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

[Uncle Willie]

There will, of course, be legal action if the deeming comes down .. it's America after all ..

What so many seem to fail to realize or even think about is the failure of the industry as a whole to get it's act together in the last few years ..

Products with no real instructions
Cartos that will burn when too dry .. yes, they will burn

and more .. however, these are the things we don't like to talk about .. we like to say "I feel better" .. and we like to say "FDA stay out of my life" ..

Most of us are still riding the nicotine train ..

And a few of us, yes a few, actually believe that some degree of standardization / long term testing / required methods of liquid and device production / are all actually good things ..

Now it's time for the old "Yes, but walking across the street is dangerous" routine ..

And now, I will don my flamesuit ..

 

[DC2]

What so many seem to fail to realize or even think about is the failure of the industry as a whole to get it's act together in the last few years ..

I think nearly every long-term vaper understands that.

Products with no real instructions
Cartos that will burn when too dry .. yes, they will burn

and more .. however, these are the things we don't like to talk about ..

We talk about these things frequently, but apparently not frequently enough for you?

.. and we like to say "FDA stay out of my life" ..

And for good reason, given their OBVIOUS inclination to remove the option of vaping from the planet.
Just like many countries in the world have already done, while citing the FDA propaganda.

And a few of us, yes a few, actually believe that some degree of standardization / long term testing / required methods of liquid and device production / are all actually good things ..

Yes, there are extremists, but you shouldn't generalize that to many/most/all vapers.
There is a large percentage that wouldn't mind some REASONABLE regulation.

Unfortunately, those that have been paying attention to past events don't feel comfortable that regulations will be reasonable.

Now it's time for the old "Yes, but walking across the street is dangerous" routine ..

What exactly is your issue?
If you can explain it clearly, perhaps you will gain some converts.

Yes, walking down the street is dangerous.
And under the wrong circumstances so is wearing seatbelts.

I could actually make a long list of such things.

After all this time, I still don't get where you are coming from yet.

And now, I will don my flamesuit ..

I for one won't be flaming you, just wondering what is on your mind.
I've read a lot of your posts, and have never really got a clear indication.

 

[MaDeuce]

Another over-simpification.

I understand that the FDA is responsible for the health and safety of Americans, but there is this little phrase in the Constitution that goes something like this;

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men (people) are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness...."

The phrase is meant to exemplify the "unalienable rights" with which all human beings are endowed for the protection of which they institute governments. In other words,we institute governments to PROTECT these unalienable rights, not to suppress them. So it would seem to me that the actions that the FDA is considering taking infringe upon both our liberty and our pursuit of happiness, and unless they have documented incontrovertible proof, (which they do not) they cannot even claim that electronic nicotine delivery devices are life threatening. Some say the pursuit of happiness is a slippery slope but as long as your pursuit stays within the law, there is no slope. Some will say that the legislature will just enact a law, but enacting a law which denies your liberty and pursuit of happiness is unconstitutional unless of course you are threatening or denying someone else's, or your own, life, which as I have stated above, the FDA does not possess proof of. The danger of second hand smoke and side stream smoke are well documented in regard to analog cigarettes but the same cannot be said of second hand vapor and since an e-cig does not smolder, side stream vapor (the two things which deny another of their unalienable right to life) does not exist.

 

[DC2]

Another over-simpification.

I understand that the FDA is responsible for the health and safety of Americans, but there is this little phrase in the Constitution that goes something like this;

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men (people) are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness...."

The phrase is meant to exemplify the "unalienable rights" with which all human beings are endowed for the protection of which they institute governments. In other words,we institute governments to PROTECT these unalienable rights, not to suppress them. So it would seem to me that the actions that the FDA is considering taking infringe upon both our liberty and our pursuit of happiness, and unless they have documented incontrovertible proof, (which they do not) they cannot even claim that electronic nicotine delivery devices are life threatening. Some say the pursuit of happiness is a slippery slope but as long as your pursuit stays within the law, there is no slope. Some will say that the legislature will just enact a law, but enacting a law which denies your liberty and pursuit of happiness is unconstitutional unless of course you are threatening or denying someone else's, or your own, life, which as I have stated above, the FDA does not possess proof of. The danger of second hand smoke and side stream smoke are well documented in regard to analog cigarettes but the same cannot be said of second hand vapor and since an e-cig does not smolder, side stream vapor (the two things which deny another of their unalienable right to life) does not exist.

I'm having a hard time coming up with superlatives to express my agreement with this post.
It sums up everything in one neat little tiny ball.

Live free, and make sure we all keep our right to live free.
Don't let us become that which we were never intended to be.

Our forefathers would shudder at what is becoming of us as a free people.
And by that I mean that we are becoming less and less of a free people.

 

[Jostumidd]

I can imagine a way around the deeming regulation. As I understand it, the regulation would refuse to allow sale of "tobacco" products introduced after February of 2007. That to me suggests that ecig hardware is exempt since no nicotine is used in their manufacture. So on to e-juice. I believe PG or VG based unflavored nicotine liquid was available prior to 2007 which makes those products exempt from pre-market review. If the deeming regulation is implemented, all e-juice manufacturers could eliminate nicotine from their products (no longer covered as a "tobacco" product) and provide instructions on how to mix them with the pre-2007 nicotine liquid to achieve the desired end product. To make it easier, perhaps manufacturers could use the epoxy model and provide their proprietary flavoring formula in bottle A, and the pre-2007 nicotine liquid product in bottle B, to be mixed together by the consumer.

A similar approach was followed during Prohibition when grape producers in California would ship bricks of dehydrated Zinfandel grapes east, to Chicago and New York in railcars. These concentrated bricks of sugary grapes came with a strong warning label: CAUTION! Do not add these grapes to 5 gallons of water and five pounds of sugar with yeast, or it will ferment into wine, which is ILLEGAL.

Obviously, this would be a huge inconvenience and many potential vapers would be discouraged from vaping because of that, but the rest of us would still be able to enjoy our vice. I also worry that incompetent mixers might overdose themselves, leading to a new outcry and more regulation.

Would this approach work?

 

[MaDeuce]

Speaking of "nicotine delivery devices", will the FDA be wanting to regulate or ban tomatoes, cauliflower, eggplant, tea, peppers and all the products derived from peppers? They are, after all, "nicotine delivery devices". Technically speaking.

 

[HarmonyPB]

A similar approach was followed during Prohibition when grape producers in California would ship bricks of dehydrated Zinfandel grapes east, to Chicago and New York in railcars. These concentrated bricks of sugary grapes came with a strong warning label: CAUTION! Do not add these grapes to 5 gallons of water and five pounds of sugar with yeast, or it will ferment into wine, which is ILLEGAL.

I just want to say that that is awesome!!

 

[rockymtnrobin]

It appears that the FDA may soon (perhaps in the next several weeks or months) follow through with the agency's April 25 stated intent (in red below) to propose a regulation that would apply Chapter IX of the FSPTCA to e-cigarette products (that contain nicotine) and other currently unregulated tobacco products, including: small cigars, large cigars, pipe tobacco, hookah/shisha tobacco, dissolvable tobacco/nicotine products (that aren't smokeless tobacco products), nicotine water, tobacco/nicotine skin cream and patches, non electronic nicotine inhalers, tobacco/nicotine nasal sprays, etc.


April 25, 2011

Regulation of E-Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products


June 16, 2011

Sens. Merkley, Brown and 10 other Democrats pressure FDA to reverse ruling that Star's Ariva BDL and Stonewall BDL aren't smokeless tobacco products (as defined by FSPTCA), grossly exaggerate health/safety risks of dissolvable tobacco (that now includes nicotine lozenges), falsely claim products are marketed to youth, call them candy.
New Senator Brown and Senate Colleagues to FDA: It's Time To Close The Door On Tobacco Candy
http://www.ktvz.com/news/28300863/detail.html (6/16/11 Dem Sens. letter to Margaret Hamburg)




October 14, 2011

US Senate Democrats Blumenthal, Lautenberg & Brown urge FDA to "swiftly" expand tobacco regulations, falsely accuse tobacco industry of undermining FSPTCA, urge agency to apply Chapter IX to all cigars, pipe tobacco, hookah/shisha, dissolvables, e-cigarettes and other tobacco products, criticize companies for marketing exponentially less hazardous smokefree alternatives to smokers, grossly misrepresent health risks/benefits and marketing of smokefree products.
Senators Send Letter to FDA on Other Tobacco Products

http://www.cspdigitals.com/tobaccoenews/tom-letter.pdf (Oct. 14, 2011 letter to Margaret Hamburg from Sens Lautenberg, Blumenthal, Brown)



November 29, 2011

Cigars | FDA | Obama Administration | Regulations | The Daily Caller

Time to move forward!

 

[Natedogg1026]

There will, of course, be legal action if the deeming comes down .. it's America after all ..

What so many seem to fail to realize or even think about is the failure of the industry as a whole to get it's act together in the last few years ..

Products with no real instructions
Cartos that will burn when too dry .. yes, they will burn

and more .. however, these are the things we don't like to talk about .. we like to say "I feel better" .. and we like to say "FDA stay out of my life" ..

Most of us are still riding the nicotine train ..

And a few of us, yes a few, actually believe that some degree of standardization / long term testing / required methods of liquid and device production / are all actually good things ..

Now it's time for the old "Yes, but walking across the street is dangerous" routine ..

And now, I will don my flamesuit ..

Very well said.-Nater

 

[Koman]

Speaking of "nicotine delivery devices", will the FDA be wanting to regulate or ban tomatoes, cauliflower, eggplant, tea, peppers and all the products derived from peppers? They are, after all, "nicotine delivery devices". Technically speaking.

LOL yeah good question!

 

[Agorizer]

Speaking of "nicotine delivery devices", will the FDA be wanting to regulate or ban tomatoes, cauliflower, eggplant, tea, peppers and all the products derived from peppers? They are, after all, "nicotine delivery devices". Technically speaking.

It is my understanding that the only logic (logic, what logic; this is a government operation...) under which the nicotine in our juice is even considered a "tobacco product" is that all nic: for patches, gum juice, other---is derived FROM tobacco. I posed this before, and will again....Why can't it be synthesized? If it doesn't come from the leaf, its not "of the leaf".
[logic disclaimer--see above aside.]

 

[markdm4805]

Maybe I'm over-simplifying things here but to ban one "nicotine delivery device", shouldn't you have to ban them all? Isn't an analog cigarette simply a "nicotine delivery device"? And if you do ban one but not the other, isn't that grounds for an anti-trust lawsuit against the FDA itself and any FDA financial backer associated even remotely with the analog cigarette industry?

Remember key word here from a legal standpoint is regulate not ban. If they had said they are banning E cigs then yes I could see a basis for Anti Trust actions. How ever what these slick snake oil salesmen are doing is simply saying that E Cigs have to standup to every regulation that analogs do. They even leave the door open by saying that any new products must get approval. Never mind the fact that approval could cost millions of dollars and might not even be approved and only big tobacco or big pharma could afford those prices. They have at left the door open right. That is the slick way in my opinion they are skirting the law by using the law and banning E Cigs by regulating them.

 

[sonicdsl]

It is my understanding that the only logic (logic, what logic; this is a government operation...) under which the nicotine in our juice is even considered a "tobacco product" is that all nic: for patches, gum juice, other---is derived FROM tobacco. I posed this before, and will again....Why can't it be synthesized? If it doesn't come from the leaf, its not "of the leaf".
[logic disclaimer--see above aside.]

It's been stated in another thread (can't find it atm) by the CASAA folks that synthesized nicotine or nicotine derived from other plants would be way too costly, and price most of us away from e-liquid.

 

[TennDave]

Trying to leave from an Airport to go to Japan. Standing in front of the front door outside vaping heavily I'm cautioned and told to move to the smoking area I show them my PV but it didn't matter almost busted just for vaping where no smoking is allowed

 

[Petrodus]

Trying to leave from an Airport to go to Japan. Standing in front of the front door outside vaping heavily I'm cautioned and told to move to the smoking area I show them my PV but it didn't matter almost busted just for vaping where no smoking is allowed

If it looks like Smoke ... then its Smoke !!

 

[Uncle Willie]

I for one won't be flaming you, just wondering what is on your mind.
I've read a lot of your posts, and have never really got a clear indication.

Yet others have no problem with comprehension .. and intolerance for anothers point of view is common ..

Feel free to use the ignore function .. I have ..

 

[DC2]

Yet others have no problem with comprehension .. and intolerance for anothers point of view is common ..

Feel free to use the ignore function .. I have ..

And still no explanation of what point you are always trying to make.

It sounds like you are saying we should be welcoming the coming FDA regulations.
But it's hard to tell because you never really come out and say it.

 

[Petrodus]

The "intellectual progressives" in America
believe they know what is best and they will decide
what freedoms will and will not be allowed.

Anything that is not politically sanctioned should
be forbidden...not because of the harm to the individual
but enjoyment without government sanction is considered wrong.

They want us all to be the children of the world
that they will guide.

This applies to any and all rights, freedoms, privileges,
and personal choices ... including e-smoking.

I'm sure I'm on the Ignore List

 

[Lisa Belle]

With the truth as our biggest weapon!

 

[chrisvapo]

they wont ban tobacco leaves......guess im gonna learn the ancient moonshinesque techinques of nic extraction....hell vapin might be EVEN more exciting if it makes me an outlaw....lol......and we can easily build radioshack batteries.....im not worried about the govt in this situation....