FDA Game changer? - "Relax ... it's a ___ NJOY!" (NJOY to make a non-cigAlike/advanced system with a tank?)

[wv2win]

Really wish that Janty was available in the US. They are one of the innovators, the Ego seems kinda popular. Plus the biggest reason I want them in the US, is they don't use Polycarbonate in their tanks, which is why my searches lead to their pages. Was looking for a re-brander of them available here, and could not find one.

They are in the US, in Buffalo, NY. I hear they even have a store front now. I like their e-liquid:

Home

 

[Nate760]

Nate, I applaud the fact that you quit w/ cigalikes, but what I hear is that this is rare.

I can't imagine why it would be. When I was first getting off cigarettes, I wanted my vaping experience to be as close to smoking as possible. It wasn't until a month later, when I was vaping for enjoyment rather than smoking cessation, that I started using second-gen devices and non-tobacco flavors.

If cigalikes didn't exist, I'm 99% certain I'd still be smoking.

 

[Jman8]

I would not say disdain but more like ineffective dislike. They have their place.

This alone makes it less snooty and more reasonable in discussion.

But here is what I dislike about most cigalikes:

1. Lying marketing: one cart = 1 - 2 packs of analogs; batteries that last for 2 days; premium device, better than anything on the market, etc, etc

As a cigalike user, I don't like that marketing tactic, but doesn't make the cigalike garbage.

2. I personally have talked with about 50+ people locally who stated they tried vaping with a cigalike and due to the weak vapor, poor throat hit and weak battery that they went back to smoking. Some even called vaping another "stop smoking scam"

I think I know one person who was on Blu, got to point of no more smoking and then saw this person about 3 months later back to smoking. As I'm a dual user and on opposite scale of those who enjoy hating on traditional smokes, I didn't care to press this person on why the change back.

Of the other local vapers I know, most (or I think all) are dual users. The last time I was in a room with many of them, they were all clearly more vapers than smokers. One of these was using a non cigalike device, but i distinctly recall having a smoke with that person.

3. The fact that no cigalike company (until possibly now) has been willing to offer an "upgrade" product for those many dissatisfied with cigalike performance. In other words, they are more interested in just quick profits and have not been willing to put a little money into a better performing product.

Obviously debatable as I'm one who is satisfied with by cigalike performance. I realize there is perception of 'better product' out there, but pushing on that is the sort of thing that comes off as snooty. Everyday on ECF I get to see this playing out within the larger devices as there are 'obviously' better devices than whatever it is certain users are using. And all that is assuming cigalikes are out of the equation.

4. If a cigalike provided an 10 hour battery with no battery drain issues (regulated), as well as a cart that lasted 10+ hours of hard use with no drop off in performance and a consistent vape for those 10 hours, I would be an advocate.

Somehow I doubt that. I imagine in that scenario, the bigger devices would provide a 20 hour battery and then the scale would still be same on rest of what you're conveying.

I like it when us vapers are of a mindset of "whatever works, is right for you." And not expressing disdain for the products that people choose to use. Helping people realize there are umpteen other choices, all of which have their fans is perfectly fine in my book, and expected to occur for rest of eternity. But when these same people need to put another device down to prop up the one they like, that's where I take issue.

5. My biggest issue is that for every one person who successfully quits analogs with a cigalike, my strong guess is that 10 keep smoking and another 10 get smart and find a better product.

I'm still smoking. Let's discuss your "biggest issue" in more detail as it seems like it is preventing you from seeing the forest for the trees.

 

[Nate760]

I like it when us vapers are of a mindset of "whatever works, is right for you." And not expressing disdain for the products that people choose to use. Helping people realize there are umpteen other choices, all of which have their fans is perfectly fine in my book, and expected to occur for rest of eternity. But when these same people need to put another device down to prop up the one they like, that's where I take issue.

This. Vapers, of all people, should understand that quitting smoking (or significantly cutting back one's cigarette intake) is the only outcome that matters, and it's completely immaterial how any individual happens to arrive at it. When we act with condescension toward people who use products we might not like, or we jump to far-reaching conclusions like "Cigalikes don't help anyone quit" just because we're trying to validate our own personal biases, we're thinking and behaving in a manner not unlike the ANTZ who write off all e-cigs as a tobacco industry conspiracy designed to get little kids hooked on nicotine.

 

[tombaker]

All I'm saying is everyone I know used cigalikes as a stepping stone and moved on to vaping.

Cigalikes are Vaping. Geez Some folks are tying to redfine E-Cigs as actually putting out "smoke" as defined by the laws.....but until then we remaiin all vapers first, then from their you can start talking MODs and APV. Its not E-Cigging. Its all vaping.

Lots of early adopters start, then move on out again. Marketing 101 and all. Mass adoption is coming into E-Cigs at a much improved level than the early adopters.

Lots of people don't want to hassle with cleaning tanks, rebuilding coils, leaks, gurgling leaks. Automatic Batteries are more advanced than a trigger system. Most cars are automatics....but real drivers must have a stick shift.....But as time goes by, race cars start using automatics, with dual clutch systems, because they are....faster.

APV you have to hold the battery all the time, with a full hand.....vs an easy teeth clench no hand Vape of an AEC vaper. (Since we seem to be wanting to spawn new names AEC, Advanced Electronic Cigarette)

Its just Vapor, we are all Vaping....E-Cigs not kicked to the side.

 

[wv2win]

This. Vapers, of all people, should understand that quitting smoking (or significantly cutting back one's cigarette intake) is the only outcome that matters, and it's completely immaterial how any individual happens to arrive at it. When we act with condescension toward people who use products we might not like, or we jump to far-reaching conclusions like "Cigalikes don't help anyone quit" just because we're trying to validate our own personal biases, we're thinking and behaving in a manner not unlike the ANTZ who write off all e-cigs as a tobacco industry conspiracy designed to get little kids hooked on nicotine.

I agree with both you and Jman that whatever works should be encouraged. It's just in my experience, personally and from what others have told me, that so many found the cig-a-likes had many draw backs from a "consistent, effective, less-hassle" standpoint to work well for many PAD+ smokers. I know they work for some which is why I stated they have their place. I just hate to see people give up because they think that is all there is. That was more likely a year or two ago. I now see many more people using at least an ego type device than cig-a-likes. Maybe that's why Njoy is jumping into the game.

 

[Roger_Lafayette]

First thing's first ...

SJ, I am completely behind your proposal to do something like the Robert West toolkit, as I've said right here (in #4, but I want your wonderful OP to be in this link): http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ore-effective-than-nrt-smoking-cessation.html

So my comments about NJOY should in no way be read as my saying that we can all relax now, even if I quoted that advertising line (I realize now that there could be a misunderstanding about that - it was only intended as a kind of humorous teaser.)

***

Sorry, how do we know this? Don't get me wrong, I think it's almost certainly correct, and it's certainly true of our sample when we carry out surveys, but has this actually been written up from population-level surveys? I hear what you're saying wrt Njoy commissioning the surveys, but I'm not sure how that helps given that we have anywhere between 50 and 125 days until the final rule is proposed.

If not, don't expect the FDA to accept it as true.

For what it's worth, I now reject the concept of Cigalikes (as sold in front-line retail) being a transitional device, helping turn people on to the "proof-of-concept" so they explore and find better devices. While this may have been true to some extent a couple of years ago, I view them now as being far more of a block to the VTM category than helping.

You're right that we don't really "know" about the relative cessation rates associated w/ cigAlikes and advanced devices, in the sense of being able to "prove" it.

My focus in saying that had to do with the applications that cigAlike manufactorers will have to submit - not the comments for the FDA's deeming rule.

So what I was saying is: If everything that we believe about cigAlikes and cessation is true, then the FDA will have legitimate grounds to reject cigAlike applications whenever it has the data, under the health effects balancing test in the tobacco act. I think we agree on this, because I've seen you say something very similar in another thread.

If the FDA wants to make life difficult for cigAlike applicants, it can wait to reject the cigAlike applications until the 2-year "window" closes. Because the applicants will then require pre-market approval if they submit another application.

You may very well be right about this whole question of whether they're more helpful or harmful as part of the pathway to advanced devices. Are you saying that people who try cigAlikes may go back to smoking because they get the wrong impression about what vaping really is? I know that I've seen that myself - two smokers whom I know are going to require a lot more "work" on my part, before they are disabused of this incorrect impression about vaping.

CigAlikes are also a huge problem for us because of the way public health studies are often done - "ever vapers" are often included. This is probably how the Grana et al. junk letter resulted. We may recognize this as the headline "e-cigarettes don't help smokers quit":

http://media.jamanetwork.com/news-item/
e-cigarettes-not-associated-with-more-smokers-quitting-reduced-consumption/

(That headline wasn't as common in the UK as it was here in the US. It was a major media storm at the end of March. References to it are by no means gone. Link is split into two lines, but anyone who wants to leap into this cesspool of junk science can paste the 2-line link into their browser's address bar. Be sure to wear HAZMAT garb

***

[...] Can we say this is the final word [on predicates]?

[...]

I would posit that if the FDA PMTA proves too onerous for them, they may well decide to jump ship entirely and focus on Europe.....

So, game changer? Could be, but we'll have to wait and see.

Don't forget that Victory brands are out there too with an enormous market capitalisation buying up everything that moves, presumably following Warren Buffet's maxim. What their plan is is anyone's guess.

On the predicates thing - I provide periodic lip sevice (or is that finger service) to the idea, only because so much work appears to have been done to track down this Ruyan lead. I've said repeatedly that I think hope for this is remote. I was just trying to be nice

Europe is a huge question mark, "herding" the 28 "cats" (member states) into art. 18 is going to be messy at best. The UK market may be bigger than most in the EU, and there are those outstanding (cessation theraphy) applications to the MHRA by BAT and Nicolite. All I can say is that in terms of population and GDP, the potential US market is substantial, and there's only one critical regulatory agency to currently deal with. Federal supremacy law generally makes it tougher for the states to get into nitty-gritty stuff like packaging and labelling requirements, now that the FDA has put down its marker. So there are big potential economies of scale here on this side of the pond.

Granted, we have no idea what NJOY will do. That's why I put a question mark in this post topic. And I wasn't being squirrelly about that, as Erich von Däniken was in Chariots of the Gods?

My bottom line here is that massively deep pockets are going to be required to pursue the new product pathway. Only BT and BV (big vapor) have it. And this is the first time so far as I know that any of them have formally announced that they're going to move forward with an advanced device.

Any BT/BV company - or any other firm - that's going to go all the way with this, will have to put serious money on the table, and be ready for a long spell of no sales if the FDA rejects their application, while the case winds its way through the courts. And they're going to have to put up a huge chunk of change in advance for the applications' studies: one per flavor and nic strength combination.

Are we talking about a mere $10M? (Hmm, sounds low.) $100M? $500M? More? I don't know.

It might be cheaper to buy Congress. Or Congress may have to be "bought" in addition. As we say here in the states - "Would you like fries with that?"

***

As an aside, questions about whether I actually vape encouraged me to start this thread, which I had been meaning to post for a while anyway, and which is totally ...

I've been looking for what strikes me as the ideal mech (according to my own personal preferences, which may not be of any relevance to anyone else - i.e. YMMV): http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...their-vapapocalypse-simplicity-longevity.html

Just for what little that may be worth - yes, I do vape, even if I don't own a Provari

(Not the APV anyway. I could be talked into buying a tee shirt tho'

 

[tombaker]

They are in the US, in Buffalo, NY. I hear they even have a store front now. I like their e-liquid:

Home

There it is....

The Janty Clearo tank is made out of durable Polypropylene. It is NOT susceptible to the cracking that plagues Chinese copy cat polycarbonate and acrylic tanks.​

I am looking for something that is actually safe to put E-Liquid in, you can not even make Polycarbonate without loads of BPA, when they crack....they spew BPA. I want an option for on the road, that is pocket friendly, vs the heavy Protanks, which are fine for in house, indoors.

Janty was the only one I found that was Polypropylene, only meaning only.

 

[Nate760]

I agree with both you and Jman that whatever works should be encouraged. It's just in my experience, personally and from what others have told me, that so many found the cig-a-likes had many draw backs from a "consistent, effective, less-hassle" standpoint to work well for many PAD+ smokers. I know they work for some which is why I stated they have their place. I just hate to see people give up because they think that is all there is. That was more likely a year or two ago. I now see many more people using at least an ego type device than cig-a-likes. Maybe that's why Njoy is jumping into the game.

There's no easy answer for this question because not everyone has an equal desire to quit smoking. A person who's only halfheartedly trying to quit would, I imagine, be more likely to try one brand of cigalike, find it unsatisfying, and promptly return to smoking. A person who's strongly motivated to quit, on the other hand, is probably going to continue exploring other/better options if the first thing they try doesn't work.

We can, however, say two things with absolute certitude: 1) no vaping product, cigalike or otherwise, makes anyone's smoking habit worse; and 2) Even if cigalikes are significantly less effective cessation devices than PVs, they're still significantly MORE effective than any traditional NRT product.

 

[Jman8]

I just hate to see people give up because they think that is all there is.

This is a very valid point. I think all vapers would dislike the idea of a noob giving up because the device they tried didn't quite cut it.

So, we let them know there are many options, and be honest that many of us started with cigalikes, enjoyed them for a little while, or didn't enjoy them (as the case may be), but found alternatives that did work, or did suit us.

I also think just saying vaping is better than smoking doesn't work. Would be nice if it did. But all of us had to get to that place of self discovery and realize it on our own. Some will realize it thru cigalikes and some (probably the majority) will realize it thru the bigger devices.

Each to their own, without judgment.

 

[2coils]

There's no easy answer for this question because not everyone has an equal desire to quit smoking. A person who's only halfheartedly trying to quit would, I imagine, be more likely to try one brand of cigalike, find it unsatisfying, and promptly return to smoking. A person who's strongly motivated to quit, on the other hand, is probably going to continue exploring other/better options if the first thing they try doesn't work.

We can, however, say two things with absolute certitude: 1) no vaping product, cigalike or otherwise, makes anyone's smoking habit worse; and 2) Even if cigalikes are significantly less effective cessation devices than PVs, they're still significantly MORE effective than any traditional NRT product.

Agreed 100% The powers to be tho.....maybe not so much
Furthermore.....been watching your posts lately, Good Stuff!!!

 

[Kent C]

There it is....

The Janty Clearo tank is made out of durable Polypropylene. It is NOT susceptible to the cracking that plagues Chinese copy cat polycarbonate and acrylic tanks.​

I am looking for something that is actually safe to put E-Liquid in, you can not even make Polycarbonate without loads of BPA, when they crack....they spew BPA. I want an option for on the road, that is pocket friendly, vs the heavy Protanks, which are fine for in house, indoors.

Janty was the only one I found that was Polypropylene, only meaning only.

Smoktech has them as well.

Smoktech LARGE ULTIMATE Dual Coil Tank (DCT)

A few others too but in tank/carto set ups.

 

[tombaker]

So what I was saying is: If everything that we believe about cigAlikes and cessation is true, then the FDA will have legitimate grounds to reject cigAlike applications whenever it has the data, under the health effects balancing test in the tobacco act. I think we agree on this, because I've seen you say something very similar in another thread.

CigAlikes are also a huge problem for us because of the way public health studies are often done - "ever vapers" are often included.

Because some people prefer a cigar sized vaporizor, instead of a smaller, automatic device, both of which can use either Carts or Tanks, you think that people they are not quitting smoking. Demitri the Vaping Greek, quit cigarettes using a V2, said he never turned back.

Lafayette now subscribes to the notion, (and its not even the FDA's notion), that the FDA can legimatly have grounds to reject E-Cigs? FDA said they are not banning E-Cigs......but Lafayette and crew think they have come up with cause for them to Legitimately reject Vaping devices. That is your considered assessment by understanding the facts????? Just gut feel eh? No need to look at actual sales data?

What in the world are you thinking......you are in the wrong direction for so long, you are all the way over to on the wrong side, and think that is a warm fuzzy place. E-Cigs are vaping, APV device users are Vaping. Anyone who is Vaporizing E-Liquid is Vaping.

A classic original Star Trek....you would have the white on the right side, vs the black on the right side fighting each other because half white and black are so different that way. Dang 1968 Star Trek was ahead of its time. Vapers of small devices are not really vaping, must use replaceable coils with Big batteries, and VV, to be really special you need VW. Maybe just perhaps Lafeyette you can consider dual use E-Cigs and APV....vape both, it happens too

E-Cig users, are the majority of the numbers, the numbers show people quitting....the majority is doing the majority of Vapers are doing. As if the FDA must not legitimately conclude that E-Cigs are safe, and much safer than Analogs.

Geeeez, just GEEEEEZ dude really, this is what you want to be selling?

So what I was saying is: If everything that we believe about cigAlikes and cessation is true, then the FDA will have legitimate grounds to reject cigAlike applications whenever it has the data, under the health effects balancing test in the tobacco act.

 

[Roger_Lafayette]

This. Vapers, of all people, should understand that quitting smoking (or significantly cutting back one's cigarette intake) is the only outcome that matters, and it's completely immaterial how any individual happens to arrive at it. When we act with condescension toward people who use products we might not like, or we jump to far-reaching conclusions like "Cigalikes don't help anyone quit" just because we're trying to validate our own personal biases, we're thinking and behaving in a manner not unlike the ANTZ who write off all e-cigs as a tobacco industry conspiracy designed to get little kids hooked on nicotine.

I apologize if I said that cigAlikes don't help anyone quit (I don't think I ever did, but maybe). I think I said that most cigAlike users are dual users. I should've also added that in many cases, this is transitional.

There's nothing wrong in my book with being a dual user (even a permanent one) - this is not a moral judgement on my part, nor any other comment on a specific person.

For some interesting perspective on this from Dr. Siegel, consider:

New Study Shows that Among Committed Electronic Cigarette Users, Dual Use is a Gateway to Smoking Cessation

Contrary to Claims of Many Anti-Smoking Advocates, New Study Shows that Electronic Cigarettes Decrease Nicotine Addiction

Anti-Smoking Advocate Incorrectly and Irresponsibly Tells Public that Smoking Half Pack Per Day is No Better than Smoking Two Packs Per Day

(The last one makes the point that while dual users may enhance their quality of life significantly. Yet mortality rates are similar, as between dual users and tobacco cigarette smokers who do not vape.)

BTW there are more interesting Siegel blogs regarding dual users here in this Google search: http://www.google.com/#q="dual+user"+site:tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com

***

So I personally do not have an issue with anyone who uses cigAlikes exclusively, advanced devices exclusively, dual uses in either combination (or uses all three). I also don't have a problem with plain old garden-variety tobacco cigarette smokers - after all, I was one just five short months ago.

What I can say with some conviction is that if every vaper was a dual user, our public relations challenges would be much greater. Not to mention what the issues would be for regulation at all levels. The cessation argument is by far the strongest claim that we have, because otherwise vaping is harder to defend, and easier to unfairly dismiss (even in the eyes of otherwise-unbiased observers) as just a mere recreational activity.

I wish we lived in a world in which smoking was not demonized, along with anything that "looks like smoking," but unfortunately we don't. If there was some obvious way to change that, I'd be doing it. But for now, the cessation argument seems to provide the greatest ROI.

Finally, I view any vaping technology as a mixed blessing (and that applies to cigAlikes or advanced devices). For every tobacco cigarette smoker who quits or cuts down using those devices, I cheer. For every smoker who tries those devices, and then permanently goes back to being a 100% tobacco cigarette smoker, I groan.

And I'll say the same thing about cessation. I am generally inclined to cheer louder when I hear about folks who quit smoking tobacco cigarettes completely, as opposed to cutting down. And it matters little to me whether they used NRT, acupuncture, hypnosis, vaping (cigAlikes or whatever), or whatever else works for them and which doesn't harm anyone else.

 

[tombaker]

Smoktech has them as well.

Smoktech LARGE ULTIMATE Dual Coil Tank (DCT)

A few others too but in tank/carto set ups.

A serious thanks for that one.....I probably saw that before but stopped when reading the polycarbonate for the clear tank....and kept searching.....not noticing the colored tanks, which clearly they don't care about the cloudy polypropylene.

Polyproplene is so resistant to chemicals, if you are a fan of Breaking Bad, you can melt people in the drums of it

Gonna buy that one, at that price its a no brainer to try. thanks

 

[Gato del Jugo]

But the sales numbers of E-Cigs are the majority of "users"...

Link?


I've seen Bonnie Herzog's estimated break-down of revenue..

I see two things wrong with her numbers:

1.) Cigalike sales are much easier to track & therefore likely more accurate.. Non-cigalike sales? Not so much.. I believe that segment is growing much quicker than she thinks & she's been under-estimating what's really going on out there, especially since it's pretty difficult -- if not impossible -- to accurately track non-cigalikes...

2.) I was spending a lot more on cigalike stuff per month than I am now on non-cigalike stuff.. Seriously, how many ProVarii does one need? With the amount I was spending on blu's those 1st few months, I could pick up a fully-loaded ProVari every 2 months -- and have money left over for a couple 120ml bottles of unflavored e-liquid... In other words, I'm spending a lot less per month now that I'm in APV land, than I was when I was in cigalike world -- thereby skewing the sales numbers... Am I the typical APV user, in this sense? I don't know & don't claim to know.. I do know that I was blowing way too much cash on cigalikes for much less performance & effectiveness...


So, for those 2 reasons, I wouldn't necessarily translate higher estimated sales of cigalikes into meaning that more people use cigalikes than non-cigalikes...

 

[tombaker]

What I can say with some conviction is that if every vaper was a dual user, our public relations challenges would be much greater. Not to mention what the issues would be for regulation at all levels. The cessation argument is by far the strongest claim that we have, because otherwise vaping is harder to defend, and easier to unfairly dismiss (even in the eyes of otherwise-unbiased observers) as just a mere recreational activity.

Dude, take a moment, you are so lost.

Claiming cessation properties is NOT what e-Cigs are going to do because of the FDA. Sottera should remind you, that NOT making those claims was important....and products are labeled "no claims of cessation" now.

Its an alternative to smoking,
its safe.
It is not a cessation product,
Regardless consumers can figure all that out, without ANY labeling.

Vaping is not hard to defend, again.....Vaping is NOT hard to defend.

Recreational activities are legal, and encouraged, especially when safe, and safe to those around you..... Vaping E-Cigs is all that......ALL THAT.

Lafayette, take some time to reflect, you are driving in the wrong direction, start worrying about gas stations being way out there.

 

[tombaker]

Link?


I've seen Bonnie Herzog's estimated break-down of revenue..

I see two things wrong with her numbers:

1.) Cigalike sales are much easier to track & therefore likely more accurate.. Non-cigalike sales? Not so much.. I believe that segment is growing much quicker than she thinks & she's been under-estimating what's really going on out there, especially since it's pretty difficult -- if not impossible -- to accurately track non-cigalikes...

2.) I was spending a lot more on cigalike stuff per month than I am now on non-cigalike stuff.. Seriously, how many ProVarii does one need? With the amount I was spending on blu's those 1st few months, I could pick up a fully-loaded ProVari every 2 months -- and have money left over for a couple 120ml bottles of unflavored e-liquid... In other words, I'm spending a lot less per month now that I'm in APV land, than I was when I was in cigalike world -- thereby skewing the sales numbers... Am I the typical APV user, in this sense? I don't know & don't claim to know.. I do know that I was blowing way too much cash on cigalikes for much less performance & effectiveness...


So, for those 2 reasons, I wouldn't necessarily translate higher estimated sales of cigalikes into meaning that more people use cigalikes than non-cigalikes...

Nobody is tracking it perfectly, but I believe everyone, and likely yourself, thinks the number of E-Cigs vs APV is at the smalled 2-1

I switched to E-Liquid because of cost. But I used an V2 Clearomizer to do that, itty bitty .9 ml tank....that never leaked, EVER. Carts are money hogs.....But E-Cigs (sticks) uses cheap E-Liquids, Kanger E-Smart 808D-1 808 808D1 Clearomizer its the same item.

This was a toss in pocket and run.....upside down in pants pocket....no surprises except lint in the drip tip

 

[Roger_Lafayette]

Tom, I'm going to try to explain this one more time. Just once, because I think it's an important issue.

Lafayette now subscribes to the notion, (and its not even the FDA's notion), that the FDA can legimatly have grounds to reject E-Cigs? FDA said they are not banning E-Cigs......but Lafayette and crew think they have come up with cause for them to Legitimately reject Vaping devices. That is your considered assessment by understanding the facts????? Just gut feel eh? No need to look at actual sales data?

Under the proposed rule, every unique product must have an associated application, if it is to remain on the market after the two-year window closes. The FDA is required to assess the public health effects.

[Edit note: the words "proposed rule" were changed from "current law" as per Kent's observation in #103.]

Now if we have a group of 1,000 smokers in a study who do not use vaping at any point, then on average about 50 of them will quit every year.

Compare those to a group of 1,000 users of a particular brand of cigAlike. Now some of these people will switch brands, or go back to 100% smoking by the end of the longitudinal study. (There are obviously going to be problems with these kinds of longitudinal studies, but there are ways to resolve them. I'm not going to get into the picky details here.)

But let's just assume that fewer than 50 of this group of cigAlike users end up either completely quitting smoking, or had already quit smoking at the beginning of the study, and continued to not smoke. (In other words, fewer than 50 end up as nonsmokers, regardless of how they started out, one year earlier.)

At that point, the FDA can step in and say that the health effects are - on balance - negative. I.e. that the cigAlike use was associated with less quitting.

This is what many folks believe about cigAlike users. Fewer of them are likely to quit - for whatever reason. I believe it, too (at least right now I do). We do not yet have any solid evidence for it, as SJ correctly observed.

But if something like the above scenario can be demonstrated for a particular type of cigAlike (or any vaping product), then the FDA can "legitimately" decline the application for this product.

What if the cigAlike users have reduced their tobacco cigarette smoking? Currently, the consensus in the US public health community is that permanently reducing the rate of smoking provides negligible benefits to the smoker - c.f. this blog by Siegel: Anti-Smoking Advocate Incorrectly and Irresponsibly Tells Public that Smoking Half Pack Per Day is No Better than Smoking Two Packs Per Day

(Some of you may recall that they used to have TV ads which said "If you can't quit, at least try to cut down." No more.)

Now the relative health effects of reduced smoking versus cessation are presumably going to be hotly disputed in any litigation that arises as a result of this scenario playing out. But even Siegel concedes that the mortality rates from reduced tobacco cigarette smoking and unchanged tobacco cigarette smoking are similar. In other words, there appears to be no longevity benefit from merely cutting down. Smokers must quit completely to live longer, on average.

What's critical for us to understand is how the health effects equation works in the statute. This is what Zeller was saying in his now-famous remark in the hearings (well, it's become "famous" around here at ECF, in this forum, anyway

If everyone quit smoking and switched to vaping, that woudl obviously be a "win" for vaping-as-a-whole in terms of the standards that congress set up in the tobacco act (FSPTCA). This would also be a "win" for any particular product that a manufacturer submitted an application for. The FDA would have to approve the application - or at least not turn it down, based on the weighing of the health effects that it's required to perform under the law.

And yes, it's "legitimate" for the FDA to follow the law and follow the science. We might not like the law. But that's neither here nor there, until we mount an effort to get it changed.

In previous posts, I have repeatedly tried to explain what I (and pretty much everyone besides you, it seems) think was decided in Soterra. It seems that those efforts did not bear fruit. So I'm not going to repeat the same mistake, by going over points repeatedly.

In the future, if you bring this point up again, I will simply link to this post.

***

Because some people prefer a cigar sized vaporizor, instead of a smaller, automatic device, both of which can use either Carts or Tanks, you think that people they are not quitting smoking. Demitri the Vaping Greek, quit cigarettes using a V2, said he never turned back.

Lafayette now subscribes to the notion, (and its not even the FDA's notion), that the FDA can legimatly have grounds to reject E-Cigs? FDA said they are not banning E-Cigs......but Lafayette and crew think they have come up with cause for them to Legitimately reject Vaping devices. That is your considered assessment by understanding the facts????? Just gut feel eh? No need to look at actual sales data?

What in the world are you thinking......you are in the wrong direction for so long, you are all the way over to on the wrong side, and think that is a warm fuzzy place. E-Cigs are vaping, APV device users are Vaping. Anyone who is Vaporizing E-Liquid is Vaping.

A classic original Star Trek....you would have the white on the right side, vs the black on the right side fighting each other because half white and black are so different that way. Dang 1968 Star Trek was ahead of its time. Vapers of small devices are not really vaping, must use replaceable coils with Big batteries, and VV, to be really special you need VW. Maybe just perhaps Lafeyette you can consider dual use E-Cigs and APV....vape both, it happens too

E-Cig users, are the majority of the numbers, the numbers show people quitting....the majority is doing the majority of Vapers are doing. As if the FDA must not legitimately conclude that E-Cigs are safe, and much safer than Analogs.

Geeeez, just GEEEEEZ dude really, this is what you want to be selling?

 

[Nate760]

I apologize if I said that cigAlikes don't help anyone quit (I don't think I ever did, but maybe).

This is the statement (or, more accurately, rhetorical question) of yours with which I took issue:

But we know that advanced devices make it possible for smokers to quit (and cigAlikes don't), right?

I took issue not only because of my own experience having quit with cigalikes (BT-owned cigalikes, no less), but because it's a sweeping generalization that could never be factually corroborated. If we know anything about vaping, it's that everyone's journey is different and there's no one-size-fits all solution that's universally applicable. If anything, the abundance of options (in terms of hardware and flavor/potency alike) is what makes vaping such a wildly successful means of smoking cessation.

I think I said that most cigAlike users are dual users. I should've also added that in many cases, this is transitional.

Do you have any empirical basis for this assertion, or is it just a personal hunch based primarily on the fact that you don't like cigalikes? Moreover, I think "dual user" is such a difficult term to define that it probably doesn't have much usefulness. According to the best available numbers, the average "dual user" has cut their daily cigarette consumption from 22 to 4. These people are going to gain nearly as many health benefits as those who quit entirely, and there's no reason to assume their cigarette intake will ever return to pre-vaping levels, so for all intents and purposes, "dual user" is probably a superfluous distinction, since we have yet to hear of any individual who went on to smoke more cigarettes after they took up vaping. It seems to be a near-universal truth that smokers who start vaping either quit smoking entirely or significantly curtail their cigarette consumption. Obviously, either of these is a worthwhile outcome and a demonstrable net gain in terms of public health.