FDA details barriers for submitting SE, MRTP and New Tobacco Product applications, falsely claims agency's goal is to reduce morbidity and mortality

[Bill Godshall]

Title of article by FDA’s former CTFP director Lawrence Deyton and DHHS’ Corinne Husten falsely claims FDA's goal is to reduce tobacco morbidity and mortality, but then delineates many unwarranted and expensive barriers (i.e. SE, MRTP and New Product guidances) the agency has issued that effectively ban new smokeless tobacco products, and prevent smokers from being truthfully informed that smokefree alternatives are far less hazardous than cigarettes.

Understanding the tobacco Control Act: efforts by the US Food and Drug Administration to make tobacco-related morbidity and mortality part of the USA's past, not its future
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(13)60735-7/fulltext

In the article, Husten and Deyton also restate FDA’s intent to propose/approve a “deeming regulation” for OTP and reveal (without acknowledging) how Sections 905(j) and 910 of the TCA would once again ban e-cigarettes if the “deeming” regulation is approved, but fail to provide any public health benefits of the deeming regulation (as none exist).

 

[DrMA]

the same old antz propaganda. I don't find it surprising at all.

 

[trying]

Is the outlined process ( financial barriers ) the type that big tobacco could over come and the much smaller E-cigarette companies could not ?

 

[aikanae1]

Products not regulated by the FDA have decreased cigarette smoking - where previous FDA regulated products experienced no reduction in cigarette smoking. So the answer to that is to regulate the products causing the reduction in cigarette smoking?

 

[wv2win]

Thanks for keeping us informed, Bill. Those on ECF who post there is nothing to worry about, need to wise up. I sure hope our membership and financial support of CASAA is growing fast enough to have a chance to get the truth out and stop this madness from the Obama administration or at least derail it or slow it down until there is a possible change of administrations in Washington.

 

[D4rk50ul]

Is there a feeling they are still going for an outright ban or heavy fees to sell e-cigs, or is this just former members fear mongering? Anything we can do to help?

 

[xpl0it]

Is there a feeling they are still going for an outright ban or heavy fees to sell e-cigs, or is this just former members fear mongering? Anything we can do to help?

Sections 905(j) and 910 of the TCA would once again ban e-cigarettes if the “deeming” regulation is approved, but fail to provide any public health benefits of the deeming regulation (as none exist)."

I believe that should answer your first part of the question. Now onto the second part, absolutely and it's very much encouraged!

 

[Petrodus]

If there was a "Tell the Truth Day" ...
It would be declared a government holiday

 

[sbdivemaster]

If there was a "Tell the Truth Day" ...
It would be declared a government holiday

............

 

[rothenbj]

Thanks for keeping us informed, Bill. Those on ECF who post there is nothing to worry about, need to wise up. I sure hope our membership and financial support of CASAA is growing fast enough to have a chance to get the truth out and stop this madness from the Obama administration or at least derail it or slow it down until there is a possible change of administrations in Washington.

I've been saying that for a long time. The FDA, historically, has managed to attempt to protect their clients BP and now BT. I could easily see them working to insure big business controls the products, all in the name of protecting we peons. No fan of Obama, however I'm not sure whether a different Pres. would stop the FDA from doing what they want.

 

[wv2win]

I've been saying that for a long time. The FDA, historically, has managed to attempt to protect their clients BP and now BT. I could easily see them working to insure big business controls the products, all in the name of protecting we peons. No fan of Obama, however I'm not sure whether a different Pres. would stop the FDA from doing what they want.

The previous administration actually saved vaping in 2009, indirectly. The judges that stopped the FDA from banning vaping at that time were appointed by the previous President. It's no accident that the continued attack on vaping by the FDA started in 2009.

 

[Petrodus]

The previous administration actually saved vaping in 2009, indirectly. The judges that stopped the FDA from banning vaping at that time were appointed by the previous President. It's no accident that the continued attack on vaping by the FDA started in 2009.

True ...
Believe It OR Not

 

[D4rk50ul]

I will vote for the next presidential and local government officials based on their standpoint towards vaping. I feel it's a good barometer for how they look at things.

 

[Petrodus]

Considering all the heat the White House administration is feeling...
I doubt the FDA will want to go high-profile with its deeming regulations
anytime soon.

 

[rolygate]

I get the impression that the FDA is so bogged down by various pressures and administrative issues (such as the non-processing of all the MRTP applications) that they are effectively paralysed at present. If so, let's hope they stay that way. One less parasite to worry about.