Illegal to sample e-juice in 3 days?

[IgnorantCig]

I got an email from beyondvape earlier, and it said that after August 8, they will no longer be allowed to provide any free sampling of e-juice at their locations anymore, due to FDA regulations.

That sounds like quite a drastic change, and what will be the point of visiting any vape shops anymore to purchase juice, if people are not allowed to sample any juice for free? Does that mean that certain shops will charge for it now, or just eliminate free sampling completely? That sounds crazy.

It seems like those new regulations are pretty much designed to destroy the entire vape industry.

 

[Lessifer]

That is correct, no more free samples.

Many think that shops will be able to charge a small fee for sampling, but it's unclear what will actually be allowed.

Personally I think the rule is meant to stop companies from handing out free products at events, but like everything else about the deeming, the FDA seems to have not considered, or understood, what actual effects it will have. Or they really do want to kill the industry, which is also likely.

 

[IMFire3605]

This is what my boss at my vape shop is implementing according to the rules.

Come in to sample juice, $1.00 you get 10 samples. Employees have to enter this as a separate transaction and file the receipt.
Can't lock down on a new flavor with those 10, another $1.00 charge for 10 more samples, again added as a separate transaction.

 

[Zipslack]

Yeah, local shop I visited the other day is going to charge $1.00 for tasting samples, but the $1.00 would be discounted if you make a purchase.

 

[ENAUD]

A thought just occurred to me, by assembling the test setups, ie, putting a coil into a clearo, filling it with juice, charging the batteries, assembling the devices, wouldn't that be considered "manufacturing" under the deeming? So possibly, if I am even on the right track here, each single taster setup would then be a different tobacco product, opening them up to the possibility that they have dozens, or even hundreds of unapproved tobacco products that they manufactured sitting in their store if an inspection were to take place?

Food for thought...

@Lessifer @IMFire3605 , what's your take on these thoughts?

 

[Two_Bears]

I got an email from beyondvape earlier, and it said that after August 8, they will no longer be allowed to provide any free sampling of e-juice at their locations anymore, due to FDA regulations.

That sounds like quite a drastic change, and what will be the point of visiting any vape shops anymore to purchase juice, if people are not allowed to sample any juice for free? Does that mean that certain shops will charge for it now, or just eliminate free sampling completely? That sounds crazy.

It seems like those new regulations are pretty much designed to destroy the entire vape industry.

That is what the FDA tried to do!

That is why i have been in the war path (i can say that because i am part Cherokee) for 13 months and 1 day to prep for the vapocalpse.

 

[Lessifer]

A thought just occurred to me, by assembling the test setups, ie, putting a coil into a clearo, filling it with juice, charging the batteries, assembling the devices, wouldn't that be considered "manufacturing" under the deeming? So possibly, if I am even on the right track here, each single taster setup would then be a different tobacco product, opening them up to the possibility that they have dozens, or even hundreds of unapproved tobacco products that they manufactured sitting in their store if an inspection were to take place?

Food for thought...

@Lessifer @IMFire3605 , what's your take on these thoughts?

Yeah, that's why I said in another thread, a lot seems to come down to how they choose to enforce things. Arguably, each sample sold is a "tobacco product" that wouldn't be in CRP packaging, the "manufacturing(assembling)" likely would have occurred in the shop which I assume would not be a clean manufacturing site, etc. I did email the FDA asking for clarification, about two weeks ago, specifically on the subject of taste testing in stores, but they have yet to reply.

 

[ENAUD]

Yeah, that's why I said in another thread, a lot seems to come down to how they choose to enforce things. Arguably, each sample sold is a "tobacco product" that wouldn't be in CRP packaging, the "manufacturing(assembling)" likely would have occurred in the shop which I assume would not be a clean manufacturing site, etc. I did email the FDA asking for clarification, about two weeks ago, specifically on the subject of taste testing in stores, but they have yet to reply.

Considering the onerous path they chose to the regulations, and the general mean spirited attitude exhibited from them, ie answering questions with indirection with voluminous quotes from the deeming regs, I would only expect the heaviest handed response possible from the agency in any and all areas of enforcement.

 

[Lessifer]

Considering the onerous path they chose to the regulations, and the general mean spirited attitude exhibited from them, ie answering questions with indirection with voluminous quotes from the deeming regs, I would only expect the heaviest handed response possible from the agency in any and all areas of enforcement.

If I were a shop owner, I would definitely want clear guidance as to what is and is not acceptable.

 

[ScandaLeX]

.....{SNIPPED}.....they have yet to reply.

I think I'd be shocked if they actually did give you a reply.

 

[Mazinny]

I think I'd be shocked if they actually did give you a reply.

Even if they did, the reply would likely be worthless.

The FDA's Incomprehensible Answer To A Crucial Question About Its E-Cigarette Regulations

..... Siegel, who supports the use of e-cigarettes as a harm-reducing alternative to the conventional kind, says “someone” (presumably a business owner) shared with him the FDA’s response to this question: “Are e-cigs that do not contain nicotine (or any other tobacco extracts) also covered by the FDA deeming regulations? If so, will they also require pre-market approval like products that do contain nicotine?” The agency’s reply, which you can read in its entirety (if you dare) on Siegel’s tobacco policy blog, is more than 1,300 words long and consists mostly of irrelevant boilerplate. When the FDA finally attempts to answer the question, in the 10th paragraph of its missive, the answer makes no sense:

....

 

[Lessifer]

Even if they did, the reply would likely be worthless.

The FDA's Incomprehensible Answer To A Crucial Question About Its E-Cigarette Regulations

..... Siegel, who supports the use of e-cigarettes as a harm-reducing alternative to the conventional kind, says “someone” (presumably a business owner) shared with him the FDA’s response to this question: “Are e-cigs that do not contain nicotine (or any other tobacco extracts) also covered by the FDA deeming regulations? If so, will they also require pre-market approval like products that do contain nicotine?” The agency’s reply, which you can read in its entirety (if you dare) on Siegel’s tobacco policy blog, is more than 1,300 words long and consists mostly of irrelevant boilerplate. When the FDA finally attempts to answer the question, in the 10th paragraph of its missive, the answer makes no sense:

....

You know, I've read that, and while I agree that it is absurd, it actually does "make sense" in the context of the regulations as a whole, or at least to me, with an assumption or two. This is the answer in question:
"As it relates to e-liquids that contain zero nicotine, generally, if your zero-nicotine product is not made or derived from tobacco, it may still be a tobacco product subject to FDA regulation if it is intended or reasonably expected to be used with or for the human consumption of a tobacco product; or intended or reasonably expected to alter the performance, composition, constituents, or characteristics of a tobacco product (with certain exceptions relating to controlling moisture or temperature for storage and initiating external heat source), your product is subject to FDA regulation. These products will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. This applies to closed and open system devices that contain zero-nicotine"

we already know that the FDA considers 0nic e-liquid to be a tobacco product component, and therefore subject to the regulations, because nicotine could be added to it.

A carto that contains 0nic, even if it has a proprietary connection and is sealed, would be considered a tobacco product component, if it could be connected to a battery that also could connect to cartos that DO contain nicotine. The carto with the nicotine is a tobacco product, the battery is a component, and by association the 0nic carto is also a component.

The only way something vapeable could not be a tobacco product or a tobacco product component, that I can see, according to their rules would be a 0nic disposable that absolutely can not be refilled.

So, if the question really was "are e-cigs that do not contain nicotine also covered by the FDA regulations?" The answer actually is "probably yes, under the circumstances outlined in the regs, though there might possibly be an exception."

"are e-cigs that do not contain nicotine also covered by the FDA regulations?" is actually not as specific a question as it appears to be.

 

[Lessifer]

Their definitions are absurd, but if you accept them, the rest isn't completely nonsensical.

 

[SteveS45]

When I phoned the FDA months ago and asked personally how they could consider my Zero e-Liquid a Tobacco product the girl tried to say it was a Nicotine delivery system and I said No it is NOT because there is NO Nicotine, NO Combustion and NO Smoke! After a long silence she said she would forward it to her superiors and took all my contact information. No answer no attempt to communicate.

 

[rtbob]

I mix my own juice in a "Clean Enuff Room"

 

[SteveS45]

There is a big difference between what you can do in your own kitchen and preparing products for human consumption. Health Department rules and Regulations for one thing. I would never eat at a place that failed a Health Department inspection and I do feel that e-Liquid should be prepared in an area that meets the type of cleanliness requirements for a sterile environment.

 

[JMarca]

This is what my boss at my vape shop is implementing according to the rules.

Come in to sample juice, $1.00 you get 10 samples. Employees have to enter this as a separate transaction and file the receipt.
Can't lock down on a new flavor with those 10, another $1.00 charge for 10 more samples, again added as a separate transaction.

If this is actually legal I'd be more than happy to comply with this.
Hopefully more vape shops will follow the example.

 

[Eskie]

There is a big difference between what you can do in your own kitchen and preparing products for human consumption. Health Department rules and Regulations for one thing. I would never eat at a place that failed a Health Department inspection and I do feel that e-Liquid should be prepared in an area that meets the type of cleanliness requirements for a sterile environment.

I'll mostly agree with you, although a sterile environment is likely beyond the necessity for proper juice preparation. Even restaurant kitchens are not sterile, but they should be clean and free of vermin. Especially vermin. So yes, realistic standards should apply to commercial preparation areas.

 

[SteveS45]

@Eskie maybe sterile is pushing it a little bit but with some of the things I have seen posted over the years online by some e-Liquid manufacturers were pretty scary to be honest. There was on e-Liquid manufacturer who posted a picture once of a barrel pouring e-Liquid into a bottle sitting on the floor. This resulted in a major uproar and changes at the company. If memory serves me right they even posted a picture of a minor in that mixing lab. I feel we do need some regulations but nothing near what the FDA is doing.

 

[Ed_C]

As I mentioned on another post, a local B&M, by me, is charging $1 for all the samples you want, but then the dollar is going to advocacy. Other shops, from what I understand, are doing this as well. It's a great idea I think.