FDA Question Re: The Regulations

[debkerri]

I was just reading the proposed regs again and found a puzzling paragraph. Can some explain to me why these products are exempt from regulation?
"The other co-proposal, option 2, is the same as option 1 except that it exempts premium cigars. The proposed rule would define premium cigars as cigars that are wrapped in whole tobacco leaf; contain a 100 percent leaf tobacco binder; contain primarily long filler tobacco; are made by manually combining the wrapper, filler, and binder; have no filter, tip, or non-tobacco mouthpiece and are capped by hand; do not have a characterizing flavor other than tobacco; weigh more than six pounds per thousand units; and sell for $10 or more per cigar."
If it's because of their cost making them prohibitive for minors, then shouldn't our mods, tanks, etc. also be exempt? I mean I don't know too many setups that you can buy for $10, or am I totally off base here????

 

[Lessifer]

I was just reading the proposed regs again and found a puzzling paragraph. Can some explain to me why these products are exempt from regulation?
"The other co-proposal, option 2, is the same as option 1 except that it exempts premium cigars. The proposed rule would define premium cigars as cigars that are wrapped in whole tobacco leaf; contain a 100 percent leaf tobacco binder; contain primarily long filler tobacco; are made by manually combining the wrapper, filler, and binder; have no filter, tip, or non-tobacco mouthpiece and are capped by hand; do not have a characterizing flavor other than tobacco; weigh more than six pounds per thousand units; and sell for $10 or more per cigar."
If it's because of their cost making them prohibitive for minors, then shouldn't our mods, tanks, etc. also be exempt? I mean I don't know too many setups that you can buy for $10, or am I totally off base here????

I doubt it's because anything about the cigars themselves makes them less harmful or less likely to be used by minors. I'm thinking more along the lines of the typical cigar smoker not wanting to fall under the category of regular tobacco user, but that's just a guess from me. Why would the cost of something make it intrinsically safer?

 

[puffon]

Politicians prefer premium cigars.

 

[Kent C]

Can some explain to me why these products are exempt from regulation?

They are not exempt... yet. This was in the 'request for comments' section of the deeming and this possible exclusion was a result of:

"The FDA’s proposal includes information provided in a citizen petition submitted by the International Premium Cigar and Pipe Retailers Association (IPCPRA). The petition asserts that premium cigars do not present a sufficient public health risk to warrant regulation, that most cigar users only smoke occasionally and thus the dose-response relationship is different than cigarette use, and that premium cigar users do not inhale and thus there is little public health benefit from the regulation of premium cigars."

http://publichealthlawcenter.org/si...uestions-for-public-health-community-2014.pdf

Of course, comments by ANTZ and the 3 and 4 letter agencies are against any such exclusion. And it has nothing (or little) to do with the cost of the product, but more about the cigar group has some political clout, unlike say makers of mods.

Although, of course, there is the same 'request for comments' regarding ecigarettes but the wording is such that they had already made up their mind with comments about how there were increases in the teen ecig use as well as comments about 'flavors targeting kids', etc. etc.

 

[debkerri]

You hit the nail on the head right there! They don't want their $10 cigars to suddenly cost $30!

 

[debkerri]

Exactly Kent, they had their minds made up, by Big Tobacco, before they ever opened it up for comments. We all know they like to sit in their offices & smoke their expensive cigars & pipes... oh I forgot you can't smoke in Federal buildings any more... yeah right!

 

[supertrunker]

The real problem with all this regulation nonsense is trying to couch it all in terms that make it look anything other than the opportunistic tax-grab that it will be.

If child safety was the issue, they'd be offering e-cigarettes to schoolkids for free because whatever way you slice it - it's safer than smoking.

Adults smoking get taxed to death, have insurance premiums hiked, are social pariahs standing out in the cold to get a fix and so on. They deserve a break too from the kind of pontificating and faux moral indignation peddled by anti-smoking groups.
i promised when i stopped smoking i'd never turn into one of those people that does nothing but criticise others' smoking.

Cigars are small beer in this and so is 'dip' or chewing tobacco - which have dire warnings on them, far out of proportion to the risks of using them. If the same applied to your car, it'd have so many warning stickers on it you'd never see the paint!

T

 

[Kent C]

You hit the nail on the head right there! They don't want their $10 cigars to suddenly cost $30!

But unlike ecigs, they'd still be available. The cost of the warning labels that would be required for premium cigars, would be miniscule compared to what it would take to get just one part of an ecigarette through the new application process.

 

[supertrunker]

The genie is out of the bottle. Ecigs will still be available. China will still send me 'gifts'. Soon, cigar-lovers can go to Cuba.

Gotta love a bit of globalisation.

T

 

[Lessifer]

But unlike ecigs, they'd still be available. The cost of the warning labels that would be required for premium cigars, would be miniscule compared to what it would take to get just one part of an ecigarette through the new application process.

I will admit to having zero knowledge about this, but I suspect that the number of cigars that would have to go through PMTA because they weren't marketed prior to 2007 is far less than the number of vapor products.

 

[supertrunker]

Nobody is going to go back to using 2007 gear, just because the US government says so.

Nothing was "safe" in 2007 either, which is also why we don't drive 1958 Fords!

Fuel emission figures are lies if you drive a VW, e-cigs are more powerful now... you get the idea.

It's just about time that adults in a free country were allowed to do what they please and if it also helps them stop smoking, beautiful. You live longer, pay more tax - on sugar, say!

T

 

[nicnik]

The petition asserts that premium cigars do not present a sufficient public health risk to warrant regulation, that most cigar users only smoke occasionally and thus the dose-response relationship is different than cigarette use, and that premium cigar users do not inhale and thus there is little public health benefit from the regulation of premium cigars."

So, if the FDA grants them their exemption, would they be implying that there is no 2nd hand and sidestream smoke with premium cigars, or that the danger to bystanders from smoking cigarettes has been greatly exaggerated?

 

[Kent C]

So, if the FDA grants them their exemption, would they be implying that there is no 2nd hand and sidestream smoke with premium cigars, or that the danger to bystanders from smoking cigarettes has been greatly exaggerated?

Yes

 

[skoony]

"The FDA’s proposal includes information provided in a citizen petition submitted by the International Premium Cigar and Pipe Retailers Association (IPCPRA). The petition asserts that premium cigars do not present a sufficient public health risk to warrant regulation, that most cigar users only smoke occasionally and thus the dose-response relationship is different than cigarette use, and that premium cigar users do not inhale and thus there is little public health benefit from the regulation of premium cigars."

Beaten to the punch by @nicnik

So, if the FDA grants them their exemption, would they be implying that there is no 2nd hand and sidestream smoke with premium cigars, or that the danger to bystanders from smoking cigarettes has been greatly exaggerated?

Great minds think alike.
Mike

 

[pennysmalls]

So are there subpar cigars then that won't be included in the exemption?

 

[Lessifer]

So are there subpar cigars then that won't be included in the exemption?

Swishers, "little cigars," black and milds, pretty much anything you'd find at a convenience store.

 

[pennysmalls]

The petition asserts that premium cigars do not present a sufficient public health risk to warrant regulation, that most cigar users only smoke occasionally and thus the dose-response relationship is different than cigarette use, and that premium cigar users do not inhale and thus there is little public health benefit from the regulation of premium cigars."

My husbands grandfather died from lung cancer. He only ever smoked El Producto cigars and of course didn't inhale or smoke them as often as the rest of us smoked our cigarettes. Maybe the risk is lower but people still die from using them. Not that I want any adult products banned or over regulated, but come on.

 

[OldBatty]

Swishers, "little cigars," black and milds, pretty much anything you'd find at a convenience store.

And my favorite, the ones with the white plastic tip. Never smoked one but always get at least a smile when I point at someone using one and loudly exclaim "Lieutenant Dan!" Sometimes it takes them a few seconds, but it always works.

 

[Lessifer]

My husbands grandfather died from lung cancer. He only ever smoked El Producto cigars and of course didn't inhale or smoke them as often as the rest of us smoked our cigarettes. Maybe the risk is lower but people still die from using them. Not that I want any adult products banned or over regulated, but come on.

Well, people do die of lung cancer who have never smoked anything or been habitually exposed to SHS. It's one of those little mysteries. I don't really know how inhaling any smoke could not be bad for you, though I suppose if there is enough moderation perhaps you can lessen the impact. It's kind of like people who say that no one has ever gotten lung cancer from smoking "other stuff." Well, you have to wonder how much is a lack of carcinogens and how much is an incredibly small sample size who smoke it and not cigarettes, and smoke it habitually enough to be statistically significant. Remember, at the population level when they record statistics, if you are or were ever a cigarette smoker, your death is attributed to smoking.

 

[wiredlove]

Well, people do die of lung cancer who have never smoked anything or been habitually exposed to SHS. It's one of those little mysteries.

I'll let you do the searching, but there's indications that those cases may be related to HPV / exposure to other viral pathogens. Because of this fact, I try to limit my exposure to second hand viruses (SHV) and believe viral outbreaks should be banned immediately.