Nevada court rules e-cigs are NOT tobacco products.

[pennysmalls]

I bring this stuff up because I'm wondering if there is a way to wear out the opposition, and I think about my own situation what if there is too much govt interference. I don't see how they can tax 0 nic liquid or the devices. Nicotine is a pleasant experience, probably mildly beneficial, and it's the slightly psychoactive ingrediant we currently use in e liquid. I wonder, is there something else that's legal, with a track record, that's not not nic, that's not derived from tobacco, that might be used instead of nic for a similar purpose in e liquid. If I want to be self sufficient the weak point is the nic. Could there be a substitute sitting out there waiting to be discovered, or rediscovered? People smoke other things besides tobacco and I don't mean the green leafy stuff that starts with an 'M". Is nicotine the only option?

I've had kind of similar thoughts. I prefer nic liquid for the throat hit and wonder if there is a flavoring or additive that could mimic TH like nic produces. That would be a perfect solution, at least for me.

 

[Jman8]

Nicotine derived from tobacco IS a tobacco product according the FSPTCA definition.

Could that be challenged in court?
Yes, but I don't see that as being successful.

Nicotine derived from tobacco is also used in the patches and gum.
But they are NOT a nicotine product because they are a drug.

And if anyone ever comes up with a viable nicotine product made from something other than tobacco?
The FDA will probably classify it as a scheduled drug and that would be worse than either of the other alternatives.

JMO

The bolded part - is what I want to respond to.

I have zero argument with what DC2 has put forth.

Some here (includes our so called leaders) appear to forget that FDA went after vaping because of nicotine being a drug. They failed. I can dig up quote from one of our so called leaders where they stated (circa 2011) that if FDA deems vaping a tobacco product, that it will never be banned. For those paying attention, this is the same person who includes in every post from around 2013 to the present saying FDA will ban 99.5% of products if vaping becomes a tobacco product. Changed their tune pretty quickly on that one.

What it seems to me that vapers want is for FDA to lose on it being considered a drug (which it is), plus lose on it being considered a tobacco product (which it technically is) and then claim victory. As if 2010 vapers weren't claiming victory (big time) when FDA lost the court battle. Go back and visit that history. You'll see many vapers then thinking we are now in the clear. All is well for the future of vaping.

But reality showed, and will show if FDA loses on "it's a tobacco product" that they will come at us from another angle. And arguably the 'tobacco product' is worse than the 'drug' position because everyone appears to hate tobacco companies where not everyone hates drug companies. Likely have a lot more sympathizers for us as vapers if vaping were considered "using a drug" compared to "using a tobacco product." But I think it is better to not be considered a drug, and am okay with it being called a tobacco product, but not okay with level of hatred expressed toward tobacco users. Even among vapers. Even among vaping leaders.

Our best bet at this point is for Congress (writers of FSPTCA) to do something pro-active that changes the playing field dramatically. This could be as significant as exempting eCigs from FSPTCA. But if there is no deeming of what it is, then there will be regulators who come along and seek to deem it in a way that vapers may think is worse than "drug" and worse than "tobacco product." So, would be ideal if Congress exempted it from TCA, and deemed it a recreational product that is not subject to any regulations other than typical consumer protection ones existing in states currently.

I don't see that ideal as entirely farfetched, but would say it currently has about a 1 to maybe 3 percent chance of occurring.
I see the idea that Congress will move the grandfather date for predicate products to say 2014 as around 50% chance of occurring in next 2 years. This to me is our best bet, and where we ought to be coming together as a community to make sure that happens as the only people that would care to resist that are ANTZ.

If those 2 things don't happen, then I think it is FDA left to enforcing policy that has deemed eCigs a tobacco product according to amendments made to TCA. And if that fails in court battles, I will be very very pleased. But also think it will mean that they might come at us again, as we remain in reactionary mode, and what comes along next may be even worse.

 

[DC2]

I bring this stuff up because I'm wondering if there is a way to wear out the opposition, and I think about my own situation what if there is too much govt interference. I don't see how they can tax 0 nic liquid or the devices. Nicotine is a pleasant experience, probably mildly beneficial, and it's the slightly psychoactive ingrediant we currently use in e liquid. I wonder, is there something else that's legal, with a track record, that's not not nic, that's not derived from tobacco, that might be used instead of nic for a similar purpose in e liquid.

Well that pretty much describes caffeine as far as I'm concerned.
And most of those proposing laws to curtail or hinder vaping are probably drinking it.

 

[DC2]

I don't see being a "tobacco product" as relevant.

It may not be relevant from a logical standpoint...
But it is highly relevant from a legal standpoint because the FSPTCA makes it the law of the land.

 

[WattWick]

It may not be relevant from a logical standpoint...
But it is highly relevant from a legal standpoint because the FSPTCA makes it the law of the land.

It's only legal until proven silly in court. I'll ... uhm... leave that to others... At least I'm feeling awfully clever right now

 

[DC2]

I've thought about the nicotine as a drug subject a lot. Drugs are used to treat diseases and/or medical conditions, which smoking is neither. I'm not aware of smoking being classified as such either though I admit that I could be wrong about that. So classifying nicotine as a drug to "treat" smokers is misguided to begin with and could very well be challenged in court and perhaps very successfully. Which would then release nicotine from the label of drug.

That would be a great idea.

But it would destroy the plans of Big Pharma to roll out their nicotine wonder drugs for treating...
--Schizophrenia
--ADHD
--Ulcerative Colitis
--Parkinson's disease
--Alzheimer's disease
--Tourette's syndrome

Not sure if I left any out or not.

 

[DC2]

I've had kind of similar thoughts. I prefer nic liquid for the throat hit and wonder if there is a flavoring or additive that could mimic TH like nic produces. That would be a perfect solution, at least for me.

That's been an elusive goal for many hundreds of posters on this forum through the years, as they try to drop to zero nicotine.
If you could find a way to search for them, you could find dozens of threads on this topic.