like The Flavor Apprentice, Capella, Flavour Art, LorAnn, etc...each manufacture hundreds and hundreds of flavorings used by other industries and everyday people, and have been doing so with the same formulas long before vaping!

Then there are flashlight (I mean real flashlights) that use the 18xxx battery format. I have brands that run 123's which is basically the same as an 18350, which I've used since they are cheaper. I have lights that run 18650's as well.

Nicotine is about the only thing that has limited use as other than vaping and the like, it is in some medicines and is used as an ingredient in poisons. I think my aunt still has a box of poison used to keep bugs off Rose bushes, it contains nicotine.

 

[Eskie]

Well, if online sales are prohibited and a B&M is the only remaining option, just about every manufacturer other than Smok not will survive in the US market. I've seen the occasional Voopoo mod in store, but nothing like the stuff we can order online. If it does turn into an order from FT and 3Fvape then the next worry will be if they slap a ban on imports.

And yes, the FDA under current law has the power to do both eliminate online sales and block imports under the TCA. All vape gear, regardless of containing nic or not has been deemed a tobacco product. That has not been overturned by any court. As a matter of fact the Federal Court already ruled that the FDA does have jurisdiction based on the Halo company and parties lawsuit against the FDA. That is now up on appeal, but I wouldn't put my money on that hope.

 

[bnrkwest]

I don't understand the FDA at all, they do not make sense. Are they trying to kill vaping all together? Has that been their goal?

 

[Eskie]

I don't understand the FDA at all, they do not make sense. Are they trying to kill vaping all together? Has that been their goal?

I don't think so. I believe they mean to regulate it but have no idea how to go about it.

Part of the problem is BT, but not in the way implied here. BT sees a bleak future for combustible tobacco. They see e cigs as their future. They've come right out and said so. Unfortunately that means every anti BT group out there wants e cigs killed off because if BT might make money off something it must be tainted. So the whole lot get painted with that. Most people who carry on about Juul and whatnot assume that's the evil BT companies looking to keep their products alive. They don't get the difference between vaping and BT's tobacco products.

 

[bnrkwest]

I remember when BT got into ecigs we were all appalled but now since they are in it to survive they could help save the vaping. They have the lobbyists. We have all these new products out that were not supposed to be allowed after deeming but that has not been enforced so maybe things can ease up??? Still checking my stash and stocking up on anything I buy online. Which is everything!

 

[DaveP]

This August 2018 article tells somewhat of a different story about ecig bans than we are envisioning.

Trump's FDA may finally end Obama's war on vaping

For more than a year, the Food and Drug Administration has hung the start-up vapor industry out to dry with anticipation for a more sane and rational approach to the regulation of electronic cigarettes. Last week, the FDA finally announced steps geared towards making it easier to bring new products to market, soliciting input from the public and signaling that Obama-era prohibition may not be the intended outcome of the agency. This largely positive announcement takes a significant step in the right direction toward regulatory certainty that could unquestionably improve public health.

Context is important. This summer marks the one-year anniversary of the FDA’s “Comprehensive Plan for Tobacco and Nicotine Regulation" and the nine-year anniversary of the passage of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. In his 2017 Plan, FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb acknowledged that when it comes to nicotine use, there is a continuum of risk for consumers. He signaled that despite the Obama administration’s 2016 Deeming Rule – which defined vapor products as tobacco and subjected them to retroactive pre-approval processes designed to end in failure – the outcome didn’t have to be so guaranteed.