FDA FDA to BAN/RESTRICT Vaping UNLESS...
- Thread starter soulcatcher
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Sorry that I left out Vaper's Militia, as they also seem to be worthy of support.
And maybe even National Vaper's Club as well.
Support who you feel comfortable supporting.
That is all.
A well hidden yet obvious attempt at divide and conquer.....
Won't work.....
The system is corrupt, and no amont of well wishing is going to change that....
My loyalties are for Vapeing period and to those who continue to dissect and twist the words of those who are merely expressing opinions, then shame on your words, I've got no use for them.
Vapers are stronger then ever thanx to the misguided efforts of those who think they are word smart.
Won't work.....
The system is corrupt, and no amont of well wishing is going to change that....
My loyalties are for Vapeing period and to those who continue to dissect and twist the words of those who are merely expressing opinions, then shame on your words, I've got no use for them.
Vapers are stronger then ever thanx to the misguided efforts of those who think they are word smart.
This would be the main reason why I have not filled out the FTV form yet. Not saying I won't, and not really saying something about FTV per se. But am saying something about taking a form letter approach. Happy to dialogue on this if desired.
I think we have different takes on what a form letter is.
Lots of definitions out there but, eg. wiki:
"A form letter is a letter written from a template, rather than being specially composed for a specific recipient. The most general kind of form letter consists of one or more regions of boilerplate text interspersed with one or more substitution placeholders."
"The term template, when used in the context of word processing software, refers to a sample document that has already some details in place; those can be adapted (that is added/completed, removed or changed, differently from a fill-in-the-blank approach as in a form) either by hand or through an automated iterative process, such as with a software assistant. Once the template is completed, the user can edit, save and manage the result as an ordinary word processing document."
What do you think the form you fill out in FTV will turn out to be?
Since you bolded 'form', you must think that the style in which the site is set up is the same as the concept 'form letter'. That simply isn't true, by definition. There are many types of "forms", whereas a form letter is consistent in it's essence.
To answer your question: In the main text, it will be what I wrote without any template or suggested text from the site.
While I understand that the list of questions at the start could be considered a 'form', they are not like a 'form letter' where there is text written predominately by someone else ('posing' as you, so to speak) where you have the ability to 'make it your own' but where perhaps most of the letter is a form letter.
The text I wrote was entirely my own as would be for all other people that used the text box for comment. The 'link' box for good urls on the subject will also be individualized although there are a lot of rather good links that have come up here that there will likely be many duplicates, but that's because those links are good, not because FTV said to use them. Without looking, I'm pretty sure they didn't even suggest any. So while some of the answers in the top part may be the same, all the rest of it will be in the person's own words and their own links given.
Last edited:
I would say very similar in concept, and is true by definition.
Because of FTV's form, there will be consistency in what is printed.
Seems to me you are going with rigid concept of 'form letter' to try and establish that it is not precisely the rigid definition of a form letter. I stand by the assertion that it is similar to a form letter. And originally noted that it is taking a form letter approach.
It will be your responses to the form attached to a section that includes links and comments of up to 6000 characters (or about 1200 words). I have issue as a result of what that comment field is likely to contain given wording on the form FTV chose to go with. Right above that text field.
I would also think you might have issue with this as it doesn't really pertain, even a little bit, to what is in the impact analysis doc.
Not could be. Is a form. But please continue...
It is taking a form letter approach. All the form items are unnecessary for what FDA has asked be submitted to them. Site doesn't explain why it would be helpful to submit those items. Guidance for what is asked is lacking. The form attempts to overcome that lack of guidance and curtail entries, via limited choices, toward a focussed goal. I share that goal. I'm just not hip to the form letter approach. Might still go the FTV route prior to 7/9/14.
The top part is the issue I am raising and could be criticized further. Such as: if answers are not the same, then we aren't necessarily speaking as a singular voice. Question in there asks: "Do you feel that having a variety of eLiquid flavors has helped you quit traditional tobacco cigarettes?" With reply of yes or no. But I haven't quit traditional cigs, and am a proud dual user who has reduced smoking because of variety of eLiquid flavors. This form and resulting entry would be confusing or inaccurate given its choice to limit responses on questions that aren't so well thought through. That I'd have to waste some of my 6000 character limit to explain what is accurate for me isn't how I'd like to approach FDA, as the form letter approach is something I find to be inherently limiting.
Also believe that a 6000 character essay on personal story is not what FDA is looking for. And CASAA has already covered that for those that need to tell their story.
You're obviously conflating the concept 'form' with the concept 'form letter'. I won't argue that point. If that's what you believe then so be it. And if you stick to that, then all comments will be a 'form letter' because there is a form to fill out when you comment to the fda.
The 6000 word comment box does not have to be a 'personal story' but I'm sure both FTV and CASAA will get a lot of those as well as ones that you've already posted. That's going to happen no matter how many forms or form letters are used. I agree that it is likely that the FDA has no interest in that, which I've said before in other posts. Posts that you've 'liked'
I have no more to say on this particular issue.
The 6000 word comment box does not have to be a 'personal story' but I'm sure both FTV and CASAA will get a lot of those as well as ones that you've already posted. That's going to happen no matter how many forms or form letters are used. I agree that it is likely that the FDA has no interest in that, which I've said before in other posts. Posts that you've 'liked'
I have no more to say on this particular issue.
"We want to make sufficient noise now before things get too set in stone."
-Gerry Stimson, emeritus professor at Imperial College London and one of the organizers of the letter to Chan.
Sorry I'm repeating myself.
I sign everything that is signable at this point. I don't care if it's proper or if the correct points are addressed according to FDA specifications.
The time is running out--we don't know if FDA is going to grant an extension. If they don't, we have one month to submit our comments on a 200+-page-long legal document. I really hope CASAA will issue next CTA soon; so far, we have only addressed procedural issues and not a word on the proposed actual deeming regulations. And there is a lot to comment on--like the grandfather date, for starters--which may kill us right off the bat. Honestly, CASAA's strategy to wait to the last minute is, IMHO, somewhat dangerous. The school is out, kids are graduating, people are beginning to travel, the 4th of July holiday is just around the corner.
Sorry if this is a bit off topic, but I would like to see more action now. But that's just me.
-Gerry Stimson, emeritus professor at Imperial College London and one of the organizers of the letter to Chan.
Sorry I'm repeating myself.
I sign everything that is signable at this point. I don't care if it's proper or if the correct points are addressed according to FDA specifications.
The time is running out--we don't know if FDA is going to grant an extension. If they don't, we have one month to submit our comments on a 200+-page-long legal document. I really hope CASAA will issue next CTA soon; so far, we have only addressed procedural issues and not a word on the proposed actual deeming regulations. And there is a lot to comment on--like the grandfather date, for starters--which may kill us right off the bat. Honestly, CASAA's strategy to wait to the last minute is, IMHO, somewhat dangerous. The school is out, kids are graduating, people are beginning to travel, the 4th of July holiday is just around the corner.
Sorry if this is a bit off topic, but I would like to see more action now. But that's just me.
My hesitation about the FTV site was that my comments to Congress are very different than comments to FDA. Elected reps are going to be much more interested in personal stories and the FDA is somewhat immune, will adopt unpopular positions for 'the greater good' in their minds, so my comments are going to be dry, clinical with references. The FDA also has a list of about 99 questions they are looking to consider and as far as I can tell, deeming of ecigs and compents is a done thing or they wouldn't be doing their jobs (in their mind). Congress on the other hand, has oversight. Two very different perspectives. If there were to be any change in FDA's mandate, it would need to come from Congress.
I also don't think CASAA's suggested letters are 'forum letter's' in the true sense, they are responding to member requests for guidlines on what to say. Sure many probably do cut and paste without many changes - but they are changeable. I've seen letters appear for other causes that attempt to prevent changes from the original before sending. Those are the true forum letters.
I tend to think any vaper that has signed up with CASAA, following CTA's or Daily Action Plans, is not going to be fooled into thinking a 15 minute forum will "do it all". I mean, many of us find we (ME) spending hours every day - or at least as much time as possible on vaping related stuff. It takes me longer to buy a drip tip than to fill out FTV's forum.
From my understanding, the FDA issues extensions at the very last and there are strategic reasons to wait until the last few days to submit.
I also don't think CASAA's suggested letters are 'forum letter's' in the true sense, they are responding to member requests for guidlines on what to say. Sure many probably do cut and paste without many changes - but they are changeable. I've seen letters appear for other causes that attempt to prevent changes from the original before sending. Those are the true forum letters.
I tend to think any vaper that has signed up with CASAA, following CTA's or Daily Action Plans, is not going to be fooled into thinking a 15 minute forum will "do it all". I mean, many of us find we (ME) spending hours every day - or at least as much time as possible on vaping related stuff. It takes me longer to buy a drip tip than to fill out FTV's forum.
From my understanding, the FDA issues extensions at the very last and there are strategic reasons to wait until the last few days to submit.
Last edited:
Ditto, every single chance I get -- I go hunting in Twitter and FB for MORE! To put it in cheerleading terms:
YOU GOTTA GET UP ON YOUR FEET AND MAKE SOME NOISE!!!!
Andria
I don't want to debate the form letter issue at length, but as a long-time member of the Humane Society of the United States, I get a lot of form letters from them--all I need to do is sign and "make them my own if I so desire." Most of the time, I just sign and if I feel strongly about an issue, I add a sentence or two of my own--most of the time I just sign and my letter is being forwarded to my senators--Boxer and Feinstein--who happen to be very good on animal welfare issues, BTW.
So that's what a form letter means to me.
This thread has blown up in all the wrong ways At some point you have to agree to disagree... Does this action cause more harm than good? Does that action cause more harm than good? OMG, is this thread now doing more harm than good?!?
What does arguing over how one chooses to be involved matter? Is it helping the cause? Just be active d@mmit!! Save your time and energy; stop debating CASAA vs FTV and have more conversations that encourage other people to get involved HOWEVER they feel comfortable.
This bold part is reason why I'm waiting at all. Every organization looking out for consumers paints a picture that suggests FDA proposed regulations mean doom and gloom. They don't mince words on this. IMO, they use lots of superlatives to make sure anyone listening realizes that the deeming regulations will end vaping as we know it.
To this day, I disagree with this take. I still see proposed regulations as rather tame, and because of the amount of questions (approx. 100) asked and wording, I feel very confident that FDA is many years away from having a decent grasp on what the heck to even regulate.
If anything is needing to be submitted to FDA, it is to answer the questions in a way where FDA would have even tougher time claiming 'we just don't know' or 'there is no evidence.' Our side's experts routinely point out that they (the FDA) do know, and have been given the evidence already. Still, comments offer opportunity to make that case again, and in numbers, plus perhaps an opportunity for consumers (as stakeholders) to speak to what is reasonable going forward. I.E. - most vapers consider it reasonable to ban sales to minors, so that would be something that FDA and majority of consumers have in common.
Yet, with FTV's hype on what's at stake, and what I've heard thus far from CASAA, I would say there is ABSOLUTELY NO REASON WHATSOEVER to submit comments to the FDA as a consumer. Based entirely on the rhetoric used about the regulations, I see that as the case. If you (in general) are so certain the currently proposed regulations spell an end to vaping, then I am very curious what you think you could submit that would change the FDA's collective mind going forward?
And again, I do disagree with this take on things, which is why I wrote the 2nd paragraph as I did. Yet, if you have the other take on things, the doom and gloom one, then I say completely ignore the FDA and only write to congress. Tell them your story or what have you. But if the doom and gloom take is accurate, then Congress is our only reasonable hope before the rule goes into full effect. If you are an expert or someone that feels differently, I am very interested in an explanation on how submitting comments to the FDA will counter the certainty of doom and gloom?
Failure to explain or even address that makes me want to ignore your CTA that suggests now is as good of time as any to submit comments to the FDA.
Here, fill out this form.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
