Proposed FDA Rules

[williebb123]

i was not around when the federal income tax was first deemed law , but we all see how that grew to state tax ,county tax and city tax now we even get sin tax , fat tax and what ever comes next so im all about slamming the door on the foot that wants to come inside

 

[williebb123]

and for the people who are not worried about online sales being banned in the future cause they have a local B&M thats an easy divide and conquer strategy when maybe half if not more people here in the US do not have a local B&M shop i live in the country and it takes me 1hr drive just to get to nowhere , if regulation does not affect you are you willing to stand up for me if not im sure there wont be enough of people like me left to stand up for you when additional legislation is added to finish the ones who are left

 

[Taledus]

From what I heard on the local news the FDA has 75 days before they actually put anything into effect to gather public input...

Whether or not this is accurate is another story altogether, but I'd still put a note in to the FDA just in case.

 

[Smellofcordite]

and for the people who are not worried about online sales being banned in the future cause they have a local B&M thats an easy divide and conquer strategy when maybe half if not more people here in the US do not have a local B&M shop i live in the country and it takes me 1hr drive just to get to nowhere , if regulation does not affect you are you willing to stand up for me if not im sure there wont be enough of people like me left to stand up for you when additional legislation is added to finish the ones who are left

I have to say this is going to make it much more difficult for the end consumer. CA is already proposing internet sales as most people know, and this is just going to help restrict our choices and free market system. Too bad there isn't a way to eliminate underage purchases for e liquids online. Looks like I better start stocking up (more) now.

 

[bcalvanese]

It's about time!!!

Finally... a step in the right direction.

 

[sky4it]

And I do hope that the optimistic comments on the FDA proposed rules are the ones that win the day. But lets at least consider what the negatives might be, as in the following:

It is a massive document, 241 pages of government bureaucracy. It's also the Octavian principle- fill the auditorium with the right chairs and who knows where this will go- or rather, maybe they do know where they will go. But you have to agree with the one person who said his concern was that we will all have to vape Blu or Njoy.

This is not good news. Certainly some controls might be helpful if and only if, some substances were proved to be harmful. But when your dealing with people who are dying from tobacco smoking, 241 pages of information is an assortment of what? Government ought to intervene when something is broken. If this turns into an empty shell game to swallow small business competition and ingenuity, but perhaps it isnt necessary to think so? The entire New Testament of the Bible is only 289 pages, and it has served for principals and thought for church protocol for almost 2,000 years.

But this is Government, Politics and Business, so that this new document could become the full effect of the Octavian principle: Start with a finely honed and fired "morality" in mind, and rule for decades with full authority.

Anyway, thank you to some of the people HERE, who have argued and objected to government interference, and have provided key insights into improving the vaping experience, and my lungs thank you too. And thanks also to Kristen, from CASSA in Wisconsin, enjoyed your comments.

 

[crxess]

I don't see any reason to panic or spread doom and gloom with these proposed regulations. They all seem rather rational, except the sampling part but I'm sure 0 nic will skirt around that as 0 nic liquid is essentially fog machine liquid.

I couldn't agree more. I was very surprised at how logical the proposals were, given that they were made without any formal public input. After we've had our say, I feel that we will reach a workable compromise to satisfy all parties.

Then you both need to finish reading the Document. Especially the parts that clearly state the FDA can make any changes or further regulations as it sees fit for public health or safety.

I.E. DO AS THEY PLEASE.

The FDA knows full well no Chinese manufacturers will apply for anything. Big Tobacco will take full ownership of Developed products and hold all license. Effectively eliminating any other available source for product.

Many of us here may have the gear and confidence that we will out maneuver the FDA and things will be as is. This is NOT a luxury new Vapors will experience once FDA has full control and they Will eventually have just that.

Compromise is not in the governments vocabulary when it comes to the common citizen. We are their Tax Mules and little else.

 

[donnah]

I wasn't feeling too bad about it until I saw the video grimmgreen uploaded. He's panicking and now that's got me worried.

 

[Mowgli]

The pharmaceutical industry doesn't care about smoking cessation drugs except as an indicator to how their real smoking-related markets will react.

Yes, NRTs and psychoactive drugs for smoking cessation are a ~$5 billion annual global market, but this is chump change compared to the main channels: (1) sick smoker treatment drugs and (2) the boost to general drug sales caused by smokers. Smoking creates at least 10% of pharma's gross income and it could even be as high as 15% or 20%.

1. The sick smoker drugs are immensely profitable as a near-monopoly situation exists: chemotherapy drugs, COPD drugs, cardiac drugs, vascular drugs etc. All these will take a 60% hit eventually although there is a long timelag in this market.

2. There is an enormous boost to general drug sales caused by smokers: diabetes, cholesterol, bronchitis and blood pressure drugs are examples. This is because a smoker is >40% more likely to be diabetic, and the same applies to many other conditions that drugs can be sold to treat. These conditions often can't be cured while continuing to smoke so the customers are permanent. Smokers will always need inhalers, diabetes meds etc. This market reacts faster than for example the chemotherapy drugs market.

In addition there are other income channels such as OTC meds that are boosted by smoking.

These huge income channels (possibly worth $200bn a year), plus the close integration of pharma with the legislative and regulatory systems, are the reasons why pharma is the strongest and most effective opponent of THR products such as ecigs. It's why they fund a range of front groups to promote their agenda: ban/restrict ecigs, in order to protect their income by protecting smoking. It's why cancer 'health' orgs are in the strange position of protecting and promoting cancer by helping to block ecigs - these groups are controlled by pharma. They pay the CEO $1m a year to keep the faith, so don't expect any honest 'cancer health' orgs anytime soon. They all need to protect smoking, it's the gravy train that pays all their mortgages.

[edit]
And I suppose it's worth adding that the reason why this is allowed is because anything connected to smoking is essentially a free-fire zone: smokers are considered already dead or addicts without rights. Industries can profit from smokers or restrict smokers in ways that would be impossible in other market areas. Smokers are basically considered to be an already-dead tax and profit source. Smokers have no rights, and ex-smokers have no rights either.

bumping for last page only readers

 

[Purplepeeps]

Because of the children, are they requiring child proof lids in addition to the warning labels?

 

[bcalvanese]

If the FDA didn't do this, they would not be doing their job.

I'm glad they are finally doing it. I would pay twice as much for eliquid knowing that it was made to a certain standard.

Guidelines are needed for all this stuff, and the people who are cooking it up in their bathtub will either have to get up to standards or go under.

This industry is getting big, and needs standards.

 

[Purplepeeps]

What about all the "box e-liquid" that comes from China that's sold at smoke shops?

 

[JackInCali]

If the FDA didn't do this, they would not be doing their job.

I'm glad they are finally doing it. I would pay twice as much for eliquid knowing that it was made to a certain standard.

Guidelines are needed for all this stuff, and the people who are cooking it up in their bathtub will either have to get up to standards or go under.

This industry is getting big, and needs standards.

The good side of FDA regulation is that yes there will be standards and yes those who cannot get up to standards (or pay the large FDA filing fees) will go under, but would you be willing to lose your ability to choose for that benefit? Would you be OK with choosing from only menthol flavored e-juice and at nicotine level no greater than 3 mg/mL? Worse yet, would you be ok with the FDA banning all forms of e-cigarettes (except Blu, Njoy, etc.) because the FDA says they are dangerous?

I'm not against higher standards for the e-juice companies, I just don't think it should come from the FDA.

 

[bcalvanese]

What about all the "box e-liquid" that comes from China that's sold at smoke shops?

Guess they would have to uphold the standards or they won't be able to sell in the US.

 

[bcalvanese]

The good side of FDA regulation is that yes there will be standards and yes those who cannot get up to standards (or pay the large FDA filing fees) will go under, but would you be willing to lose your ability to choose for that benefit? Would you be OK with choosing from only menthol flavored e-juice and at nicotine level no greater than 3 mg/mL? Worse yet, would you be ok with the FDA banning all forms of e-cigarettes (except Blu, Njoy, etc.) because the FDA says they are dangerous?

I'm not against higher standards for the e-juice companies, I just don't think it should come from the FDA.

I'm sure their will be more than a few choices, and it is the FDA's responsability to do this.

 

[Lessifer]

If the FDA didn't do this, they would not be doing their job.

I'm glad they are finally doing it. I would pay twice as much for eliquid knowing that it was made to a certain standard.

Guidelines are needed for all this stuff, and the people who are cooking it up in their bathtub will either have to get up to standards or go under.

This industry is getting big, and needs standards.

They could very well decide that the only "safe" method of delivering e-liquid in a reliably regulated way is to only be available in pre-filled tamper proof cartridges, like the Camel Vuse. This is where the unwritten parts of the regulation are pointing. Application fees, and the testing(paid for by the manufacturer, not the FDA) that goes along with them, are likely to be cost prohibitive for all but the largest corporations.

 

[eeevilyn.]

Sign the petition. Who knows, maybe it will make a difference. Sorry if this was already in here.

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/veto-fda-restrictions-e-cigarettes/kdKtpFH4

 

[Curtlawyer]

According to CNN they will also be banning free samples, that means every brick and mortar that lets you try before you buy will be breaking the law.

FDA releases proposed e-cigarette regulations - CNN.com

I am going to borrow from the hookah bar idea- $.25 sample buffet. Costs a quarter for all-you-can-sample. See that? They are not free. Hey, friend, do you need a quarter?

 

[MTFogger]

Another point about FDA regs is that the fee levels will eventually be set high enough to remove all the small businesses from the market. This is after all the reason for the regs: they can't ban ecigs but they can gradually regulate them out of existence.

Or the final goal is to let BT handle it...money

 

[FireDragon1138]

Something to consider... Some people here on ECF know what snus is... well it is basically regulated by food laws in Sweden (It's regulated as a food, much like how the FDA will regulate e-cigs, no doubt), and yet there are plenty of snus choices, even more now than decades ago.

I don't think government regulation of e-cigarettes is such a bad thing, it's just a sign that e-cigs are no longer a fad. With regulation will come a certain level of entrenched interest and protection, and as has been pointed out, the FDA regulating e-cigs takes away some of the fire to ban them altogether.