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

[swissfactor]

I agree with the basement idea. The competition keeps the suppliers honest. I may try a juice once, to check the consistency and quality of any manufacturer, but if its not what I am looking for i don't buy again. And repeat business is what will keep the true manufacturers afloat. I don't mind paying a dollar extra for a juice that I will enjoy, one that I can rely upon to give me the consistent flavor i look for. Self regulation forces the e-juice suppliers to be honest in not only their practices and ingredients, by allowing the consumer to choose who can stay and who can go. With all these regulations, the ones with the biggest wallets will be "allowed" by government control to do what they choose, because they can line the pockets of lawmakers and quality inspectors. And that's where the corruption causes consumer harm.

 

[Insignificance]

I took a look at several packs of cigarettes and there is no mention of how much tar / nicotine there was. Earlier this year, I started buying a brand that claimed they were "natural" and went to the website looking for what they consider to be "natural" - Nothing. No information. Cigarette makers have fended off requests for product disclosure based on the fact it's propietary information. I have seen crediable information that the additives (that no one knows about) could number anywhere from 1,000 to 10,000. That really makes me ANGRY that tobacco companies STILL don't have to respond. And 'they' (the vigilanti anti-smokers) are worried about menthol??? or flavor's in e-cigs???? Give me a break. It's BS.

No one has ever argued against regulation for quality control of things like nicotine juice, sales to mnors, battery safety, even inspection as if it was a food product - but this is not what this is about. In fact none of those things are on the table at all. There's no serious, common-sense driven discussion or debate about those items or anything else related to "public safety". Notta unless it can be spun into something that limits the sale of e-cigs to the general public (like minors).

GIVE ME THE BASEMENT! I am very impressed with how forthcoming e juice vendors I have dealt with, have been about what they are using in their juices. Maybe it's because I don't frequent those who aren't. Many of them allow the public to tour their production facilities. The juices are labeled, dates, percentages of nic and base, etc. I'm not aware of a DIY-er selling juices on the internet. Maybe they are locally, idk. The simple answer is "Don't buy it, if you don't know what's in it". The customer has the choice and there's plenty of choices right now.

If e-juice is rolled back to only major tobacco companies again, then what? My bet is it will be like a pack of cigarettes where what is actually in it is anyones guess because they are protected from revealing any information including nicotine content. Please note that major tobacco companies are grandfathered in and the act doesn't apply to them. IF controls, inspections, labeling were given regulations, the tobacco companies wouldn' need to change a thing. Nor would pharmecuticals and makers of ineffective NRT's.

I have far more confiedence in the current system. Give me the basment anyday over what tobacco companies do. At least I have an illusion of knowing what I'm buying.

This isn't about "safety".

You make a lot of great points and I agree that our safety (making sure batteries are safe, there are no harmful additives in e-juice) is not what this is about for the FDA and other concerns.
That said, I don't think the proper stance should be zero regulation because that puts e-cigs in greater peril to, say, the average parent who knows his son in college uses e-cigs reads that what his son is inhaling is completely unregulated. That will not only cause an unnecessary backlash against e-cigs but also put them on par with analog cigarettes. A complete lack of quality standards will create a vacuum that opponents to e-cigs will be quick to fill (there could be anything in this e-juice!!!).

Self-regulation is a great idea in practice but has proven to be ineffectual.....for proof look no further than at analog cigarettes. And the argument that we are either regulated to the hilt or not regulated at all is a false choice.

 

[Petrodus]

How did we ever survive so long
without Mommie FDA's regulations ??!!

Just because something can be regulated..
doesn't mean it should be regulated.

 

[JColt]

The federal government is nothing but a legalized Tony Soprano.

I think I found a new sig!

 

[bunnomatic]

A little bit of regulation is about as good as a little bit of taxation. The government's definition of a "little" is is "we need a little bit more". I prefer to keep the bought and paid for FDA on the outside looking in.

 

[bunnomatic]

You make a lot of great points and I agree that our safety (making sure batteries are safe, there are no harmful additives in e-juice) is not what this is about for the FDA and other concerns.
That said,

I don't think the proper stance should be zero regulation because that puts e-cigs in greater peril to, say, the average parent who knows his son in college uses e-cigs reads that what his son is inhaling is completely unregulated.

That will not only cause an unnecessary backlash against e-cigs but also put them on par with analog cigarettes. A complete lack of quality standards will create a vacuum that opponents to e-cigs will be quick to fill (there could be anything in this e-juice!!!).

Self-regulation is a great idea in practice but has proven to be ineffectual.....for proof look no further than at analog cigarettes. And the argument that we are either regulated to the hilt or not regulated at all is a false choice.

Is little johnny going to be safer using Chantix because it had been FDA approved and regulated? I'm sure many parents don't feel better after their kid goes nuts using Chantix because it was regulated by the FDA. There are a lot of things the FDA has approved and regulated that turned out very bad for people.

 

[Horselady154]

It might be interesting to have an internet campaign, advertised with Google ads.

 

[DC2]

It might be interesting to have an internet campaign, advertised with Google ads.

That is kind of interesting...

I wonder how much that would cost.
Most likely a lot more than I am thinking or hoping it would.

 

[Insignificance]

How did we ever survive so long
without Mommie FDA's regulations ??!!

Just because something can be regulated..
doesn't mean it should be regulated.

So just to clarify - you would oppose the FDA mandating that analog cigarette manufacturers disclosing what chemicals are in cigarettes?

 

[Insignificance]

Is little johnny going to be safer using Chantix because it had been FDA approved and regulated? I'm sure many parents don't feel better after their kid goes nuts using Chantix because it was regulated by the FDA. There are a lot of things the FDA has approved and regulated that turned out very bad for people.

You're not going to get an argument on that from me because I've been on Chantix and I had a very bad reaction to it.

That said, I don't get your point - that the FDA has approved some medications that have harmful effects on some people that we should do away with the whole system?

 

[Insignificance]

A little bit of regulation is about as good as a little bit of taxation. The government's definition of a "little" is is "we need a little bit more". I prefer to keep the bought and paid for FDA on the outside looking in.

Well, I'm not going to argue with the bought and paid for part.

That said, I don't understand why this has to be framed as an either/or choice. Either the government lets companies put whatever they want in food and drugs or we allow them complete control over everything. That's a false choice.

 

[retired1]

Well, I'm not going to argue with the bought and paid for part.

That said, I don't understand why this has to be framed as an either/or choice. Either the government lets companies put whatever they want in food and drugs or we allow them complete control over everything. That's a false choice.

Because most don't stop to think what a completely unregulated food industry would be like. There's a reason for many of the standards during the manufacture and packaging of products designed for consumption. Those that claim there should be no regulation at all when it comes to ejuice will quickly change their tune when someone messes up a batch and people start getting sick.

 

[ElectricalSocket]

How about , as a consumer, doing some of your own reseach into who you buy from, instead of asking the government to do it!!

This remark was uncalled for and absolutely disgusting. How dare anyone here jump down someones throat for saying 'there should be a minimal amount of regulations regarding the manufacture and labeling of e-liquids'. Maybe "guidelines" is a better word?

As a "responsible consumer", why don't you ask your nicotine supplier who their source is? Oh they won't tell you? You think my local tobacco shop will tell me who supplies them with juice? No amount of research on the internet will answer those questions!

I had bad side-effects from multiple bottles of juice I bought locally. Come to find out, another local said he tested juices from around here and they all had a higher % nic than stated.

You want to make this a 'freedom/keep the gov out of it' issue? If I buy POISON expecting it to be 18mg/ml but it's really 40mg/ml (hypothetically), I should be able to make sure that person never sells juice...or anything else...ever again. That's freedom.

Listen, keyboard patriots: We aren't free, we never were, we never will be, and we shouldn't be. Please go set up a hot-dog stand and tell me how that works out for you. Put a little engine on your bicycle and go ride around. Since we are so free to travel as we please without...a license...insurance...registration. Oh yeah and how's that "owning" land thing going after you stop paying taxes?

One of the more benevolent reasons we have so many restrictions and laws in place, is because there are scum-bag opportunists who don't mind screwing over an ignorant population. Why do you think there are so many e-cig vendors who really don't seem to care about any upcoming regulations? Look at all those website banners urging everyone to join CASAA! Their attitude is: I'll find something else to sell and make a buck. How many are ex-smokers who personally depend on e-cigs remaining legal and affordable? Yeah, thought so. You smart smart consumer buying from people who really care about you and your addiction.

Don't get me wrong, I think people who buy infomercial products or sign a contract without reading it deserve what they get. Maybe that has happened to you. Maybe that's why you're bringing up being a "responsible consumer", when there's nothing you can do to ensure that 'basement juice guy' is looking out for you and not his wallet.

I don't think any regulations should make it cost-prohibitive for someone to start making/selling juice, but YES there should be some basic minimal mandatory guidelines for SELLING e-juice. While most of the e-cig industry has done an amazing job of self-regulating, there are still those scumbag opportunists who obviously need to be forced to do the right thing.

What kind of ignorance is this? You distrust the gov but trust some opportunist trying to make a buck? Get real...talk about naive. Distrust everyone, not just the gov.

I could start selling juice with {SOMETHING BAD} in it. Everyone would love their morning pick-me-up and it would have rave reviews online. You cool with that?

 

[ElectricalSocket]

I live in the 4th largest city in the U.S. and the only juice I can buy locally is THIS?!

You think that's OK?! Blah Blah-Medium?? What is medium? 12, 18, 24? I don't know, and neither does the {EDIT} tobacco shop who sells it. All juice sellers should have certain things they have to put on a label. Yes, have to/forced/OMG slavery. If you think it's ok for someone to sell basically unlabeled juice, you're not mentally competent enough to have poison in your house. Throw out the Lysol and bleach while you're at it. You're gunna kill someone, maybe yourself or maybe your poor pet, with your stupidity.

Yeah yeah I know, order online. What about noobs who don't know any better though? While people should be smart consumers, people aren't expected to know everything about everything. That's why chemicals and most every other product has a {EDIT} LABEL! /end rant

({EDIT} is censored? That's obnoxious. Better add {EDIT} to the list of banned books. Heil)

 

[Lisa Belle]

I am an artist and almost 60. I do not have any income currently, (hopefully, that will change soon.) However, if they over regulate or do it enough, that I can't be my own Billy Bob, making my own juice for a year now. I will be climbing the mountains... LOL with nicotine fits! I love my nic and I am not going to give it up too easily

 

[ElectricalSocket]

Oh I think everyone should be able to be their own billy bob. I just think the rules should change when you start selling the poison to other people. A nic % and pg/vg ratio would be nice. "Oh look, I'm allergic to something in this juice, aaaaaand I have no idea what's in it". Not cool.

Just like I can make myself food, but things change when I try to sell food that I cook. It's unfortunate that dirty scumbags have to ruin things for the rest of us, but it is what it is.

 

[Insignificance]

Oh I think everyone should be able to be their own billy bob. I just think the rules should change when you start selling the poison to other people. A nic % and pg/vg ratio would be nice. "Oh look, I'm allergic to something in this juice, aaaaaand I have no idea what's in it". Not cool.

Just like I can make myself food, but things change when I try to sell food that I cook. It's unfortunate that dirty scumbags have to ruin things for the rest of us, but it is what it is.

Exactly. I'm not pro-FDA per se but I don't understand the notion of being against any regulation to the extent that you'd be against e-juice companies being forced to disclose what exactly is in their product. It's not only about consumer safety but at a base level it's about allowing for an informed consumer.

When I first made the dive into e-cigs one of the confusing parts of what to buy was which nicotine level I should choose. Why? Because to this day regular cigarette companies do not provide that information so I'm left guessing how much nicotine is in what I was smoking and trying to find something close to that in e-juice form.

On a side note - I've seen CEOs of e-cig manufacturers on TV promoting their product and one of the bullet points that they should be pushing over and over is that they are voluntarily telling people the level of nicotine that is in their product and proceed to slam the analog industry for never having done so. They can't market their product as a replacement therapy but they should get the word out that their products should be considered safer because people are being told the nicotine level in each bottle of e-juice and each cartridge they sell. Who would feel safe if alcoholic beverages stopped giving measures of how strong their drinks are and people just had to stand in a liquor store and guess? This is a very high horse these CEO's of e-cigs could climb on.....I really wish they would start doing it.

 

[bigbells]

There's no such thing as "Limited" Regulation

You can make a pretty good guess about someone's geographical location based on their political views. I'm a political junkie and simply find it interesting. The middle of the country has become disconnected from the current administration. The Atlantic and Pacific coasts tend to be largely supportive of the current administration. 100% accurate? Of course not. Just statistics. Just the way it is.

 

[aikanae1]

I live in the 4th largest city in the U.S. and the only juice I can buy locally is THIS?!
You think that's OK?! Blah Blah-Medium?? What is medium? 12, 18, 24? I don't know, and neither does the {EDIT} tobacco shop who sells it. All juice sellers should have certain things they have to put on a label. Yes, have to/forced/OMG slavery. If you think it's ok for someone to sell basically unlabeled juice, you're not mentally competent enough to have poison in your house. Throw out the Lysol and bleach while you're at it. You're gunna kill someone, maybe yourself or maybe your poor pet, with your stupidity.

Yeah yeah I know, order online. What about noobs who don't know any better though? While people should be smart consumers, people aren't expected to know everything about everything. That's why chemicals and most every other product has a {EDIT} LABEL! /end rant

({EDIT} is censored? That's obnoxious. Better add {EDIT} to the list of banned books. Heil)

Tell me what is in a cigarette.

The labeling on those bottles have more information.

Neither is ok and this legislation doesn't confront that at all. It's not about labeling, making products safer, accuracte consumer information and all that. You'd need to introduce another bill and good luck getting it passed.

The only thing this bill addresses (and all the others) is WHO CONTROLS THE MARKETPLACE. That's it. Both drug and cigarette manufacturers have been pretty openly claiming 'e-cigs are not fair because they don't have our overhead' and they spin it up for the anti-smoking crowd as if it's more. But I doubt if they do it for legislators beyond telling them how to "frame" it and that's why they need bogus studies - and ignore the valid studies as if they don't exist.

No one has ever died from an e-cig and hundreds have died from Chantix.

 

[aikanae1]

but YES there should be some basic minimal mandatory guidelines for SELLING e-juice.

Tell me what's in a cigarette first.

Don't you think it's ironic that KNOWN CANCER CAUSING cigarettes remain legal, available and free from oversight and regulation, but e-cigs, which almost everyone has admitted could be a healthier option (even the FDA), is under attack?

There is nothing about safety or the public's health being addressed. It is all about the money not going into THEIR pockets.

​