FDA FDA approved flavours

[Papa_Lazarou]

I'm wondering - if the FDA deeming were to go ahead and part of the regulation were to restrict allowable flavouring a la cigarettes (you know... to save the kids), just what flavours exactly would be approved? tobacco flavoured ejuice is ersatz and no more "natural" than Pluid or Red Bull.

Further, what would stop a vendor from producing a dozen different "tobacco" flavours with different properties, such as ones that tasted like Red Bull or Pluid? How would such a thing be policed?

Alternatively, do we foresee all flavouring being banned, with only refreshing "naked" PG/VG available?

 

[Papa_Lazarou]

Hmmm... 100+ views and not a thought to share?

 

[DC2]

I would EXPECT that they would allow tobacco and menthol flavors.

But when you look at what it takes to get something approved, it suggests only flavorless would be available.
If find that hard to believe, so I think something has to give somewhere along the way.

 

[JustMeB]

I would suspect it to be only normal cigarette and cigar flavors. Then again, wouldn't those still be appealing to some under age any way, if they are smoking the real thing now?

 

[wheelie]

Impossible to ban flavors. Worse case you get unflavored juice and add your own flavoring. Their will just be more flavor companies opening so we can flavor our tap water. LOL

 

[Kent C]

Hmmm... 100+ views and not a thought to share?

The title may have suggested that the FDA approved some flavors - so some viewed. 'ersatz' likely confused some And while I know what it means, I'm not so sure about Pluid.... I haven't sampled flavors in over a year, so that might be why.

 

[Papa_Lazarou]

It would seem to make sense that tobacco and menthol flavours would be immediately allowed, using the (real) tobacco rationale/template, but while menthol is pretty much a direct correlate, tobacco is not - it's as contrived as bananas foster and has no standard.

That leaves us with...

* Completely arbitrary in/out decisions based on flavour name.

* All flavours allowed (potentially tied to the grandfather date, which is an open topic).

or

* No flavours allowed (even menthol is under attack in the tobacco world).

 

[Papa_Lazarou]

The title may have suggested that the FDA approved some flavors - so some viewed. 'ersatz' likely confused some And while I know what it means, I'm not so sure about Pluid.... I haven't sampled flavors in over a year, so that might be why.

Fair points, all.

 

[Papa_Lazarou]

Impossible to ban flavors. Worse case you get unflavored juice and add your own flavoring. Their will just be more flavor companies opening so we can flavor our tap water. LOL

Yep - it's a distinct advantage we enjoy. But banning and eradicating are two different things. For the sake of exercise, I was wondering about the former.

 

[TRoxx]

Vodka and Glycerin...
That's what I vape..
want more flavor?
Eat a piece of bacon whilst vaping!

 

[Lessifer]

I would imagine it would be fairly easy for the FDA(with their BT consultants) to come up with an agreed upon "tobacco" flavor, with each company allowed to have their proprietary differences, as long as they pay the application fees. Remember that reason, logic and science are not really part of the equation here. The ones who spout the "flavors are only to attract children" nonsense know nothing about vaping and e-liquid. I'm sure they think there is an actual "tobacco" flavor native to e-liquid.

 

[philoshop]

If it comes to that, I'm actually much more concerned with precisely who will be vested with the power to make that decision, and why, and to what extent they will be given the power to enforce their will.

 

[philoshop]

Moving to the penalty phase, I have little doubt that someone sequestered in a government office somewhere is hard at work outlining a framework for this. Allow me to take a stab at it:

Possession of any non-approved flavor shall carry a minimum sentence of 90 days of community service, including no fewer than 30 days of youth counseling, during which time the offending adult will likely be taught by the kids the error of his/her ways. This penalty will be subject to mitigation if the offending flavor includes something like broccoli.
An unapproved 'fruit' flavor shall be penalized with twice (2x) the above sentence, unless the fruit in question contains slimy seeds or exotic names because it's been well-documented that they're icky.
Dessert and custard flavors shall carry a minimum sentence of three (3) months in jail wherein the offender will have to go to bed every night without dessert or custard. That'll teach 'em.
Packaging of products in such a way that we don't like shall be punishable by no less than one year (1 year) of incarceration without paper, pens, or pencils. Prison art classes will also not be allowed during this tenure because we know damn well you'll be drawing stuff of which we don't approve (of), and we don't want you to do that any more.
Questions and comments are welcome from any and all persons or groups who support us.

 

[Kent C]

Moving to the penalty phase, I have little doubt that someone sequestered in a government office somewhere is hard at work outlining a framework for this.

Without going full French - it's what they live for

 

[Krashman Von Stinkputin]

My guess is only Tobacco and Menthol flavors available as of 2007--the current "grandfather" date---so based on analog cigarette tobaccos types (Virginia, Burley, etc)

Adding other flavors (nuts,vanillas, fruits) would not comply.

 

[blusean]

most may ban some candy, juice flavor ( for the children ?) in public
and no doubt that menthol and tobacco ok .

 

[AndriaD]

Everytime I read a thread like this, it makes me so happy that my DIY efforts are moving right along, succeeding terrifically. They can bite me, and stick their brain-dead regulations wherever they'd find most painful.


Andria

 

[Jman8]

It would seem to make sense that tobacco and menthol flavours would be immediately allowed, using the (real) tobacco rationale/template, but while menthol is pretty much a direct correlate, tobacco is not - it's as contrived as bananas foster and has no standard.

That leaves us with...

* Completely arbitrary in/out decisions based on flavour name.

* All flavours allowed (potentially tied to the grandfather date, which is an open topic).

or

* No flavours allowed (even menthol is under attack in the tobacco world).

The completely arbitrary decision would open a black market that would be so easy to circumvent and navigate through that it would be pointless to make such a decision. At worse, it would say no such flavors could be sold at a retail shop (and even then likely left entirely up to a state). At best, under this scenario, it does limit the market to a few flavors, but I don't think it would be just tobacco and menthol. I think there would be flavors that opposition would have tough time saying are only manufactured to appeal to kids. If it were 10 flavors allowed, then the black market thing would open up (wide) and it wouldn't be the kind of black market where someone has to go to some shady place to make their purchases.

All flavors allowed with grandfather date does make most sense, but with this, opposition could fight and likely win (in the short term) on the low hanging fruit of flavors that based on title alone appear to be "kiddie flavors." They could argue that those ought not to be grandfathered in. If they did win on this, and did keep it to a select few, it would allow them a foot in the door after the grandfather date to rule out additional flavors that are seeking application approval. Only us die-hard, politically aware vapers would likely realize what was disapproved and then even some of us are likely to be okay throwing those under the bus with idea that there are still millions of other flavors to choose from. But, rest assured, black market would make those banned flavors available for anyone that wants them. And in the long term, I don't see a ban on any flavor being able to stand the test of time, and next generation opinion on the topic.

My latest spin on this topic, which is semi-joking but is in vein of how the heck do you limit tobacco flavor when there are umpteen variations of it, deals with idea of naming flavors with something other than kiddie names. I've actually thought of the name "FDA-Approved" but realize that is begging for trouble. So, instead, I'd go with:

- ANTZ approved tobacco 1 = cotton candy
- ANTZ approved tobacco 2 = bubble gum

and so on and so forth. I honestly would love to see this occur.

 

[Lessifer]

I think it would depend on what other regulations are passed. If only closed systems are allowed, it will be fairly easy to regulate flavors. If not, there's only so much they can do, though they could make it difficult for new vapers.

 

[Sundodger]

I think it would depend on what other regulations are passed. If only closed systems are allowed, it will be fairly easy to regulate flavors. If not, there's only so much they can do, though they could make it difficult for new vapers.

This ^^^^^^^ is the exact problem. Most of us that are already active vapers have tanks and supplies to weather the storm. But with the regs written the way they are they will put open tank systems out of reach of the majority of smokers that have yet to switch over. This will hand the majority of sales to the FDA's good BT buddies and maybe one or two non-BT companies. Without open, refillable systems the flavor issue is non-existent.