Okay, just got off the phone from a call to the MHRA:
The person who I spoke to was nice and stressed that at this stage the proposal is very open to consultation.
This means that all options 1,2 or 3 are very much open depending on the kind of response they get. She also did not rule out option 3 but said that it would depend on the response they got.
My conversation (doing this from memory so not necessarily exact wording - responses in red):
Smokindeuce: Ive recently been made aware of a new policy that the MHRA are putting forward on the regulation of unlicensed nicotine products or NCPs and had a few questions for you if you wouldnt mind.
We currently market and sell a tobacco alternative called the electronic cigarette and I would like to know a few details.
First of all, how would these proposals potentially affect us in the long run.
MHRA - It would depend on the outcome of the consultation.
Me: I gather that you are pushing for option 1 is this the case?
MHRA -no not at all - that is the point of this consultation.
Me: To give you a background, the liquids we sell are all UK produced and all to CHIP (Chemicals (Hazard Information and Packaging for Supply) regulations in terms of labelling and child proofing whereby satisfying trading standards. One of the liquids has also had a laboratory report analysis.
Would these factors be acceptable to continue sales as we are to my mind already fulfilling what has been asked from us?
MHRA -as long as licensing is applied for and accepted in terms of showing evidence of general safety and ethics
I would also like to know (if you will potentially be regulating all nicotine products), why nicotine containing tobacco products are not included in your proposal?
Tobacco already has many regulations. We are looking specifically at nicotine in a medicinal sense.
So why then would electronic cigarettes have to be regulated as a medical product if we are marketing it as a tobacco alternative NOT a cessation device?
MHRA: We are considering any product that comes to market which contains nicotine.
Me: But not tobacco?
It just seems a little hypocritical..... there are many people up in arms about this - these devices have been on the market for well over two years now.
There are a lot of livelihoods riding on this product for both users and vendors alike, cutting supply will upset an awful lot of people.
If this product is banned, people will still use this product, but instead they would get it in an unregulated form direct from China - it doesn't make any sense.
There must be a middle ground that the electronic cigarette can fall under somewhere between a tobacco product and NRT.... it is a unique device and nothing else has been made like it and nothing will follow - surely having it's own set of regulations is a possibility isn't it?
MHRA: That's the point of this consultation to get as much feedback and consider all the options.
The FDA recently did test on some of the liquids and the quality was .....
Me: Yes but did you also see the [FONT="]The FDA recently took a similar stand on the electronic cigarette as the MHRA and were taken to court where the judge ruled in favour of the electronic cigarette saying the FDA had no jurisdiction over the product. Do you think maybe the electronic cigarette could potentially be outside your jurisdiction?[/FONT]
MHRA: The FDA/US has a different set of rules and approach to the UK.
Me: Okay so what you are saying is that you will assess the response via the public consultation and all of the options will be considered.
And for us to continue to sell e-liquid we have to apply for a license.
MHRA: Yes
Me: Thanks, bye
MHRA: Bye
The person who I spoke to was nice and stressed that at this stage the proposal is very open to consultation.
This means that all options 1,2 or 3 are very much open depending on the kind of response they get. She also did not rule out option 3 but said that it would depend on the response they got.
My conversation (doing this from memory so not necessarily exact wording - responses in red):
Smokindeuce: Ive recently been made aware of a new policy that the MHRA are putting forward on the regulation of unlicensed nicotine products or NCPs and had a few questions for you if you wouldnt mind.
We currently market and sell a tobacco alternative called the electronic cigarette and I would like to know a few details.
First of all, how would these proposals potentially affect us in the long run.
MHRA - It would depend on the outcome of the consultation.
Me: I gather that you are pushing for option 1 is this the case?
MHRA -no not at all - that is the point of this consultation.
Me: To give you a background, the liquids we sell are all UK produced and all to CHIP (Chemicals (Hazard Information and Packaging for Supply) regulations in terms of labelling and child proofing whereby satisfying trading standards. One of the liquids has also had a laboratory report analysis.
Would these factors be acceptable to continue sales as we are to my mind already fulfilling what has been asked from us?
MHRA -as long as licensing is applied for and accepted in terms of showing evidence of general safety and ethics
I would also like to know (if you will potentially be regulating all nicotine products), why nicotine containing tobacco products are not included in your proposal?
Tobacco already has many regulations. We are looking specifically at nicotine in a medicinal sense.
So why then would electronic cigarettes have to be regulated as a medical product if we are marketing it as a tobacco alternative NOT a cessation device?
MHRA: We are considering any product that comes to market which contains nicotine.
Me: But not tobacco?
It just seems a little hypocritical..... there are many people up in arms about this - these devices have been on the market for well over two years now.
There are a lot of livelihoods riding on this product for both users and vendors alike, cutting supply will upset an awful lot of people.
If this product is banned, people will still use this product, but instead they would get it in an unregulated form direct from China - it doesn't make any sense.
There must be a middle ground that the electronic cigarette can fall under somewhere between a tobacco product and NRT.... it is a unique device and nothing else has been made like it and nothing will follow - surely having it's own set of regulations is a possibility isn't it?
MHRA: That's the point of this consultation to get as much feedback and consider all the options.
The FDA recently did test on some of the liquids and the quality was .....
Me: Yes but did you also see the [FONT="]The FDA recently took a similar stand on the electronic cigarette as the MHRA and were taken to court where the judge ruled in favour of the electronic cigarette saying the FDA had no jurisdiction over the product. Do you think maybe the electronic cigarette could potentially be outside your jurisdiction?[/FONT]
MHRA: The FDA/US has a different set of rules and approach to the UK.
Me: Okay so what you are saying is that you will assess the response via the public consultation and all of the options will be considered.
And for us to continue to sell e-liquid we have to apply for a license.
MHRA: Yes
Me: Thanks, bye
MHRA: Bye