Mitch Zeller falsely claims FDA tobacco/nicotine regulations are based upon scientific evidence

[Bill Godshall]

Mitch Zeller once again claims FDA tobacco/nicotine regulations are based upon scientific evidence.
http://cancerdiscovery.aacrjournals.org/content/4/1/10.full?

But FDA’s unlawful 2009 e-cig ban wasn’t based on any scientific or empirical evidence (other than lots of smokers were switching to e-cigs). Nor was/is FDA’s policy since 2011 to impose the “deeming” regulation (which would once again ban all e-cigs). In fact, all the evidence consistently indicates the deeming regulation would protect cigarette markets and threaten the lives of vapers and smokers.

Rather, those and many other FDA regulatory policies were prompted by lobbying and propaganda (just like the FSPTCA) by Big Pharma funded CTFK, ACS, AHA, ALA, AAP, Legacy, Pinney Associates (where Mitch Zeller worked the past decade), by their congressional allies Waxman, Lautenberg, Durbin, Harkin, Blumenthal, and by the NY Times and other liberal news media.

In April 2009, FDA’s Rita Chapelle revealed the agency’s unscientific, unethical and inhumane policy to defend its unlawful e-cig import ban and to deceive Americans about e-cigs: “We don’t want the public to perceive them as a safer alternative to cigarettes.”
E-Cigarettes Under Fire

 

[Roger_Lafayette]

I'm a little confused by these two pieces (they don't appear to contain junk, so I've left the links alone)

http://www.cspnet.com/category-mana...icles/house-subcommittee-looks-center-tobacco

House Subcommittee Examines Implementation of Tobacco Control Act | NACS Online

As far as I can tell, the KY Repub who seems to be pushing this (Brett Guthrie, R-KY) may be upset over the fact that the FDA isn't moving fast enough on the post 3/22/11 SE (substantial equivalence) requests, thus preventing tobacco co.s from bringing those products to market (??).

Is there a connection w/ what Glantz is talking about, here ... namely that the FDA is fast-tracking the post 3/22/11 SE appls?

http://www.tobacco.ucsf.edu/
fda-prioritizes-tobacco-industry-needs-over-public-health

(This may not be the perfect thread for this, apologies if it belonged somewhere else.)

Bill, can you pls. explain what's going on here?

Generally this wouldn't interest me, except perhaps there may be consequences if/when vaping is regulated by the FDA (although as you say, this seems almsot like an oxymoron given the current statory framework, i.e. regulation would be effectively prohibition).

 

[Bill Godshall]

Per several of Roger's inquiries, see my posting at
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ntation-tobacco-control-act.html#post12794643


Per Roger's inquiry

Is there a connection w/ what Glantz is talking about

Last week the FDA (as a preemptive defense against potential criticism at the House E&C Cmte hearing, which the FDA declined to attend) issued a statement claiming that the agency was beginning to evaluate newly submitted SE reports (but not the 3,000+ SE reports filed in 2011). Glantz was just promoting FDA's latest claims.

 

[Kent C]

As far as I can tell, the KY Repub who seems to be pushing this (Brett Guthrie, R-KY) may be upset over the fact that the FDA isn't moving fast enough on the post 3/22/11 SE (substantial equivalence) requests, thus preventing tobacco co.s from bringing those products to market (??).

I must have missed the link on Gutherie. Only thing I see is that he's against sale to minors. And in the one link you give it says:

Some Democrats raised the specter that e-cigarettes are a "gateway" drug, while U.S. Rep. John Shimkus (R-IL) countered that the products could be helpful in smoking cessation.