SE, NJoy vs FDA -- Discussion

[dee5]

"In particular, the panel will raise issues about how FDA and Congress can better address the public health concern to develop more reduced risk tobacco, nicotine and alternative tobacco products, as well cope with the requirements set by the tobacco Control Act to define limits for harmful constituents in tobacco products and ban or reduce the limit of substances used to make tobacco products more addictive or palatable and thereby encourage new or continued use."

Uh-oh, this might be a problem. If the FDA begins to regulate e-cigs as a tobacco product, they could ban flavored nic liquid with this wording.

 

[JerryRM]

"In particular, the panel will raise issues about how FDA and Congress can better address the public health concern to develop more reduced risk tobacco, nicotine and alternative tobacco products, as well cope with the requirements set by the Tobacco Control Act to define limits for harmful constituents in tobacco products and ban or reduce the limit of substances used to make tobacco products more addictive or palatable and thereby encourage new or continued use."

Uh-oh, this might be a problem. If the FDA begins to regulate e-cigs as a tobacco product, they could ban flavored nic liquid with this wording.

It won't be a surprise, if they do that, Dee. This is no longer a war against cigarettes or even smoking. It has become a war against tobacco and nicotine use.

 

[Vocalek]

"In particular, the panel will raise issues about how FDA and Congress can better address the public health concern to develop more reduced risk tobacco, nicotine and alternative tobacco products, as well cope with the requirements set by the Tobacco Control Act to define limits for harmful constituents in tobacco products and ban or reduce the limit of substances used to make tobacco products more addictive or palatable and thereby encourage new or continued use."

Uh-oh, this might be a problem. If the FDA begins to regulate e-cigs as a tobacco product, they could ban flavored nic liquid with this wording.

I had just copied that paragraph, Dee. You and I are on the same wavelength. I think these turkeys need to get away from their fascination with the idea that they can make products more or less addictive. Addiction is self regulating!

If they banned any alcohol products with more than 6% alcohol, would there be any fewer alcoholics???

No, there would just be a lot more liquid going in and out. People can and do get drunk on beer and drink incredibly large amounts.

Same thing with nicotine. If you attempt to control "addictiveness" by reducing the nicotine, the internal regulator kicks in and smokers find ways to compensate. Explains why I went from a pack a day of regular cigarettes to 2-1/2 packs a day of lights when the Surgeon General (not any tobacco company ads) recommended that I switch to reduce my health risks.

Flame Out.

 

[Vocalek]

The Food Drug Law Institute (FDLI) conference promotional cites the SE/Sottera v FDA as one of the top cases in 2010 that will be discussed (but I don't know any of the four law professors who will discuss). I also highlighted (below) other conference sessions on FDA tobacco and nicotine regulatory issues. Scott Ballin and Dave Sweanor are both tobacco harm reduction advocates, and both will talk about e-cigarettes and smokeless tobacco during their presentation. Hopefully, Deyton will stick around after his presentation to hear Scott and Dave speak. BTW, the conference costs $1500 unless you work for government or a university.




2011 FDLI Annual Conference

Bill, will you be attending this conference? If so, can you please ask Dr. Deyton why it is that the group of stakeholders they selected to serve on the TPSAC does not inclue any representation from the group of stakeholders with the most to lose if they get it wrong? Why are there no CONSUMERS on TPSAC?

If they get it wrong, right now the worst that can happen to any of the TPSAC members is they may see a reduction in their consulting fees. The consumers will have their health (negatively) affected by boneheaded ideas like lowering the nicotine content in proudcts. We are talking about their income versus our lives.

 

[JohnKing]

[/B]
It won't be a surprise, if they do that, Dee. This is no longer a war against cigarettes or even smoking. It has become a war against tobacco and nicotine use.

It's just an extension of the war on citizens. Whenever they declare "war" on something, they really mean YOU.

 

[JustJulie]

Nothing new on the docket. But I'm going to thank Jerry all the same.

 

[JerryRM]

You THANK me ??? All that I can say is that YOU are welcome, JULIE.

 

[Rosco]

You THANK me ??? All that I can say is that YOU are welcome, JULIE.

Good one. TUJ

 

[JerryRM]

T...k you, Rosco.

 

[ScottB]

You speak for all of us Jerry... ... Tanks Julie...!

 

[DataPhreak]

I wouldn't stress too much dee. You may not be able to buy your favorite juices in their flavors, but vendors should still be able to sell the flavors seperately from the juice. What makes me wonder is whether or not you will be able to flavor the juice with tobacco flavors. I mean, it still constitutes flavoring. Otherwise, they would have to outlaw tobacco that tastes like tobacco. We'll all be smoking Capri 120 mega slims by 2012, except it'll be like the cigarettes in 5th element.

"In particular, the panel will raise issues about how FDA and Congress can better address the public health concern to develop more reduced risk tobacco, nicotine and alternative tobacco products, as well cope with the requirements set by the Tobacco Control Act to define limits for harmful constituents in tobacco products and ban or reduce the limit of substances used to make tobacco products more addictive or palatable and thereby encourage new or continued use."

Uh-oh, this might be a problem. If the FDA begins to regulate e-cigs as a tobacco product, they could ban flavored nic liquid with this wording.

 

[Bill Godshall]

Vocalek wrote

Bill, will you be attending this conference? If so, can you please ask Dr. Deyton why it is that the group of stakeholders they selected to serve on the TPSAC does not inclue any representation from the group of stakeholders with the most to lose if they get it wrong? Why are there no CONSUMERS on TPSAC?

I'm not spending $1500 to listen to a few folks say the same thing I've heard them say dozens of times in the past. Besides, I'll be talking with folks at Philip Morris about harm reduction in Richmond on April 5, and I'll be presenting on tobacco harm reduction products and policies at a conference sponsored by the Virginia Tobacco Settlement Foundation in Newport News on April 6.

But I strongly agree that the FDA has made a disasterous mistake by declaring war on all tobacco users
http://www.publichealthreports.org/archives/issueopen.cfm?articleID=2597
and by failing to consider or include tobacco consumers as tobacco regulation "stakeholders" CTP Stakeholder Discussion Series Sessions

That's why tobacco consumers will play the most important role in convincing the FDA to make reducing tobacco diseases and deaths their regulatory priority (instead of tobacco users and usage).

 

[Rosco]

Thank you Bill.

 

[JustJulie]

Nothing new on the docket. And everyone is welcome . . . even Jerry, who is completely thankless.

 

[Grammie]

Thanks!!

 

[JerryRM]

Yet another weekend is upon us and I am thankful that winter is just about over. I hope that you have nice weather for your weekend, Julie.

 

[JustMeAgain]

The Food Drug Law Institute (FDLI) conference promotional cites the SE/Sottera v FDA as one of the top cases in 2010 that will be discussed (but I don't know any of the four law professors who will discuss). I also highlighted (below) other conference sessions on FDA tobacco and nicotine regulatory issues. Scott Ballin and Dave Sweanor are both tobacco harm reduction advocates, and both will talk about e-cigarettes and smokeless tobacco during their presentation. Hopefully, Deyton will stick around after his presentation to hear Scott and Dave speak. BTW, the conference costs $1500 unless you work for government or a university.[/url]

Maybe I'm running behind, but this is the first time I've ever heard of FDLI. I went to their website and I see that it's a nonprofit whose membership include the likes of Altria Client Services, Inc. & Eli Lilly and Company.

Isn't it an blatant conflict of interest for companies who are regulated by the government to fund an organization that holds a conference and waives a $1500. fee for government employees?

Somebody please tell me I'm misinterpreting something -

 

[CES]

Maybe I'm running behind, but this is the first time I've ever heard of FDLI. I went to their website and I see that it's a nonprofit whose membership include the likes of Altria Client Services, Inc. & Eli Lilly and Company.

Isn't it an blatant conflict of interest for companies who are regulated by the government to fund an organization that holds a conference and waives a $1500. fee for government employees?

Somebody please tell me I'm misinterpreting something -

um...perhaps thinking that conflicts of interest matter when it comes to the FDA and pharma? Since they clearly don't.

 

[DataPhreak]

um...perhaps thinking that conflicts of interest matter when it comes to the FDA and pharma? Since they clearly don't.

Yeah, i've not seen the FDA have any major conflicts of intrest with big pharma. ^_^

 

[JustMeAgain]

um...perhaps thinking that conflicts of interest matter when it comes to the FDA and pharma? Since they clearly don't.

Yeah, i've not seen the FDA have any major conflicts of intrest with big pharma. ^_^

I know that I sounded naive - - but the usual conflicts of interest seem to be a bit more subtle, like ignoring facts or putting their own spin on things.. This is such an openly flagrant disregard...it's incredible what we let people get by with.