FDA Misleading Report Strategy Backfires

[Vocalek]

FDA Misleading Report Strategy Backfires

OK, I couldn't resist. The njoy lawyers did such a good job tearing apart the FDA's lab tests of e-cigarettes, that I had to write about it.

The story also provides a very brief history of the legal battle and contains links to all the relevant documents.

Hope you like it.

You can Digg it, you can Share it, you can comment freely.

 

[yvilla]

As always, excellent job Elaine!

Dugg and shared on Facebook.

 

[Vocalek]

Just realized that I forgot to mention that SE has recently withdrawn from the case. On the other hand, it isn't germaine to the point of the story that FDA's "half-truths" may be coming home to roost in court.

 

[Wafflestomper]

Awesome article, dugg it!

I hope that they are able to create enough momentum with this to get something done.

I think these huge government agencies are so arrogant and complacent at times, its at their peril. I hope they continue to let their true colors show.

 

[chrisl317]

FDA Misleading Report Strategy Backfires

OK, I couldn't resist. The njoy lawyers did such a good job tearing apart the FDA's lab tests of e-cigarettes, that I had to write about it.

The story also provides a very brief history of the legal battle and contains links to all the relevant documents.

Hope you like it.

You can Digg it, you can Share it, you can comment freely.

The FDA will probably blame the Dr.'s testing protocols as being inaccurate and will probably invalidate it's own report, get a stay in the meantime, shop for a favorable bad report, shop for a judge, and continue to lie their backsides off.

 

[bassnut]

I Dugg it, Daddy-O!

...and commented via bongo on the grape vine.
All is hip in Coolsville.

Like, wow, Elaine. Things are heating up and getting exciting.
Great article. Thanks!

 

[JerryRM]

Well said, Elaine. I tweeted it.

 

[coralie]

Great article, I tweeted it too.

 

[Tom09]

Great article, it’s always interesting to revisit this FDA report.

To add something that that I have not really seen recognized before: isn’t it odd that the sample „Apple NO“ returned 0.00 mg nicotine/cartridge in whole cartridge tests while the sample „Apple NO“ apparently yielded 0.35 µg/100ml puff in simulated use? How on earth did FDA’s testing regime managed to produce nicotine out of nothing?
Certainly we don’t know, and FDA‘s investigator did not care about obvious contradictions in his report. However, the report never recognizes that 1/2-1/3 of the fluid in an assembled e-cig is stored in the atomizer’s mesh (is not present in the cartridge only) and does not mention how he dealt with this when a cartridge was assembled with the atomizer for testing...

 

[Our House]

Great article, it’s always interesting to revisit this FDA report.

To add something that that I have not really seen recognized before: isn’t it odd that the sample „Apple NO“ returned 0.00 mg nicotine/cartridge in whole cartridge tests while the sample „Apple NO“ apparently yielded 0.35 µg/100ml puff in simulated use? How on earth did FDA’s testing regime managed to produce nicotine out of nothing?
Certainly we don’t know, and FDA‘s investigator did not care about obvious contradictions in his report. However, the report never recognizes that 1/2-1/3 of the fluid in an assembled e-cig is stored in the atomizer’s mesh (is not present in the cartridge only) and does not mention how he dealt with this when a cartridge was assembled with the atomizer for testing...

In other words, FDA PUTS nicotine into zero-nic cartridges and then reports the nicotine found as problematic. Wow...sick sick stuff.

 

[Vocalek]

Great article, it’s always interesting to revisit this FDA report.

To add something that that I have not really seen recognized before: isn’t it odd that the sample „Apple NO“ returned 0.00 mg nicotine/cartridge in whole cartridge tests while the sample „Apple NO“ apparently yielded 0.35 µg/100ml puff in simulated use? How on earth did FDA’s testing regime managed to produce nicotine out of nothing?
Certainly we don’t know, and FDA‘s investigator did not care about obvious contradictions in his report. However, the report never recognizes that 1/2-1/3 of the fluid in an assembled e-cig is stored in the atomizer’s mesh (is not present in the cartridge only) and does not mention how he dealt with this when a cartridge was assembled with the atomizer for testing...

You can ask this, when one of the photos illustrating FDA's testing shows him inserting an entire assembled device, cartridge first, into the battery charger?

 

[Tom09]

In other words, FDA PUTS nicotine into zero-nic cartridges and then reports the nicotine found as problematic.

Not necessarily intentional. I just think there are several possibilities of how to obtain inconsistent data due to experimental errors. And that the ‘simulated use’ section of this report bears no indication that obvious sources of possible experimental errors had been accounted for. Such could well be the primer fluid / fluid residue in the atomizer from a previously tested cartridge. Certainly not the biggest fish in this report, but the author was very quick in attributing inconsistencies to sample properties. Much in line with the general scheme of painting the product in the darkest colors.

 

[Tom09]

You can ask this, when one of the photos illustrating FDA's testing shows him inserting an entire assembled device, cartridge first, into the battery charger?

LOL, I love this picture!

Source: FDA Consumer Information UCM173430

 

[ezmoose]

You can ask this, when one of the photos illustrating FDA's testing shows him inserting an entire assembled device, cartridge first, into the battery charger?

As an Equal Opportunity Employer, the FDA can not discriminate; that includes against the Intellectually Challenged! lol

 

[Vocalek]

LOL, I love this picture!

Source: FDA Consumer Information UCM173430

So that would explain why he didn't get a charge out of using the e-cigarette.

 

[lonercom]

Top secret (smuggled through security) photos of FDA researchers hard at work:

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac288/lonercom/......-22713.jpg

 

[Our House]

Not necessarily intentional.

Of course, but does it matter? The manufacturers are taking the hit for something they most likely didn't do. Intentional or not, the FDA isn't exactly putting efforts into getting them pardoned.

 

[Tom09]

Of course, but does it matter? The manufacturers are taking the hit for something they most likely didn't do. Intentional or not, the FDA isn't exactly putting efforts into getting them pardoned.

I fully agree.

FDA should certainly feel urged to follow AAPHP Petition 2 -- Follow-up to July 22, 2009 Press conference and repair some of their blatant mistakes.

 

[Hoosier]

Shared it. Hope it does really come back to bite them in court.

Unfortunately poor science is too common, and not just at the FDA.

 

[smilin0117]

I dont think I have commented on your writting before. I wanted to say thank you. You are an excellent writter and always seem to have vast resources to back up everything you write.

Thank you and I appreciate the time and effort that must go into these articles.