FDA may soon propose regulation that could ban many/most e-cigarette products, eliminate many/most companies
- Thread starter Bill Godshall
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
-
- Tags
- innokin nicquid revolution revolver
- Status
It took a long time for the page to load, but I did it finally. Put a widget on my web page too. Art By Lisabelle Portraits of People and Pets Since 1987
It's hard enough to breathe LOL not funny!
It's hard enough to breathe LOL not funny!
Bill, you da man!
I have lot of respect for you because you actually DO something instead of whining. But you have gotten used to running with the wind at your back when you were an anti smoking lobbyist. Public serpent politicians looking for revenue, citizens annoyed by smoke, a righteous cause, Big PhRma companies trying to increase the demand for their NRT products.
This is a lot tougher. You do a great job of explaining the what and when.
Some fellow ecig users are questioning why. Why are ACS, ALA and grant junkie reseachers and Big PhRma sponsored anti smoking groups so threatened and hostile to ecigs? I've read this forum a lot and others have touched on the answer.
I'm not coming down off the mountain with the tablets here....it's all about the money$$$$$.
I have lot of respect for you because you actually DO something instead of whining. But you have gotten used to running with the wind at your back when you were an anti smoking lobbyist. Public serpent politicians looking for revenue, citizens annoyed by smoke, a righteous cause, Big PhRma companies trying to increase the demand for their NRT products.
This is a lot tougher. You do a great job of explaining the what and when.
Some fellow ecig users are questioning why. Why are ACS, ALA and grant junkie reseachers and Big PhRma sponsored anti smoking groups so threatened and hostile to ecigs? I've read this forum a lot and others have touched on the answer.
I'm not coming down off the mountain with the tablets here....it's all about the money$$$$$.
Quite a few studies have shown that anti-smoking campaigns can actually increase smoking rates, particularly among the true target audience: teens who have never smoked. This is the most lucrative sector as people who have already begun smoking tend to be quite brand specific. Price elasticity of demand is quite high among smokers - they prefer their brand and will usually pay more for that brand.
tobacco interests want the young smokers to get them engaged with their specific brand from the onset. This increases market share.
So, why would big pharma be interested? Because the more smokers there are, the greater number of people there will be lining up to purchase smoking cessation medication.
The anti-smoking lobby benefits from each addition smoker as well. Cigarette companies pay xx% of revenue to anti-smoking programs. For each dollar drop in tobacco revenue, there is a direct percentage drop in funds diverted to anti-smoking campaigns.
So, tobacco benefits from anti-smoking campaigns, big pharma benefits from tobacco, and anti-smoking campaigns benefit from tobacco. One giant bundle of mutual interest and benefit.
Ecigs threaten all of that mutual .........ion.
tobacco interests want the young smokers to get them engaged with their specific brand from the onset. This increases market share.
So, why would big pharma be interested? Because the more smokers there are, the greater number of people there will be lining up to purchase smoking cessation medication.
The anti-smoking lobby benefits from each addition smoker as well. Cigarette companies pay xx% of revenue to anti-smoking programs. For each dollar drop in tobacco revenue, there is a direct percentage drop in funds diverted to anti-smoking campaigns.
So, tobacco benefits from anti-smoking campaigns, big pharma benefits from tobacco, and anti-smoking campaigns benefit from tobacco. One giant bundle of mutual interest and benefit.
Ecigs threaten all of that mutual .........ion.
Way to lay it out there. It's crazy how the world "works". It's like all these guys are sitting at the poker table and nobody's losing.
!@#$% bureacracy . . .
!@#$% bureacracy . . .
I am disgusted, with what Bill Godshall's good efforts are up against. Lies, Greed and immorality! This is a fight between good and evil.
"Bhutan: 39 people have been convicted and jailed for three years or more for tobacco possession, while 24 received sentences of less than three years.
http://www.kuenselonline.com/2011/?p=25399"
We are all seeing the end of our ability to choose a safer alternative to smoking. I would like to believe in miracles of course we all do. It is Europe first and now us. Somebody powerful has got to support us.
"Bhutan: 39 people have been convicted and jailed for three years or more for tobacco possession, while 24 received sentences of less than three years.
http://www.kuenselonline.com/2011/?p=25399"
We are all seeing the end of our ability to choose a safer alternative to smoking. I would like to believe in miracles of course we all do. It is Europe first and now us. Somebody powerful has got to support us.
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 67
Eric Blair wrote
While money clearly pays (pun intended) a role in opposition to tobacco harm reduction products and policies, the root of the problem is the rapidly expanding (or coming out of the closet) abstinence-only tobacco prohibitionism ideology.
ACS, AHA, ALA and other organizations have allowed CTFK's Matt Myers (who is an abstinence-only prohibitionist and a pathalogical liar) to basically establish and coordinate implementation of their organizations' tobacco/nicotine policies since 1998. While drug industry funding of CTFK, ACS, AHA, ALA has provided them with massive resources to lobby and propagandize for abstinence-only tobacco prohibition policies, Matt Myers probably would be advocating these policies whether or not he had drug industry funds.
The Legacy Foundation (created and heavily funded by the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement) has also been funding and campaigning for abstinence-only tobacco prohibitionist policies because Cheryl Healton (Legacy's extemely well paid president) is an abstinence-only tobacco prohibitonist who opposes tobacco harm reduction products and policies.
Similarly, the reason why NCI and CDC have been funding researchers and state/local health agencies to advocate abstinence-only tobacco prohibitionist policies is because key officials and staff at NCI and CDC are abstinence-only prohibitionists.
Interestingly, two groups of abstinence-only tobacco prohibitionists (in MA and in CA) have recently split from their drug industry funded pro NRT allies by claiming that NRT products reduce (instead of increase) smoking cessation. Greg Connolly (from MA), the most extreme of all abstinence-only prohbitionists in the US, has gone even futher by advocating NRT be banned by the FDA.
So now the drug companies that have funded many abstinence-only tobacco prohibitionists are probably reconsidering their funding of abstinence-only prohibitionists, and are beginning to advocate tobacco harm reduction (albeit only for NRT as a harm reduction product).
While money clearly pays (pun intended) a role in opposition to tobacco harm reduction products and policies, the root of the problem is the rapidly expanding (or coming out of the closet) abstinence-only tobacco prohibitionism ideology.
ACS, AHA, ALA and other organizations have allowed CTFK's Matt Myers (who is an abstinence-only prohibitionist and a pathalogical liar) to basically establish and coordinate implementation of their organizations' tobacco/nicotine policies since 1998. While drug industry funding of CTFK, ACS, AHA, ALA has provided them with massive resources to lobby and propagandize for abstinence-only tobacco prohibition policies, Matt Myers probably would be advocating these policies whether or not he had drug industry funds.
The Legacy Foundation (created and heavily funded by the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement) has also been funding and campaigning for abstinence-only tobacco prohibitionist policies because Cheryl Healton (Legacy's extemely well paid president) is an abstinence-only tobacco prohibitonist who opposes tobacco harm reduction products and policies.
Similarly, the reason why NCI and CDC have been funding researchers and state/local health agencies to advocate abstinence-only tobacco prohibitionist policies is because key officials and staff at NCI and CDC are abstinence-only prohibitionists.
Interestingly, two groups of abstinence-only tobacco prohibitionists (in MA and in CA) have recently split from their drug industry funded pro NRT allies by claiming that NRT products reduce (instead of increase) smoking cessation. Greg Connolly (from MA), the most extreme of all abstinence-only prohbitionists in the US, has gone even futher by advocating NRT be banned by the FDA.
So now the drug companies that have funded many abstinence-only tobacco prohibitionists are probably reconsidering their funding of abstinence-only prohibitionists, and are beginning to advocate tobacco harm reduction (albeit only for NRT as a harm reduction product).
Last edited:
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 67
wfx wrote:
Unfortunately, left wing Democrats at the federal, state and local levels have made tobacco harm reduction a partisan issue.
Virtually all legislation that would ban the sale or use of e-cigarettes have been introduced by left wing Democrats, as has virtually all legislation that would excessively tax smokefree tobacco products.
And while Obama may be centrist on many issues, he appointed left wing abstinence-only tobacco prohibitionists to run the FDA and CDC, which is why FDA's Josh Sharfstein tried to ban e-cigs and lied about their health risks, why the FDA is planning to promulgate a "deeming" regulation (to apply Chapter IX of the FSPTCA to currently unregulated tobacco products) that would effectively ban e-cigarettes and other new smokefree alternatives, why the CDC and FDA now deceitfully claim that "tobacco use" is the leading cause of disease and death (instead of "cigarette smoking"), and why the FDA and CDC staunchly oppose even acknowledging the existance of tobacco harm reduction products.
For disclosure, I've been a registered Democrat since 1980, although I'm a social liberal and fiscal conservative (more of a pragmatic liberterian), and I've collaborated with Rs and Ds on many legislative campaigns.
Unfortunately, left wing Democrats at the federal, state and local levels have made tobacco harm reduction a partisan issue.
Virtually all legislation that would ban the sale or use of e-cigarettes have been introduced by left wing Democrats, as has virtually all legislation that would excessively tax smokefree tobacco products.
And while Obama may be centrist on many issues, he appointed left wing abstinence-only tobacco prohibitionists to run the FDA and CDC, which is why FDA's Josh Sharfstein tried to ban e-cigs and lied about their health risks, why the FDA is planning to promulgate a "deeming" regulation (to apply Chapter IX of the FSPTCA to currently unregulated tobacco products) that would effectively ban e-cigarettes and other new smokefree alternatives, why the CDC and FDA now deceitfully claim that "tobacco use" is the leading cause of disease and death (instead of "cigarette smoking"), and why the FDA and CDC staunchly oppose even acknowledging the existance of tobacco harm reduction products.
For disclosure, I've been a registered Democrat since 1980, although I'm a social liberal and fiscal conservative (more of a pragmatic liberterian), and I've collaborated with Rs and Ds on many legislative campaigns.
Last edited:
Another email from WA State Senator:
Dear Ms. Terry :
Thank you for contacting me with your thoughts about online piracy. I appreciate hearing from you on this important subject.
As you may know, S. 968, the Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act of 2011 , was introduced in the Senate early last year. Companion legislation called the Stop Online Piracy Act was also introduced in the House. Both bills attempt to address the problem of foreign-based websites that sell pirated movies, music and other products.
While I support the goal of tackling online piracy , I have real concerns with both of t hese bills as they are presently written. Protecting intellectual property is vital for job creation and our economy in Washington state, but elements of this legislation could hamper innovation through increased legal burdens and costs. Additionally, I have concerns about the legislation's potential to reduce freedom of expression and unintentionally weaken our cybersecurity .
Earlier this month, millions of Americans spoke in opposition to these bills, and I heard your conce rns. Now, we should continue our work to protect intellectual property and stop online piracy, while continu ing to support a free and open I nternet.
Again, thank you for writing to me about this important issue. If you would like to know more about my work in the Senate, please feel free to sign up for my weekly updates at Senator Murray . Please stay in touch.
Sincerely,
Patty Murray
United States Senator
Dear Ms. Terry :
Thank you for contacting me with your thoughts about online piracy. I appreciate hearing from you on this important subject.
As you may know, S. 968, the Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act of 2011 , was introduced in the Senate early last year. Companion legislation called the Stop Online Piracy Act was also introduced in the House. Both bills attempt to address the problem of foreign-based websites that sell pirated movies, music and other products.
While I support the goal of tackling online piracy , I have real concerns with both of t hese bills as they are presently written. Protecting intellectual property is vital for job creation and our economy in Washington state, but elements of this legislation could hamper innovation through increased legal burdens and costs. Additionally, I have concerns about the legislation's potential to reduce freedom of expression and unintentionally weaken our cybersecurity .
Earlier this month, millions of Americans spoke in opposition to these bills, and I heard your conce rns. Now, we should continue our work to protect intellectual property and stop online piracy, while continu ing to support a free and open I nternet.
Again, thank you for writing to me about this important issue. If you would like to know more about my work in the Senate, please feel free to sign up for my weekly updates at Senator Murray . Please stay in touch.
Sincerely,
Patty Murray
United States Senator
Bill Godshall you are illuminating a very sick situation. We need Donald Trump or others that are in the upper upper tier to make some supportive noises. I am almost seeing war over this. Alcohol prohibition made victims by the hundreds of thousands dying in bullit sprays. It didn't take long for the drinkers of this country to take matters into their own hands.
Why is Alcoholism please this is not to offend anyone, in a broad sense, Alcoholics have more of a legacy of damages to others, not just themselves, and that particular addicted group, is coddled, and applauded for accepting help at tax payers expense, every social service and then upheld in esteem for "Recovery" but nicotine addicts, who smoke in sub freezing temperatures, are ostracized, and this is not paranoid, nicotine addicts are now persecuted and annihilated, alienated and shamed to the grave no matter what they do. If an alcoholic has a hard time staying abstinent society has endless ways and understands. I am disgusted with to borrow a truthful phrase from you " is an abstinence-only prohibitionist and a pathalogical liar". Do they think this addicted group nicotine users who have found a safe alternative, who have recovered their physical health and stamina won't be muscle is this coming to a police state? The only hope is that the might wealthy whatever party they may be affiliated with, is our only hope to avoid a blood bath (LOL) not funny!
Why is Alcoholism please this is not to offend anyone, in a broad sense, Alcoholics have more of a legacy of damages to others, not just themselves, and that particular addicted group, is coddled, and applauded for accepting help at tax payers expense, every social service and then upheld in esteem for "Recovery" but nicotine addicts, who smoke in sub freezing temperatures, are ostracized, and this is not paranoid, nicotine addicts are now persecuted and annihilated, alienated and shamed to the grave no matter what they do. If an alcoholic has a hard time staying abstinent society has endless ways and understands. I am disgusted with to borrow a truthful phrase from you " is an abstinence-only prohibitionist and a pathalogical liar". Do they think this addicted group nicotine users who have found a safe alternative, who have recovered their physical health and stamina won't be muscle is this coming to a police state? The only hope is that the might wealthy whatever party they may be affiliated with, is our only hope to avoid a blood bath (LOL) not funny!
Last edited:
I love peace, puppies, flowers and people of course I am praying for a peaceful settlement that we vapers and other safe alternative users of nicotine will be able to afford and freely use. If that is a dream I am aware of the alternatives as stated above, and it's scary but an underground of illegal nicotine use and then resulting punishments, fines and imprisonment for otherwise law abiding citizens. Vaping and driving isn't killing millions, vaping behaviors are not obnoxious, domestic violence and other crimes are not attributed to smoking or the use of nicotine. Rape all aggrivated assaults are not related to nicotine users. That drug alcohol is revered and young people always want it and easily at home, they get it. Most alcoholics similar to smokers began "picking up use in puberty". Those cronys that you have mentioned and their political association make me/we aware of this total abstinence regime spearheaded by a bunch of lunatics and baffoons! Mostly LIARS!
Last edited:
One more thing. I have a drink when I want to. I am not knocking alcohol or hoping for another prohibition there, it's just a good argument for fairness. Cheers
Back to the drawing board Leonard ss. LOL it hurts when I laugh and I guess I laugh when it hurts too, unless sob......... emotions heating up over all this and I know I am not the only one.
Back to the drawing board Leonard ss. LOL it hurts when I laugh and I guess I laugh when it hurts too, unless sob......... emotions heating up over all this and I know I am not the only one.
Bill, windwalker,
I'm a total noob (1 week) to PV's but I've been able to stop 45 years of tobacco use with them. I can't say that about cold turkey, patches, gum, lozenges, or Wellbutrin. I'm not at all ashamed of my desire for nicotine either. I think I understand your approach to the FDA and regulation, but I also see windwalker's scenario playing out in some form so I'm trying to brace for it while hoping the 'cigar piggyback' plan succeeds.
I'd like to hear your opinions though, on this: It seems to me that references to 'tobacco' and 'tobacco product' not only mean different things to different people, but moreover the terms have grown out of historical experience/reference and the advent of PV's challenge the accepted definitions. The connotations of tobacco, tobacco products, and their effect all need to be divorced from 'nicotine', i.m.o. In the past nicotine was the evil 'hook' back to the negatives of the rest of the tobacco components and nicotine delivery methods and today the two are still synonymous both in public opinion as well as legal documents and legislative intent. When in fact in light of technology advancement and PV use, nicotine needs to be re-evaluated on it's own. Granted this might mean considering it as a drug and might take it from the FDA frying pan into the fire but isn't this incorrect association really at the root of non-acceptance and our frustrations?
Shouldn't we also be convincing our legislators that they need to re-examine this incorrect correlation and use that as a basis to advocate PV/nicotine exemption from historical 'tobacco' legislation?
In my perfect world scenario, there would be realistic & reasonable cost nicotine solution manufacture quality standards (a new USP monograph for nicotine vaporisation products), and sufficient controls to avoid sales to minors. For sure we'd never get there if the current nicotine/tobacco association persists. And in these days of Trans Fat bans, maybe we would never get there, but I think we should try.
I'm a total noob (1 week) to PV's but I've been able to stop 45 years of tobacco use with them. I can't say that about cold turkey, patches, gum, lozenges, or Wellbutrin. I'm not at all ashamed of my desire for nicotine either. I think I understand your approach to the FDA and regulation, but I also see windwalker's scenario playing out in some form so I'm trying to brace for it while hoping the 'cigar piggyback' plan succeeds.
I'd like to hear your opinions though, on this: It seems to me that references to 'tobacco' and 'tobacco product' not only mean different things to different people, but moreover the terms have grown out of historical experience/reference and the advent of PV's challenge the accepted definitions. The connotations of tobacco, tobacco products, and their effect all need to be divorced from 'nicotine', i.m.o. In the past nicotine was the evil 'hook' back to the negatives of the rest of the tobacco components and nicotine delivery methods and today the two are still synonymous both in public opinion as well as legal documents and legislative intent. When in fact in light of technology advancement and PV use, nicotine needs to be re-evaluated on it's own. Granted this might mean considering it as a drug and might take it from the FDA frying pan into the fire but isn't this incorrect association really at the root of non-acceptance and our frustrations?
Shouldn't we also be convincing our legislators that they need to re-examine this incorrect correlation and use that as a basis to advocate PV/nicotine exemption from historical 'tobacco' legislation?
In my perfect world scenario, there would be realistic & reasonable cost nicotine solution manufacture quality standards (a new USP monograph for nicotine vaporisation products), and sufficient controls to avoid sales to minors. For sure we'd never get there if the current nicotine/tobacco association persists. And in these days of Trans Fat bans, maybe we would never get there, but I think we should try.
Last edited:
agree Lisa Belle, as an exsmoker being on the receiving end of the discrimination wondered for years why its the Smokers who are the Spawn of the Devil not the Drunks,
Dont know any Smokers who drive on the wrong side of freeways because they had too many cigarettes, or start fights, or throw the furniture in the pool, or finish the evening lying face down on footpaths,
The fumes from a heavy drinking bout will maker a Smokers
breath smell like a bunch of flowers by comparison,
So far as "costing the community money" as Smokers are always accused of doing, Drunks leave Smokers in the shade,
Always wondered... why Smokers ?
Dont know any Smokers who drive on the wrong side of freeways because they had too many cigarettes, or start fights, or throw the furniture in the pool, or finish the evening lying face down on footpaths,
The fumes from a heavy drinking bout will maker a Smokers
breath smell like a bunch of flowers by comparison, So far as "costing the community money" as Smokers are always accused of doing, Drunks leave Smokers in the shade,
Always wondered... why Smokers ?
Congrats on joining the vaping world and for quitting that 45-year habit. I had the same experience with my 17-year habit almost 7 months ago now.
Uh-oh... here comes a bit of a rant.
From my perspective, any laws and regulations will be irrelevant. The instructions are out in the wild to build a box mod for about $10 from legal radioshack parts, batteries will remain legal, same with safe PG and VG liquid, so its just a matter of getting hold of the nicotine liquid. If an underworld appears for that, so be it... it'll get my business. I've no problem following sensible laws, but as Tburys remarked, this isn't about health and safety, its about taxes... and money, lobbying and control. BigTobacco has powerful lobbyists and controls congress more than the people. Such brazen unethical influence means it isn't the bills and regulations we need to fight... it is our congress, including removing about 95% of them from office and limiting their powers of intrusion. Sure if millions of us voice opposition for months we can influence them, but we would have far greater influence if we actually kick scores of them out of office for not listening to us or voting for our best interests.
As for re-evaluating nicotine... it will never happen, or at least not in the next 50 years. It is a toxin (with benefits), and is dangerous. If I drink the bottle next to me right now, there's a good chance I'll die (sure that's true of anything under my sink too - bleach, etc.). It is infinitely more dangerous than another substance long overdue re-evaluation and they've proved for many decades they can maintain a policy against the greater good, if an interested party is paying them enough.
Our best bet is to spread the word, as we are doing, about how vaping has extended lives and is saving lives. E-cigs are my bible. I talk to anyone and everyone, anytime and anywhere (including Disneyland!), about vaping and answer any questions. There is power in numbers, so we need to make our community the majority, and save yet more lives in the process.
You said you're 1 week into this... I expect in a few weeks to a few months at worst, you're going to experience a re-awakening of taste and smell, while regaining lost lung capacity (to the point where it'll surprise you and and make you grin/laugh), improved energy, skin health, mood... make sure you spread that joy with everyone. I'm fat and aging, but I feel like I've been born again and haven't been healthier or happier since I was a teenager. I'm NOT going to let any law prevent others from feeling the same way.
/rant Zzzzz.
Thanx OrthodoxAthiest, and congrats to you as well. It may be my imagination but I think I'm noticing better sense of smell and easier breathing already. And I totally agree with you about enough is enough. After 60 years of seeing more and more restrictions I'm simply ready to ignore them all myself regardless of the consequences. The adoption of that sort of attitude among we the governed is historically proven and inevitable and legislators only have themselves to blame. So be it, say I.
I'm still convinced we should all work hard to divorce PV's/nicotine from smoking/tobacco in minds and legislation. (the use of PV rather than e-cig is one way I intend to do that for example). And, I don't think money is necessarily the only motivation. I think personal human vices play a pretty big factor, and that's why cigars, pipes, and the other toxic-on-a-level-with-nicotine commonly used substance (alcohol) has had such a relatively easy time so far. NO ONE can argue that nicotine (alone, used in PV's) has anywhere NEAR the 'cost to society' as alcohol, imo.
As far as not going to happen.. 4 years ago I never thought I'd hear presidential candidate Ron Paul being interviewed by even the few mainstream media that have finally begrudgingly had him on. Or the other candidates starting to espouse his desire to eliminate whole federal government departments. All because people have had enough and just won't go away in their support. I'm proud to be one of them, btw. He might not win, but huge insight into how fed up the masses are have been made known to the political bodies even if he doesn't. We need to make a 'thousand cuts' on the governing bodies.
One thing I forgot.. my analogy is that nicotine is a tobacco product as tires are a motor vehicle product. They're not.
I'm still convinced we should all work hard to divorce PV's/nicotine from smoking/tobacco in minds and legislation. (the use of PV rather than e-cig is one way I intend to do that for example). And, I don't think money is necessarily the only motivation. I think personal human vices play a pretty big factor, and that's why cigars, pipes, and the other toxic-on-a-level-with-nicotine commonly used substance (alcohol) has had such a relatively easy time so far. NO ONE can argue that nicotine (alone, used in PV's) has anywhere NEAR the 'cost to society' as alcohol, imo.
As far as not going to happen.. 4 years ago I never thought I'd hear presidential candidate Ron Paul being interviewed by even the few mainstream media that have finally begrudgingly had him on. Or the other candidates starting to espouse his desire to eliminate whole federal government departments. All because people have had enough and just won't go away in their support. I'm proud to be one of them, btw. He might not win, but huge insight into how fed up the masses are have been made known to the political bodies even if he doesn't. We need to make a 'thousand cuts' on the governing bodies.
One thing I forgot.. my analogy is that nicotine is a tobacco product as tires are a motor vehicle product. They're not.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
