Here is a good articule I found
FDA will rule none too soon on e-cigarette regulations | Other Views | NewsObserver.com
FDA will rule none too soon on e-cigarette regulations | Other Views | NewsObserver.com
Fda to Rule
- Thread starter mgmrick
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
The amazing thing is that we allow these people to "rule" us at all. What business is it of theirs or anyone else's, what we choose to put in our own bodies?
The land of the free and the home of the brave? Hardly. Not anymore. More like the land of the police state and the home of the sheep.
The land of the free and the home of the brave? Hardly. Not anymore. More like the land of the police state and the home of the sheep.
I found that to be a very good article!
It is inevitable that this will happen sooner or later, and the article was written intelligently and without Bias for or against the use of the e-cigarette.
It is inevitable that this will happen sooner or later, and the article was written intelligently and without Bias for or against the use of the e-cigarette.
Mixed bag article. Yes it's for ecigs, but they want to set regulation on what goes into them. My thoughts are: anytime government talks about 'for the good of the people' it is bad news.
my take on these developments is this
if you have noticed...in the last few months you are seeing more and more media stories that are pro-ecig, gone are the days of discussing how ecigs have antifreeze in the for example
this is because the big players, Altria, RJR etc have decided that if you cant beat em', join em'...they want a slice of the pie, really though they want to whole pie
i figure they will regulate these in a way that favors only the large corporations by insisting on expensive licenses and other regulatory hoops which require a team of attorneys and scientists
Big tobacco will push for tamper resistant cartomizers so that you cannot refill them...the days of bottled juice will be over...they will say they need to protect children or protect adults who are buying too high of a concentration of nic etc....that will be the justification but the real motive is just big tobacco's profit
They are already spreading the lobbying money around...its coming
if you have noticed...in the last few months you are seeing more and more media stories that are pro-ecig, gone are the days of discussing how ecigs have antifreeze in the for example
this is because the big players, Altria, RJR etc have decided that if you cant beat em', join em'...they want a slice of the pie, really though they want to whole pie
i figure they will regulate these in a way that favors only the large corporations by insisting on expensive licenses and other regulatory hoops which require a team of attorneys and scientists
Big tobacco will push for tamper resistant cartomizers so that you cannot refill them...the days of bottled juice will be over...they will say they need to protect children or protect adults who are buying too high of a concentration of nic etc....that will be the justification but the real motive is just big tobacco's profit
They are already spreading the lobbying money around...its coming
LOL yeah, look at the food pyramid.... but that's another discussion...
Good article. I like how it explicitly states that nicotine is NOT a carcinogen. So many naysayers condemn e-cigs right off the bat because of the nicotine content. If more people were properly informed about the benefits of e-cigs it would change the perception.
But you can bet your bottom dollar that the FDA, BT, and Big Pharma will do everything they can to regulate, tax, and otherwise obstruct the availability of e-cigs and supplies in order to make a profit. Filling their coffers is their number one priority, even if it means depriving people of a life-saving alternative. Think GREED.
Amen.
But you can bet your bottom dollar that the FDA, BT, and Big Pharma will do everything they can to regulate, tax, and otherwise obstruct the availability of e-cigs and supplies in order to make a profit. Filling their coffers is their number one priority, even if it means depriving people of a life-saving alternative. Think GREED.
Amen.
This is more the norm than not. I think we can expect regulation and restriction of some supplies. Just waiting.
Very fair and rational article...
If they deem the spirit of tobacco regulations to apply to e cigarettes and those regulations would subject e cigarettes to an approval process for devices released after 2007 then that would be the same as banning the devices.
If a federal court ruled against their ban of e cigarettes in 2009 and deeming regulations would violate the spirit of the federal court ruling then the fda can't apply deeming regulations to e cigarettes.
The conclusion is a catch 22, they can't do either. What the fda needs to do is redefine the spirit of tobacco regulations without violating the spirit of the federal court ruling... At that point they cease to be deeming regulations but an entirely new set of regulations.
If they deem the spirit of tobacco regulations to apply to e cigarettes and those regulations would subject e cigarettes to an approval process for devices released after 2007 then that would be the same as banning the devices.
If a federal court ruled against their ban of e cigarettes in 2009 and deeming regulations would violate the spirit of the federal court ruling then the fda can't apply deeming regulations to e cigarettes.
The conclusion is a catch 22, they can't do either. What the fda needs to do is redefine the spirit of tobacco regulations without violating the spirit of the federal court ruling... At that point they cease to be deeming regulations but an entirely new set of regulations.
All good points except its nys and they can and do anything they want..... nanny state
If you look at the author of the article company web site, they are basically providing a "managed" nicotine inhalor.
Isn't it amazing that people like this (and the FDA, BP, BT, ANTZ's) seem to think they have to "tell us" or "force us" to use a product that has severe limitations (in comparison to what we currently use), because we, the former smoker, is not smart enough or capable of deciding what really works in getting us to break our tobacco habit.
And there have been no reported harmful accidents from all of us million+ vapers who have successfully transitioned away from analogs, yet we must be "managed" and "protected" from ourselves.
e-Nicotine Technology
Isn't it amazing that people like this (and the FDA, BP, BT, ANTZ's) seem to think they have to "tell us" or "force us" to use a product that has severe limitations (in comparison to what we currently use), because we, the former smoker, is not smart enough or capable of deciding what really works in getting us to break our tobacco habit.
And there have been no reported harmful accidents from all of us million+ vapers who have successfully transitioned away from analogs, yet we must be "managed" and "protected" from ourselves.
e-Nicotine Technology
The bill did not even come up for a vote today.....
CASAA: Call to Action! New York Bill to Impose 95% Tax on E-Cigarettes and Smokeless Tobacco -- A.B. 7106 (UPDATED)
CASAA: Call to Action! New York Bill to Impose 95% Tax on E-Cigarettes and Smokeless Tobacco -- A.B. 7106 (UPDATED)
This is a great point. I think overall vapers are extremely cautious and safe people. Think of all the DIYers and electronics modders out there. With the exception of a few battery explosion incidents, I've not heard about a whole lot of vape accidents. And batteries are known to blow up in other devices.
Analogs, we know, often cause forest and wildfires in dry areas, have been known to cause house fires etc. Cigarette lighters explode too.
But for all the playing around our amateur electricians do here, for all the people out there cutting down their own 100mg nic, there just isn't very much carelessness.
I've not heard of even a single incident of nic poisioning on here or in the general media. Not one. It's pretty amazing when you consider the high concentrations some of us deal with and the leaky delivery systems that are so often reported here.
Where then, is the danger? Millions of people are doing this, statistically the accident rate is neglible.
With all the DIY folks "running around", somebody's bound to make themselves sick sometime. On the other hand, they never did quite get rid of all the moonshiners.
Very good article. The basic fact is that I know what is in my nic juice and I do not know what was in cigarettes, including the nicotine content. Yet cigarettes are legal?
Is there some harm from vaping? Probably but it's not killing people like other cessation products like Chantix. Vaping is also a lot more effective. There are ample studies to support those statements. They are not just "my opinion". Kids have died after they have gotten a hold of nicotine lozenges and gums. I don't see juice being any more or less dangerous, if anything child proof caps provide a (tiny) measure of additional safety. I don't think a toddler could get a lethal puff out of an ecig.
Cigarette butts have been listed as #1 for litter and enviromental harm for decades in various cities. I think it's pretty obvious they are greener - except for the disposables. I do have concerns about waste and think rechargable ecigs are much better.
This is a public health issue with the Medicaid expansion going into effect. For every smoker that switches to vaper, I suspect (not confirmed) that at least 10 non-smokers are affected; either through healthier lifestyles for someone they care about, less health care costs, less enviromental damage, less problems with second hand smoke.
Everyone should be aware and concerned watching how innovation, small business and capitalism is being controlled and regulated to favor multi-national corporations. Most of the state bills were written through ALEC and the content of the bills have nothing to do with 'public health / safety'. They are 100% about market control or they would be addressing the real killers; cigarettes and they are not.
No one has died from vaping even though the industry has been unregulated for over 6 years. Cigarettes and tobacco cessation products can't say that. Legislation should be directed at the real killers.
Is there some harm from vaping? Probably but it's not killing people like other cessation products like Chantix. Vaping is also a lot more effective. There are ample studies to support those statements. They are not just "my opinion". Kids have died after they have gotten a hold of nicotine lozenges and gums. I don't see juice being any more or less dangerous, if anything child proof caps provide a (tiny) measure of additional safety. I don't think a toddler could get a lethal puff out of an ecig.
Cigarette butts have been listed as #1 for litter and enviromental harm for decades in various cities. I think it's pretty obvious they are greener - except for the disposables. I do have concerns about waste and think rechargable ecigs are much better.
This is a public health issue with the Medicaid expansion going into effect. For every smoker that switches to vaper, I suspect (not confirmed) that at least 10 non-smokers are affected; either through healthier lifestyles for someone they care about, less health care costs, less enviromental damage, less problems with second hand smoke.
Everyone should be aware and concerned watching how innovation, small business and capitalism is being controlled and regulated to favor multi-national corporations. Most of the state bills were written through ALEC and the content of the bills have nothing to do with 'public health / safety'. They are 100% about market control or they would be addressing the real killers; cigarettes and they are not.
No one has died from vaping even though the industry has been unregulated for over 6 years. Cigarettes and tobacco cessation products can't say that. Legislation should be directed at the real killers.
- Status
Similar threads
