If the source of nicotine for e-juice is something other than tobacco, doesn't that somewhat put the FDA's "tobacco product" thing on hold? Just wondering and by no means an expert on any of this. I do know that there are other sources of nicotine in nature and I do understand that extracting the nicotine from these other sources may be cost prohibitive, so I guess my question is this, does the FDA want to regulate tobacco products or nicotine in general? Do they regulate the nic-patch or nic-gum? I'm just curious.
I've learned that anything in the nightshade family (eggplant, tomato, etc.) has nicotine, and yes, extracting enough nicotine to supply e-liquid is incredibly cost-prohibitive, from what's been discussed previously. The FDA currently regulates the patches, gums & lozenges produced by BP under the pharmaceutical department, whereas tobacco is controlled by the tobacco control department. FDA tried to ban e-cigs in 2009 under claims they are a drug delivery device, but were sued by two e-cig companies, and the FDA lost. The judge told them they
may regulate as a tobacco product, which is why now they are planning these deeming regulations under the Family Tobacco Control act.
The main theory around here is that the FDA gets most of it's input and finances from BP, so they would probably do whatever they can to help BP avoid having to compete w/e-cigs since they work so much better than the gums, lozenges, patches they product (which have an effective rate of only 5-7%). Following the money, we have seen actual evidence that BP provides much or most of financing to ALA, AHA, ACA, CFTFK, and other "alphabets" for certain, which leads us to believe a large bias when they comment negatively on the e-cig.
Hope I answered; I'm sure someone else with better memory
can provide more or better info.
if you're interested in keeping up on all the latest
News and
Legislation on vaping, check out those sub-forums for some great information and discussion. Also, join
CASAA and visit their
sub-forum here too.
