FDA to propose rule on ecigarettes Monday 4-28-2014

[picowatt]

Pipe smokers have been fighting this for a couple years

http://....../rYTRUS

Hi: Thanks for the reply. The URL you listed - "http://....../rYTRUS" - is missing some info like domain name.

 

[dave51]

Hi: Thanks for the reply. The URL you listed - "http://....../rYTRUS" - is missing some info like domain name.

Ooops sorry for some reason it wouldnt include the domain

Try this

Flavored Tobacco

 

[paigekoontz]

I certainly don't want my ability to vape or the industry hurt by regulation, but our other options weren't really great either. I feel like there are only a few ways this could have gone to maintain the industry's momentum.

New product status. If ecigs were stated as an entirely new product, like a personal electronic vaporizor etc... this would definitely require a large amount of studies and high costs in regards to the new product/technologies efficacy, social utility, potential harm to others and wouldn't allow people (like us) to be heard. Once the new product is submitted, the FDA would have had only 180 days to make a decision.

Substaintial Equivalency. If you are introducing a new tobacco product to the FDA as a new variant of a tobacco cigarette by blend, paper type or other change, you must submit an application and the FDA would have no set deadline for approval (they can review it indefinitely). I found the total number of product submissions received and filed each month, but can't find where any approvals are (help! if you can find them). The highest month (by a long shot to be fair) was March 2011 with the grand total of: 3,552 submissions.

So it seems to me that regulating this product as a tobacco product (that has a pretty long lineage behind it) was our best option if we wanted to keep up with the momentum the industry was going. What comes out from the FDA is a proposed rule, meaning they are going to publish a regulation (that doesn't have any force) open for review and comment prior to adoption. So because this is a tobacco product we get to have a voice, and I am personally happy for that. What we need to do is better prepare to respond to the proposed rule the most eloquently way possible. Which is why I wanted to start this thread, to see what people had to say about the topic and I'm really happy people are sharing their input!

 

[epicdoom]

Well CASAA just got another new member by tomorrow it will have 4 more from my home and 5 more from friends of mine. Pretty sad we live in an age where the all mighty Dollar is more important then some ones life. IMO that's all this is aimed at, just another way for Uncle Sam to jam his filthy, thieving hand into some ones Pockets nice and Legal like. Maybe we should all just smoke like chimney's quit our jobs go on welfare and let Uncle Sam foot the health care bills see how he like being ROBBED Nice and Legal like.

 

[edyle]

I certainly don't want my ability to vape or the industry hurt by regulation, but our other options weren't really great either. I feel like there are only a few ways this could have gone to maintain the industry's momentum.

New product status. If ecigs were stated as an entirely new product, like a personal electronic vaporizor etc... this would definitely require a large amount of studies and high costs in regards to the new product/technologies efficacy, social utility, potential harm to others and wouldn't allow people (like us) to be heard. Once the new product is submitted, the FDA would have had only 180 days to make a decision.

Substaintial Equivalency. If you are introducing a new tobacco product to the FDA as a new variant of a tobacco cigarette by blend, paper type or other change, you must submit an application and the FDA would have no set deadline for approval (they can review it indefinitely). I found the total number of product submissions received and filed each month, but can't find where any approvals are (help! if you can find them). The highest month (by a long shot to be fair) was March 2011 with the grand total of: 3,552 submissions.

So it seems to me that regulating this product as a tobacco product (that has a pretty long lineage behind it) was our best option if we wanted to keep up with the momentum the industry was going. What comes out from the FDA is a proposed rule, meaning they are going to publish a regulation (that doesn't have any force) open for review and comment prior to adoption. So because this is a tobacco product we get to have a voice, and I am personally happy for that. What we need to do is better prepare to respond to the proposed rule the most eloquently way possible. Which is why I wanted to start this thread, to see what people had to say about the topic and I'm really happy people are sharing their input!

It seems to be a common trend that former smokers who make the switch to vaping find themselves shifting away from tobacco flavors.

Since vaping therefore is more about taste and flavors it strikes me as quite a recipe for disaster to attempt to regulate it with regulations intended for tobacco.

 

[thewomenfolk]

Oh, so now it's a by-product!

I guess Coca-Cola is coffee then, because it contains caffeine.

And would tomatoes be tobacco products too?

You are too logical, something that's not well 'tolerated' today. But yes, logically they should outlaw all tomatoes because they contain nicotine.

Just be ready for anything. Buy mechanical Mods and tanks, rebuildable cartos and attys and you'll be fine. May have to make your own juice but that's not a big problem. "They" cannot rid the country of ecigs, but boy do they like to try! LOL

 

[daviedog]

50 people damaged by ecigs in the last year. Poison control center emergencies up. Nico poison complaints & shortness of breath etc. people are scared & the FDA to the rescue. Just heard on the radio 2 minutes a ago . Miami WIOD 610.

Now, what do you think is going to happen? Huh?..

 

[picowatt]

Ooops sorry for some reason it wouldnt include the domain

Try this

Flavored Tobacco

Well that's bad. The FDA would have to change a few things to include e-cigs but it does look possible. I'm not sure they cold make the leap from nicotine base to tobacco so easily. I suppose synthetic nicotine would be a short circuit. I will have to ponder this. I think it would be absurd for such an action though.
This is probably old news to many but I think it won't hurt to re-quote it.
Quote from FDA -
"September 22, 2009 ... Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act ...
According to the act

…a cigarette or any of its component parts (including the tobacco, filter, or paper) shall not contain, as a constituent (including a smoke constituent) or additive, an artificial or natural flavor (other than tobacco or menthol) or an herb or spice, including strawberry, grape, orange, clove, cinnamon, pineapple, vanilla, coconut, licorice, cocoa, chocolate, cherry, or coffee, that is a characterizing flavor of the tobacco product or tobacco smoke

Any company who continues to make, ship or sell such products may be subject to FDA enforcement actions."

 

[Robino1]

50 people damaged by ecigs in the last year. Poison control center emergencies up. Nico poison complaints & shortness of breath etc. people are scared & the FDA to the rescue. Just heard on the radio 2 minutes a ago . Miami WIOD 610.

Now, what do you think is going to happen? Huh?..

But they never mention how many calls to poison control centers about kids swallowing flouride toothpaste The calls to poison control about eliquid are the lowest in the list of calls. Of course that won't be mentioned.

I wish common sense could prevail. It has been taken over by greed.

 

[Jeffk123]

I certainly don't want my ability to vape or the industry hurt by regulation, but our other options weren't really great either. I feel like there are only a few ways this could have gone to maintain the industry's momentum.

New product status. If ecigs were stated as an entirely new product, like a personal electronic vaporizor etc... this would definitely require a large amount of studies and high costs in regards to the new product/technologies efficacy, social utility, potential harm to others and wouldn't allow people (like us) to be heard. Once the new product is submitted, the FDA would have had only 180 days to make a decision.

Substaintial Equivalency. If you are introducing a new tobacco product to the FDA as a new variant of a tobacco cigarette by blend, paper type or other change, you must submit an application and the FDA would have no set deadline for approval (they can review it indefinitely). I found the total number of product submissions received and filed each month, but can't find where any approvals are (help! if you can find them). The highest month (by a long shot to be fair) was March 2011 with the grand total of: 3,552 submissions.

So it seems to me that regulating this product as a tobacco product (that has a pretty long lineage behind it) was our best option if we wanted to keep up with the momentum the industry was going. What comes out from the FDA is a proposed rule, meaning they are going to publish a regulation (that doesn't have any force) open for review and comment prior to adoption. So because this is a tobacco product we get to have a voice, and I am personally happy for that. What we need to do is better prepare to respond to the proposed rule the most eloquently way possible. Which is why I wanted to start this thread, to see what people had to say about the topic and I'm really happy people are sharing their input!

Will there be some way to write them once the regulations are proposed for review? If so there are 13 vape shops here I will be going to to get them to write as well.

 

[JaRod]

The sad thing is there is so many people talking about banning, regulating, categorizing ecigarettes, yet there is not a single serious study based on real evidence about the side effects, consequences, or benefits of ecigarettes, all the politician's arguments backing their bills are BS, no solid evidence, we are guilty by association.
As a user of ecigs, I'd like to see a serious impartial, and scientific study about what vaping means for my health, not a stupid study done by this or that university with serious methodological and statistical deficiencies performed by a group of students who need to graduate or a group of so called scientists that need to come up with results in "something" in order to keep their funding.

 

[paigekoontz]

Will there be some way to write them once the regulations are proposed for review? If so there are 13 vape shops here I will be going to to get them to write as well.

Yes! Proposals (usually always) include instructions within the content! When they publish it, I'll post the information!

 

[edyle]

Well that's bad. The FDA would have to change a few things to include e-cigs but it does look possible. I'm not sure they cold make the leap from nicotine base to tobacco so easily. I suppose synthetic nicotine would be a short circuit. I will have to ponder this. I think it would be absurd for such an action though.
This is probably old news to many but I think it won't hurt to re-quote it.
Quote from FDA -
"September 22, 2009 ... Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act ...
According to the act

…a cigarette or any of its component parts (including the tobacco, filter, or paper) shall not contain, as a constituent (including a smoke constituent) or additive, an artificial or natural flavor (other than tobacco or menthol) or an herb or spice, including strawberry, grape, orange, clove, cinnamon, pineapple, vanilla, coconut, licorice, cocoa, chocolate, cherry, or coffee, that is a characterizing flavor of the tobacco product or tobacco smoke

Any company who continues to make, ship or sell such products may be subject to FDA enforcement actions."

Thanks for that important quote.

The intent of that would have been to prevent the tobacco companies from using flavors as a way to ensnare the public towards smoking.
Now, the tricky part is: that does not apply to vaping for the same reason that it does not apply to pastry.

 

[CassiusCloud]

I find it funny,the second people in a country that brags about freedom,starts to enjoy their freedoms.
The same old players jump in to tell them how bad it is for them to do..
No matter what it is..
Fear is used as the brain washer before the cat gets too far out of the bag.
Some things never change..

They will try their best to make a tomato become a banana and people will buy into it so easily..
It's just amazing how things really have not changed other than having less freedom now than before..

we have this awesome technology that has people getting healthier and they are making it look like it's worse than what we are leaving..
yet i've only heard of one death,which was by injection and other self inflicted stories .

 

[hairball]

The sad thing is there is so many people talking about banning, regulating, categorizing ecigarettes, yet there is not a single serious study based on real evidence about the side effects, consequences, or benefits of ecigarettes, all the politician's arguments backing their bills are BS, no solid evidence, we are guilty by association.
As a user of ecigs, I'd like to see a serious impartial, and scientific study about what vaping means for my health, not a stupid study done by this or that university with serious methodological and statistical deficiencies performed by a group of students who need to graduate or a group of so called scientists that need to come up with results in "something" in order to keep their funding.

Dr. Konstantinos Farsalinos has done tons of research on this. Search him on the interwebs too. He's on our side.

Exclusive ECF Interview: Dr Konstantinos Farsalinos - ECF InfoZone

 

[-mj01-]

So it seems to me that regulating this product as a tobacco product (that has a pretty long lineage behind it) was our best option if we wanted to keep up with the momentum the industry was going. What comes out from the FDA is a proposed rule, meaning they are going to publish a regulation (that doesn't have any force) open for review and comment prior to adoption. So because this is a tobacco product we get to have a voice, and I am personally happy for that. What we need to do is better prepare to respond to the proposed rule the most eloquently way possible. Which is why I wanted to start this thread, to see what people had to say about the topic and I'm really happy people are sharing their input!

I'm pretty sure I disagree with this line of thinking. Pigeon holing what we do in with tobacco products will provide the government with the immediate justification they need to tax the hell out of us after they've made the product virtually unusable.

I originally thought regulation might be a good thing but after educating a little and reflecting on personal experiences, I can no longer say such a thing. I think that juice manufacturers who proactively disclose their ingredients on their labels are wise in doing so. I also think that our best bet is for those who make juice on a mass level come together to agree to a set of "best practice guidelines".

I also think that vendors - specifically on the local front - should pull their heads out of their a$$es and hold themselves to standards in terms of WHO they sell to (at least two shops sell to kids locally), as well as HOW they position the product ("you can smoke these anywhere").

Worthy of note, many vendors, suppliers, and manufacturers are already setting/maintaining the bar in terms of standards.

I can say from personal experience, we do not need government oversight. We don't want or need the FDA to get involved and we don't need the government telling us how we should do what we do. From personal experience, government is good at taxing things to death and ruining some businesses to benefit others. They're not good at taking a real world, sensible approach to things.

 

[hairball]

You keep saying tobacco products. They already have most of this on tobacco products. You're talking about "nicotine" products, right? Or has e-juice already been officially classified as a "tobacco product". Please clarify.

Judge Leon ruled us as a tobacco product when the FDA was trying to ban us all together.

 

[edyle]

I certainly don't want my ability to vape or the industry hurt by regulation, but our other options weren't really great either. I feel like there are only a few ways this could have gone to maintain the industry's momentum.

New product status. If ecigs were stated as an entirely new product, like a personal electronic vaporizor etc... this would definitely require a large amount of studies and high costs in regards to the new product/technologies efficacy, social utility, potential harm to others and wouldn't allow people (like us) to be heard. Once the new product is submitted, the FDA would have had only 180 days to make a decision.

Substaintial Equivalency. If you are introducing a new tobacco product to the FDA as a new variant of a tobacco cigarette by blend, paper type or other change, you must submit an application and the FDA would have no set deadline for approval (they can review it indefinitely). I found the total number of product submissions received and filed each month, but can't find where any approvals are (help! if you can find them). The highest month (by a long shot to be fair) was March 2011 with the grand total of: 3,552 submissions.

So it seems to me that regulating this product as a tobacco product (that has a pretty long lineage behind it) was our best option if we wanted to keep up with the momentum the industry was going. What comes out from the FDA is a proposed rule, meaning they are going to publish a regulation (that doesn't have any force) open for review and comment prior to adoption. So because this is a tobacco product we get to have a voice, and I am personally happy for that. What we need to do is better prepare to respond to the proposed rule the most eloquently way possible. Which is why I wanted to start this thread, to see what people had to say about the topic and I'm really happy people are sharing their input!

Which product would be defined as a tobacco product?

It's always amazing to me that we can look back at history and stupid things that people did in the past and say boy those people sure were stupid, them watch in the present seeing new stupid unfolding, and just imagining the future generations reading history and wondering to themselves 'boy those people sure were stupid back then'.

 

[Talyon]

Hmmmm, still no Official word from CASAA or ECF.

Would be nice to know for sure what's up if anything.

 

[Kryyptyk]

"In other words, in addition to directly subjecting newly-deemed "tobacco products" to the substantive requirements of Chapter IX of the FD&C Act, it enables FDA to issue further public health regulations related to such products."

Say bye-bye to vaping in public, people.