FDA may soon propose regulation that could ban many/most e-cigarette products, eliminate many/most companies

[Uma]

This is very much sounding like the FDA is campaigning to legalize Monopolizing.

 

[DC2]

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.).

I am not positive that this is true, although I have heard it from some trusted sources...

But supposedly, if you drank that bottle next to you, you would have almost no chance of keeping it down.
And the chances you could die from nicotine poisoning are pretty low.

From what I understand, it is really, really, really hard to die from nicotine poisoning.

 

[mostlyclassics]

The FDA is clearly in the pockets of Big Pharma and their minions. Adam Feuerstein, a chronicler of new drugs and medical devices companies and their stock issues, did a survey of what gets approved by the FDA.

Over the last few years, companies with a market cap of a billion or more had a bunch of new drugs and medical devices approved. The exact number escapes my aged brain, but it was quite a number.

But during the same period, companies with a market cap of less than 50 million had exactly zero drugs or devices approved.

Bear in mind that all the testing protocols were designed in cooperation with the FDA, no matter what the market cap size of the companies. Everyone had to jump through the same FDA hoops. Big companies won; little companies lost.

Go figger.

 

[DC2]

It's enough to make you want to start a revolution.

 

[DaveP]

I think that the 1ml = a pack of cigarettes general belief could be a slow death to the ejuice industry. I don't know how much the tax would be, but I'm betting that it would be $1.00 per ml, similar to the $1 tax on a pack of cigarettes. That would add $30 to a 30ml bottle, just in taxes. Most of us vape two to three times that in a month. Adding $100 a month to the average juice bill would be outrageous.

I guess we need to find a way to establish the correct amount that the previous pack a day vaper actually consumes. We all know that it's far more than 1ml. 5ml would be more like it.

 

[DC2]

I think that the 1ml = a pack of cigarettes general belief could be a slow death to the ejuice industry. I don't know how much the tax would be, but I'm betting that it would be $1.00 per ml, similar to the $1 tax on a pack of cigarettes. That would add $30 to a 30ml bottle, just in taxes. Most of us vape two to three times that in a month. Adding $100 a month to the average juice bill would be outrageous.

I guess we need to find a way to establish the correct amount that the previous pack a day vaper actually consumes. We all know that it's far more than 1ml. 5ml would be more like it.

You are so correct, it makes me eyes bleed.

They will nail us with these claims some day, and we'll all be sorry.
Unless we keep on fighting them, and make them back off.

But we need numbers, as in people willing to stand up and fight.
And we are getting those numbers slowly but surely.

What I'm not seeing, though, is the standing up and fighting.
At least to the degree it is needed.

I guess it will take a vaping earthquake to wake up the sleeping masses.
By then it might be too late.

 

[DC2]

I am not positive that this is true, although I have heard it from some trusted sources...

But supposedly, if you drank that bottle next to you, you would have almost no chance of keeping it down.
And the chances you could die from nicotine poisoning are pretty low.

From what I understand, it is really, really, really hard to die from nicotine poisoning.

From a recent post...

As a child, at various times I had occasion to forcefully empty the contents of my stomach. It was unpleasant, but by no means "devastating."

These people have been brainwashed by all the propaganda about "fatal doses" of nicotine. They take the dose of nicotine thought to be fatal, compare it to the total amount of nicotine in a container, and conclude that the contents of the container would kill a child if ingested. What really happens is that the nicotine triggers vomiting, which eliminates the vast majority of nicotine from the system. Nicotine that isn't in the system cannot kill the child.

During the past 27 years, the only child death related to tobacco involved a child that had both cigarettes and Valium in his system. Perhaps the Valium suppressed the body's natural defense mechanism against nicotine poisoning. Or perhaps the Valium itself killed the child.

The majority of cases require no medical treatment whatsoever. For example in 2009, out of 8,774 tobacco exposures, 1602 cases were treated in a medical facility, and only 4 cases were considered "Major". Of 1,307 pharmaceutical nicotine exposures, 315 were treated in a medical facility, and 2 cases were considered Major. There were no Deaths in either category.

Perhaps the PTA is not focusing its attention on the problems that are really the most dangerous. For example, there were 13,339 exposures to Amphetamines and Related Compounds. Of these, 4,337 required treatment in a medical facility, 75 were considered Major, and there were 3 deaths.

There were 51,999 exposures to alcoholic beverages, 4,060 treated in a medical facility, 202 were considered Major, and there were 8 Deaths.

 

[mostlyclassics]

I think that the 1ml = a pack of cigarettes general belief could be a slow death to the ejuice industry. I don't know how much the tax would be, but I'm betting that it would be $1.00 per ml, similar to the $1 tax on a pack of cigarettes. That would add $30 to a 30ml bottle, just in taxes. Most of us vape two to three times that in a month. Adding $100 a month to the average juice bill would be outrageous.

And that's just the federal tax. Imagine adding on the state and local taxes, which in most cases are triple or more the federal tax!

 

[Thulium]

I guess we need to find a way to establish the correct amount that the previous pack a day vaper actually consumes. We all know that it's far more than 1ml. 5ml would be more like it.

1ml of 16mg/ml e-liquid contains about as much nicotine as the average commercial cigarette: 1.63%. I suggest moving away from the scientific terminology of milligrams and milliliters that are not well understood and use terms that the average person understands: "Most former pack-a-day smokers use less than a teaspoon(5ml) per day of liquid with an optional small percentage (<5%) of nicotine."

 

[lawnman3]

i say they all should JUST GO AWAY...
NUF SAID...

lawnman3...

 

[JD4x4]

1ml of 16mg/ml e-liquid contains about as much nicotine as the average commercial cigarette: 1.63%. I suggest moving away from the scientific terminology of milligrams and milliliters that are not well understood and use terms that the average person understands: "Most former pack-a-day smokers use less than a teaspoon(5ml) per day of liquid with an optional small percentage (<5%) of nicotine."

That's actually more confusing to me somehow. But, who are we aiming this verbage at? Consumers want it simple but comparable to smoking. FDA wants it technical. Sellers want it to look like a bargain.

I think we are simply at the point of divergence between FDA, seller, and consumer interests. As a consumer I want to relate consumption size/cost to smoking for both cost and health reasons. The seller quite properly wants to make the cost to the consumer attractive while maximising profit. The FDA on the other hand, wants to take whatever the average usage is and then a) make the daily use lower to help us stop using it altogether, and b) make the cost as painful as possible for cessation reasons as well as contribute to the reparation fund, both of which are because it's another harmful tobacco product. (By the way as I've said before nicotine is a tobacco product as much as tires are a motor vehicle product).

Isn't mg/ml what everyone uses when talking about cigarettes, just shortened to mg? And as a total noob, what you just said '1ml of 16mg/ml' contains as much as an avg commercial cig doesn't jive with me being a 22 RYO a day smoker and being satisfied now with about 3ml of juice (granted it's 24mg/ml). Is in fact the absorption rate higher with vapes?

Forgive me for not knowing, I've been using vapes only a week now and a RYO user for the last 5 years so it's been that long since I've seen a pack.

Regardless, doesn't it just need to be realistic? I think we are all best served if a cart or ml just accurately equates to past cigarette use. I used a filter on my RYOs and I rolled them with a roller to roughly 3/4 the size or smaller of a store-bought (5.3mm dia, 68mm total length, 15mm filter length). My 2 year avg was 22 a day. As I said, that now equates to about 3ml/day of 2.4% liquid. I'd like to up it to 3.6% to see if I can get down to 2ml/day for cost reasons only. Don't we just need more stats from vape users about previous brand, strength, flavor, and consumption vs. current vape strength, flavor, & consumption?

 

[Lisa Belle]

I like that so many of us are thinking here and sharing ideas. It is a practical problem and could be handled rationally.....
rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrggggggggggggggggg of course LOL I hope it's not time to call out the National Guard. I like what you have said JD4X4 and everyone. We are getting a clue and that might be best over all.

 

[FAAmecanic]

correct. i should have said: this /should not be/ a partisan issue.

Im sure while it seems like the majority of the politicos supporting the ban of ecigs are democrats, there are plenty of republicans on that side as well. When it comes to finding ways to tax something so you can buy more votes from the uneducated/under-educated, this type of disgusting politics is NON partisan.

I like Bill, am a fiscal conservative and a moral moderate. Definately lean heavily libertarian. In my mind if you are not harming anyone else, or interfering with thier pursuit of life and liberty...then federal/state/local govnts have no RIGHT to get in your way.

And I used to be a dyed in the wool, die hard Republican...... until I discovered the only difference between the two parties is R or D at the end of thier names.

 

[JD4x4]

..snip..
I like Bill, am a fiscal conservative and a moral moderate. Definately lean heavily libertarian. In my mind if you are not harming anyone else, or interfering with thier pursuit of life and liberty...then federal/state/local govnts have no RIGHT to get in your way.

And I used to be a dyed in the wool, die hard Republican...... until I discovered the only difference between the two parties is R or D at the end of thier names.

Hmm. This quiz may help you determine.

 

[wfx]

And I used to be a dyed in the wool, die hard Republican...... until I discovered the only difference between the two parties is R or D at the end of thier names.

you got that right. i came from the opposite side. we have a serious 'payola' problem and ecig regulation is a wonderful lense to see it.

there's obviously a reasonable policy balance to be struck here. apart from the habit/hobby itself, i'm thrilled that this issue is such a game changer. the debate from both ends of the spectrum is stale.

 

[progg]

I'm not busting your chops but I have to say -- The road to serfdom is paved with 'reasonable policy balance'.

That philosophical line of thought is an admission of defeat. [See cigarettes.]

'Reasonable' continually evolves from regulation to eventual (in effect) prohibition of what once existed.

[OP: if I've violated your thread intention, please PM me and I'll remove it.]

 

[FAAmecanic]

Hmm. This quiz may help you determine.

Love your avatar JD4X4... Is that an Aussie or Border Collie? I have two Aussies Like having two 5 year olds

LOL...yep as I suspected. While I do have issues with legalizing all drugs (some are just downright harmful and destructive..I have been to Amsterdam and seen what happens with lax drug policies).

Your PERSONAL issues Score is 70%

Your ECONOMIC issues Score is 100%

According to your answers, the political group that agrees with you most is...

Libertarians support maximum liberty in both personal and economic matters. They advocate a much smaller government; one that is limited to protecting individuals from coercion and violence. Libertarians tend to embrace individual responsibility, oppose government bureaucracy and taxes, promote private charity, tolerate diverse lifestyles, support the free market, and defend civil liberties.

 

[warlike36]

Hmm. This quiz may help you determine.

Thanks for the link..... Very informative. Who would a thought

 

[Coil]

Hmm. This quiz may help you determine.

Nice find! Cool little quiz

 

[wfx]

I'm not busting your chops but I have to say -- The road to serfdom is paved with 'reasonable policy balance'. That philosophical line of thought is an admission of defeat. [See cigarettes.] 'Reasonable' continually evolves from regulation to eventual (in effect) prohibition of what once existed.

totally respect your position. i've taken it many times. but the defeatist attitude is to assume market regulation cannot be done correctly. just because it's done naively most (all?) of the time. practice makes perfect. live free or die. please go with the former.