...when the FDA has said that long-term nicotine use is safe??
Yes, this is a serious question.
I'm not saying smoking is safe. I'm not even saying vaping is safe (though I believe it is). But as a legal matter - if someone is using nicotine (patches/lozenges/gum) - how can health insurance charge a surcharge when the FDA has 1) approved them for over-the-counter purchase and 2) says that the health effects are negligible?
In case you're wondering, here's the appropriate section from the Federal Register 04/02/2013. https://www.federalregister.gov/art...erapy-products-for-over-the-counter-human-use
In the years since NRT products became available for OTC use, a number of studies have examined the use of NRT products over periods longer than 12 weeks. We have reviewed the published literature on this longer-term use of NRT products and have not identified any safety risks associated with such use. A well-known and highly regarded study on the effects of long-term use of NRT products is the Lung Health Study, in which almost 6,000 smokers were given access to free nicotine gum for up to 5 years (see Murray et al., 1996). In this study, over 1,000 subjects were still using the gum after 1 year. The adverse effects of long-term nicotine gum use reported by these subjects were described as minor and transient, and there was no correlation between long-term gum use and cardiovascular events. A followup study found that long-term ad lib use of nicotine gum neither increased nor decreased the Lung Health Study subjects' likelihood of developing cancer (see Murray et al., 2009).
Granted, it's not 20 years worth of studies and it's referring to nicotine gum but it's still significant. The FDA considers nicotine an over-the-counter drug that 1) is safe and 2) can be used indefinitely.
(Obviously the whole point of this is that if insurance companies have to charge nicotine gum users regular rates, it's very hard to justify charging vapers a surcharge.)
Yes, this is a serious question.
I'm not saying smoking is safe. I'm not even saying vaping is safe (though I believe it is). But as a legal matter - if someone is using nicotine (patches/lozenges/gum) - how can health insurance charge a surcharge when the FDA has 1) approved them for over-the-counter purchase and 2) says that the health effects are negligible?
In case you're wondering, here's the appropriate section from the Federal Register 04/02/2013. https://www.federalregister.gov/art...erapy-products-for-over-the-counter-human-use
In the years since NRT products became available for OTC use, a number of studies have examined the use of NRT products over periods longer than 12 weeks. We have reviewed the published literature on this longer-term use of NRT products and have not identified any safety risks associated with such use. A well-known and highly regarded study on the effects of long-term use of NRT products is the Lung Health Study, in which almost 6,000 smokers were given access to free nicotine gum for up to 5 years (see Murray et al., 1996). In this study, over 1,000 subjects were still using the gum after 1 year. The adverse effects of long-term nicotine gum use reported by these subjects were described as minor and transient, and there was no correlation between long-term gum use and cardiovascular events. A followup study found that long-term ad lib use of nicotine gum neither increased nor decreased the Lung Health Study subjects' likelihood of developing cancer (see Murray et al., 2009).
Granted, it's not 20 years worth of studies and it's referring to nicotine gum but it's still significant. The FDA considers nicotine an over-the-counter drug that 1) is safe and 2) can be used indefinitely.
(Obviously the whole point of this is that if insurance companies have to charge nicotine gum users regular rates, it's very hard to justify charging vapers a surcharge.)
