FDA Post-hearing reactions?

[Roger_Lafayette]

I'm just taking the liberty of starting a new thread. I'm sure a transcript will come out soon, but if you've already watched them, you can scroll down on the left of this page and replay critical parts: FDA Regulation ECigarettes | Video | C-SPAN.org

Can't D/L yet from YT, but hopefully C-SPAN will put it up on their page: C-SPAN - YouTube (or maybe someone else will capture it from the first link).

Harkin looked fairly ridiculous, and the only press report I can find seems rather muted: Harkin says e-cigarettes target children | TheHill

This hasn't turned out to be anything like the famous '94 Waxman hearings 1994 - Tobacco Company CEOs Testify Before Congress - YouTube (should I break the link? I figure it's just historical).

While I anticipate that some media outlets will use this as an excuse to rehash the poison control center calls thing, Dutra & Glantz ("seven times more likely"), and maybe even the dead puppy or the AR 4-year old, or the cancer baloney (S.J. Park) regarding the "immortalized" cells, the latest Grana/Benowitz/Glantz "review" (etc, ad nauseum), it didn't look like anything close to the public relations disaster that some of us had feared.

On the other side, Zeller and McAfee didn't stumble in a serious way, and didn't show their hands, so far as I can tell.

But it's certainly interesting to observe that no senator who is still facing a potential re-election campaign showed up to score political points against vaping. On the other side, neither Burr nor Alexander seeme to be in much of a mood to try to put Zeller & McAfee on the spot. While their questions were heartening in some ways, and perhaps we might view them as "warning shots," Z&A weren't exactly on the griddle either.

Other than the fact that McAfee bore a stunning resemblence to Dana Harvey's "Church Lady" (h/t to Kent ... and that Harkin's understanding of Soterra resembles that of only the most ignorant vaper (I will resist the urge to name names), I think we learned little, and not much happened.

Maybe something will jump out in the transcripts.

 

[DetraMental]

Yep, it was an hour of finding out a lot about nothing more than we knew before except Burr did lean towards favoring the ecig technology.

 

[pamdis]

My broad initial thoughts:

FDA's mind is made up. Nothing we say will make a difference. Confirmed that the questions in the rule are not honest, but only looking for ways around our objections. And not in order to deem, because that's already decided, but for public relations after the fact.

Specific thoughts:

People worried about flavor bans, be really worried. All along, some have taken encouragement because they weren't banned outright in the proposed rules. Others say it's because they can't. Law only allows them to ban in cigarettes. ANTZ have screamed about it, and Zeller's only comments to date have been that they can't do it until after they are deemed. Now he gives away the game: Product Standards. He says it is their most powerful tool for regulation and will be what allows them to ban flavors.

 

[GaryInTexas]

I think your absolutely correct pamdis. Flavors are going to get wacked.

 

[pamdis]

More pessimistic thoughts from the hearing:

Only congressional disapproval has a chance of stopping this. And outlook for that isn't good seeing how few senators even showed up for the hearing.

 

[Roger_Lafayette]

More pessimistic thoughts from the hearing:

Only congressional disapproval has a chance of stopping this. And outlook for that isn't good seeing how few senators even showed up for the hearing.

The minimal show rate could be chalked up to a lot of factors. I'd like to think that one of them is that the other sens decided that this wasn't a good opportunity to score poitical points either way. That just might be a good thing.

I can think of several scenarios under which this could've been a spectacle, instead of a yawner.

While I don't think we can count on this, I believe that Bill G. is correct when he says that the FDA may never come out with their final proposed rule. He cites the example of OSHA, which proposed workplace smoking bans, but never followed through - after getting a million comments. The FDA has been duly warned that harm reduction and cessation potential are serious issues for the very first time at the national level (in addition to the two gov.s - Dayton & Shumlin).

I don't think the picture changed today. There's no reason for undue optimism, particularly about what folks like Zeller, Frieden and their ilk would like to do, if given the chance. But we haven't lost this one yet.

 

[pamdis]

Sigh...OK. I'll keep working on my comments then. It's a lot of work, and sad that the only hope is not in the content of the comment, but in the fact that it will just be contributing to hopefully a high number that makes them back off.

 

[mynewtoy]

Sen. Richard Burr gave me hope that common sense will prevail.

People from North Carolina should be proud to have a representative with good sense

 

[Belushi]

I just switched parties.

 

[SensesFailed]

Sen. Richard Burr gave me hope that common sense will prevail.

People from North Carolina should be proud to have a representative with good sense

At least on this topic lol(although I don't live in NC anymore)

As for my reactions, I was disappointed to only see the three Senators around, as my State Senator is on the committee and was not there. Senator Burr and Senator Alexander get my respect for their wiling to listen to reason and not just jump on the ship against e-cigs, whether they actually care about something like this or just want to go against the Democrat, I don't care, they aren't siding with him, so I'm OK with it.

The FDA/CDC continue to prove how little they do and only push invalid talking points and misinformation. They used key words to try and "answer" the questions without actually "answering" them. They continued to spew the same rhetoric that we have debunked for awhile now and yet, they hope it still hits the select few people who won't do their own research, I call them lazy people.

Senator Harkin pretty much had the focus on the "children" and occasionally went off on other random topics. He kept trying to drive that point home and it was a joke. I'm sorry, you don't have proof that all e-liquid are exclusively marketed towards kids based on the names and flavors. It's stupid.

EDIT: And apparently there is a juice out there that has a label that looks like a Juicy Juice bottle... That isn't exactly going to help.

 

[mynewtoy]

I just switched parties.

haha. i think a lot of vapors are thats why all the democrats up for re-election didn't show up

 

[Nermal]

I'm not sure any of them consider the issue would have reelection consequences.

 

[Roger_Lafayette]

haha. i think a lot of vapors are thats why all the democrats up for re-election didn't show up

Hagan is the only remotely vulnerable Dem. None of the Rs are vulnerable.

Still, one would think that this would've been a good chance for either side to score cheap points at the expense of the other. NE Dems like Whitehouse and Murphy could've thrown in their lot w/ Schumer and Durbin. Repubs like Enzi and Scott could've made points with the Tea Party. Rand Paul could've burnished his potential Pres. credentials.

And from all of them we heard .... crickets.

I have no idea what that means.

 

[Uma]

Senator Burr rocked, in compassion and research. He has a FB page if you all want to show some love.

Everything the main wahhhwahhhs wahhhhed about, didn't surprise me. They kept stressing The fact they were once sued and the judge didn't feel their side. They put out innuendos at the end, of how to get the ruling tossed. That ...... me off a lot when it finally clicked on dumb and dumber.

Hmmm, maybe I shouldn't be typing until after I have a beer. Brb

 

[zoiDman]

I posted this in another Thread. To Tired to write it Again.

I dunno if I would go so far as saying We Won. Because there Wasn't really Anything to Win or Lose at this Point.

But I will say that I say some Hope from Mr. Zeller. I think he sees that Yes, there is an Issue with Under-Aged Vaping. But that there is a Huge Benefit for Adults for Harm Reduction.

I also think he has Enough Scientist left in him that he Can't Ignore some of the Publish Research that is out there in Favor of Adults using e-Cigarettes.

Rep. Burr brought up some Great Points. And was kinda the Voice of Reason.

McAfee from the CDC seems like an Anti Nicotine Hardliner.

And Harkin is Clueless and Lying. More of an Embarrassment and as another member mentioned... "Couldn't get off the Flavor Train."

 

[GaryInTexas]

I don't think it was a R vs D thing at all. I think it was a personal responsibility vs an over reaching government battle. I hope that there are some on both sides that don't believe the government should use faulty science to control the choices of a free society.

 

[beebopnjazz]

The timeline for filing an appeal has long passed.....they had that option. I do wonder, however, as the Judge directed the FDA to regulate e-cigs as a tobacco product - and they haven't until 4 years later - can they somehow be precluded now?

Furthermore, as the e-gig market was well underway when Congress issued the Tobacco Control Act, could this omission, in fact, exclude e-cigs from regulations altogether given the Sottera decision?

 

[zoiDman]

I don't think it was a R vs D thing at all. I think it was a personal responsibility vs an over reaching government battle. I hope that there are some on both sides that don't believe the government should use faulty science to control the choices of a free society.

It is a Shame when the R vs D things gets Applied. And I wish there were some Proponents and Detractors on BOTH sides of this one.

But it does seem like One Party seems to be Spearheading a Squash e-Cigarettes ASAP Campaign. And the Other Party Seems to be More for seeing what the Studies/Science says.

 

[Fitzie]

I didn't see most of it (I'll catch the rerun later). What surprised me the most from what I did see, I suppose, is how much time they spent on cigars and cigarettes vs. e-cigs. Weren't tobacco cigarettes already dealt with in the original statute? And aren't e-cigs the "scourge" they're trying to deal with in the proposed deeming regs?

That and when Harkin dissed the Constitution. I mean, he did take an oath to support and defend the Constitution when he took office.

 

[Culinarytracker]

That and when Harkin dissed the Constitution. I mean, he did take an oath to support and defend the Constitution when he took office.

Yep, it's right here. (and the 1 commenter seems to have gotten it right 5 years ago.)

I'll be waiting for someone to edit those two video clips together.