FDA regs worst case scenario?

[2coils]

Just curious.....What time frame are we looking at to get a response from the petition? Any Ideas??

 

[DC2]

The last one we got a response in about two weeks.

See this thread, and start at post 434 to get a timeframe and see the response...
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...administration-recognize-e-cigarettes-11.html

Everyone who signed it will get the response via email.

 

[Uncle Willie]

Not quite. The definitions of the relevant acts specifically define tobacco products as chopped tobacco leaves. If one wants to include an extraction of nicotine be it from tobacco itself or from any other plant for that matter as a tobacco product then the definitions need to be amended. That requires legislation. If it were so simple as for the FDA to simply say "E-Cigarettes are tobacco products because....well because eff you thats why." Then why has the FDA not already done such a thing?

The reasoning behind why they have not done that is simple, there are laws that have to be amended for them to do that--which means Congress must and will be involved.

It would simply be hilarious if you are correct .. all the rhetoric that has flown, the legal team(s) .. etc .. your nugget of info would and could be a game changer .. and what does that say about the movement and it's advisers .. ??

Start a new thread with this info .. please ..

 

[Abe_Katz]

It would simply be hilarious if you are correct .. all the rhetoric that has flown, the legal team(s) .. etc .. your nugget of info would and could be a game changer .. and what does that say about the movement and it's advisers .. ??

Start a new thread with this info .. please ..

Uncle Willie, I'm afraid that could possibly do more harm than good. It is merely the views of a non-lawyer reading laws as they are written and applying common sense to those laws. As just about everyone knows common sense does not apply within the beltway.

However, it would seem to me that if the only thing that was required to effectively ban PVs and/or e-liquid was to write a three paragraph regulation it would have been done already. It isn't like the FDA, Congress or the President would actually attempt to review any actual science (much less do actual science) on THR. After all, Snus has almost 30 years of documentation from Sweden and Norway (hardly third-world countries) of being far less harmful than smoking and yet for it to be sold here it has to have the packaging loaded up with misleading health warnings (most of which are not even accurate) and then prohibitively sin taxed on top of import duties.

In fact the last time I was even moderately successful in switching to something less harmful than smoking it was with snus but I lost my job and it was cheaper to smoke--I already knew I couldn't afford BP's concoctions and that they wouldn't work anyway.

 

[DC2]

It would simply be hilarious if you are correct ..

Only you would find that hilarious.
The rest of us would find it to be a breakthrough.

 

[2coils]

The last one we got a response in about two weeks.

See this thread, and start at post 434 to get a timeframe and see the response...
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...administration-recognize-e-cigarettes-11.html

Everyone who signed it will get the response via email.

Yes, looking at the past time frame, we may actually hear something as early as Friday or beginning of next week. Thank you for the on point and quick response!!

 

[DC2]

Yes, looking at the past time frame, we may actually hear something as early as Friday or beginning of next week. Thank you for the on point and quick response!!

Yeah, I practically live here, and know where to find almost any information.
This is what I do when I pretend to be working all day.

 

[Abe_Katz]

Yeah, I practically live here, and know where to find almost any information.
This is what I do when I pretend to be working all day.

Lucky, it beats smelling grease all day. Until I stopped smoking I had no idea that the fry-a-lator smelled so funky. I'm going to have to rework the filtering schedule on that.

 

[DC2]

Lucky, it beats smelling grease all day. Until I stopped smoking I had no idea that the fry-a-lator smelled so funky. I'm going to have to rework the filtering schedule on that.

So you run a restaurant?

 

[StormFinch]

There is a 1986 law which directly defines what a tobacco product is for advertising purposes. That law would need to be amended. There are several others--the tobacco industry is heavily regulated (and was even before FSPTCA).

Also it is conceivable that nicotine can be extracted from some plant other than tobacco as well. Nightshade family plants in particular (after all even people who have never used tobacco in their life have a background nicotine level of 2ng/mL of blood plasma), but with a little genetic engineering I imagine one could use daisies if they wanted to.

E-liquid would need to be specifically defined as a tobacco product in laws for it to be a tobacco product for there to not be loopholes one could drive a mack truck through. That again requires legislation, and a lot of time.

Here you go;

*101] Sec. 101. AMENDMENT OF FEDERAL FOOD, DRUG, AND COSMETIC ACT.
(a) Definition of Tobacco Products.--Section 201 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act ( 21 U.S.C. 321) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
"(rr) (1) The term 'tobacco product' means any product made or derived from tobacco that is intended for human
consumption, including any component, part, or accessory of a tobacco product (except for raw materials other than
tobacco used in manufacturing a component, part, or accessory of a tobacco product).

- Page 10 of http://www.fda.gov/downloads/TobaccoProducts/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/UCM237080.pdf

And for anyone that was wondering about the equipment, "I'm guessing "component, part, or accessory" will include that. They even make mention of matchbooks within the text.

 

[Abe_Katz]

So you run a restaurant?

I'm an sous-chef, meaning I'm second in command in the kitchen (after the head chef and of course the general manager) and that part of my duties include scheduling standard kitchen maintenance procedures, such as having the fry-a-lator grease filtered/replaced.

I used to think that once per shift was acceptable (or at least the Health Department thinks so), but apparently based on smell it is not. Though there is very little particulate--so I'm a little perplexed why the fryers should smell so funky. It is the burnt particulate in the fry vats that causes the grease to smell well--nasty. Dirty fry-a-lators have a particular smell and its hard to describe.

So I'm going to try to remedy the problem. If it isn't the grease itself I'll have to get the hood checked out (which requires a professional equipment guy).

 

[Hello World]

I would also be in support of a tax to help pay for the people doing the regulation, but something to the tune of 1-5cents per ml of liquid or maybe something like sales tax wherre they charge %per dollar on e cig purchases. But if it goes beyond 2-4% it would be insane and overboard IMHO.

It has been estimated they already collect at least twice as much in tobacco taxes than medical expenditures in treatment and cost of regulation combined. They tax on the basis of what they can get away with, not fairness or common sense. I suspect the cost of e-juice to double, but then unit pricing should also drop as e-ciging becomes more popular and mass production rolls forward. If BT reaps exorbitant profits retailing a pack of cigs for $3, e-juice production costs for 7ml are not even half of processing & packaging tobacco.

Nonetheless, the combined Gov'ts probably want around $3-5 for the equivalent of a pack of smokes for e-juice.

 

[2coils]

Yeah, I practically live here, and know where to find almost any information.
This is what I do when I pretend to be working all day.

I have an office job myself, Though you have roughly 12,000 posts more than me, I am following in your footsteps. I find myself on the forum or googleing E cig news most of the day. AND BTW you have become one of my best resources here at ECF and I really appreciate it.

 

[2coils]

I'm an sous-chef, meaning I'm second in command in the kitchen (after the head chef and of course the general manager) and that part of my duties include scheduling standard kitchen maintenance procedures, such as having the fry-a-lator grease filtered/replaced.

I used to think that once per shift was acceptable (or at least the Health Department thinks so), but apparently based on smell it is not. Though there is very little particulate--so I'm a little perplexed why the fryers should smell so funky. It is the burnt particulate in the fry vats that causes the grease to smell well--nasty. Dirty fry-a-lators have a particular smell and its hard to describe.

So I'm going to try to remedy the problem. If it isn't the grease itself I'll have to get the hood checked out (which requires a professional equipment guy).

I hope we dont see your work place on Kitchen Nightmares anytime soon!!

 

[EddardinWinter]

I submit the following, Mr Katz

Yes I disagree with that. Under the FSPTCA, and other laws the definitions are such that a tobacco product must be either a smokable or smokeless form of leaves (or other plant parts) of the Nicotiana genus of Solanaceae family of plants. Other plants of that family also contain nicotine (though in lower quantities than those of the Nicotiana genus) and could conceivably be used to extract nicotine base for e-liquids. Nicotine is in your tomato juice after all, and no it is not a contaminate.

To the best of my knowledge, all commercially sold e-liquids derive their nicotine from tobacco leaves. Yes, it is theoretically possible to extract it from other plants, but it is not economically viable at this time. So long as the nicotine juice is extracted from a tobacco product, it is vulnerable to classification as a tobacco product. Bill Goodshall (sp?) spoke about this topic about six weeks ago at the CASAA meeting.

While you argue sensibly according to the rule of law, our government does not function that way anymore. Just because it should work the way you describe does not mean it will be done that way by any means. The FDA has tried to shut down the industry by fiat before, it will do so again. The FDA is not about to let things like "the rule of law" and "individual rights" stop its crusade to protect the children.

 

[DC2]

I used to think that once per shift was acceptable (or at least the Health Department thinks so), but apparently based on smell it is not. Though there is very little particulate--so I'm a little perplexed why the fryers should smell so funky. It is the burnt particulate in the fry vats that causes the grease to smell well--nasty. Dirty fry-a-lators have a particular smell and its hard to describe.

You don't have to tell me, having grown up in the restaurant business.
God only knows why that waste is so pungent.

 

[DC2]

I have an office job myself, Though you have roughly 12,000 posts more than me, I am following in your footsteps. I find myself on the forum or googleing E cig news most of the day. AND BTW you have become one of my best resources here at ECF and I really appreciate it.

CASAA is always in need of people with such passion.
If you feel you have the time to spare, please contact them to see how you can help.

I've been following your posts as well, and you're the kind of person that this community needs.
Doing what you can is all we can ask of anybody.

 

[EddardinWinter]

I have an office job myself, Though you have roughly 12,000 posts more than me, I am following in your footsteps. I find myself on the forum or googleing E cig news most of the day. AND BTW you have become one of my best resources here at ECF and I really appreciate it.

I am also a fan of DC2. I am never bored when I read his posts!

 

[Abe_Katz]

Here you go;

- Page 10 of http://www.fda.gov/downloads/TobaccoProducts/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/UCM237080.pdf

And for anyone that was wondering about the equipment, "I'm guessing "component, part, or accessory" will include that. They even make mention of matchbooks within the text.

Yep I read that. And I did see a huge loophole. It is specifically referring to the chopped up leaves (or other parts) of a specific genus of plants (there are three different species) or compounds derived from manufacturing processes applied to the leaves (or other parts) of that specific genus.

It could be argued that since nicotine base uses tobacco as a raw material in its production that the nicotine base itself in e-liquid is not a tobacco product.

Also same document: Sec 900.

"(18) Smokeless tobacco.-- The term 'smokeless tobacco' means any tobacco product that consists of cut, ground, powdered, or leaf tobacco and that is intended to be placed in the oral or nasal cavity.

Now I'm no vaping expert but last time I used my PV I didn't encounter any cut, ground, powdered or leaf tobacco and I certainly did not put any cut, ground, or leaf tobacco into my oral or nasal cavity. Yet I enjoyed nicotine and did not produce any smoke.

So what class of tobacco product would PVs and E-liquid be? If they are a tobacco product, then they cannot be a smokeless tobacco product under the current definition nor are they cigarettes, little cigars, or cigars per the current definitions. So either the definitions need to be amended or a new class of tobacco product created (assuming pvs and e-liquid can even be classed as tobacco products legally).

Since the FDA does not write laws--Congress does that--we're back to the legislative process again.

 

[EddardinWinter]

Yep I read that. And I did see a huge loophole. It is specifically referring to the chopped up leaves (or other parts) of a specific genus of plants (there are three different species) or compounds derived from manufacturing processes applied to the leaves (or other parts) of that specific genus.

That is where they get the leverage to deem the juice, Abe_Katz. Trust me, I do not wish for you to be wrong, but it can be argued that the bold section does apply to nicotine juice. Rationally argued, at that.