FDA Sen Johnson (R-Wis) demands answers from FDA RE deeming
- Thread starter DrMA
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
I wish we as a collection of vapers could send the man a thank you. Can you imagine one single senator reviewing close to 9,000,000 letters for one issue. Now THAT would be some political credit to spend.
I'm down.
I'm down.
Just so much information on just a handful of threads rick it's hard to keep track of it all. Never mind the deeming thread. That's a full-time job. My take is FDA does have to take this into account but that's all part of the PMTA process, i.e. they decide and the burden on proof rests with the applicant. Which pretty much means you're damned if you do, and SOL if you don't.
We need to extract vaping from tobacco legislation.
Good luck.
Think he already has. But I think the best idea is to grow the stream…and, to keep it comin'.
We need to be never out of sight or out of mind.
So send more!
Good luck.
Dan, just to update this thread, the original demand needed to be answered by the 31 May. FDA thumbed their nose. Yesterday vaping 360 reported the Sen sent a follow up ultimatum here…
Sen. Johnson Demands Answers From the FDA...Again - Vaping360
Good luck all.
Just so much information on just a handful of threads rick it's hard to keep track of it all. Never mind the deeming thread. That's a full-time job. My take is FDA does have to take this into account but that's all part of the PMTA process, i.e. they decide and the burden on proof rests with the applicant. Which pretty much means you're damned if you do, and SOL if you don't.
We need to extract vaping from tobacco legislation.
Good luck.
Mac, this may go back as far as the 2014 discussions of this whole mess. For all I know it may have been in a private e-mail exchange with Elaine Keller. But it was in the context of addressing the need for any regulation at all, not in the context of any PMTA requirement.
As said earlier, the most important part of this is we NEED the FDA to respond so concise legal challenges can be exposed and pursued. I don't know how long the FDA can delay things though. Seems like they are going to try to delay their response as long as possible.
Well this is my quandary rick as I've been posting about in the past few days. Don't understand why the original premise has not been already challenged in the 2009 FD&C (deeming authority). Understand early on the consensus and resources may have been absent. But it's been in the industry's best interest long ago to do so. Betting on FDA to do nothing hasn't worked out very well. We must inevitably extract vaping from tobacco legislation or it will forever remain entangled in the regulatory morass that is tobacco.
Good luck.
It is a shame that Sen. Johnson is at great risk of not being re-elected. I'm not in Wisconsin, but I can write a letter. IMHO, this is the guy to write to. He is in power to derail these bloated deeming crap.
Go get 'em, Ron!!!!
And I also wonder how the Nicopure/Halo v FDA suit is progressing?
Go get 'em, Ron!!!!
And I also wonder how the Nicopure/Halo v FDA suit is progressing?
Well this is my quandary rick as I've been posting about in the past few days. Don't understand why the original premise has not been already challenged in the 2009 FD&C (deeming authority). Understand early on the consensus and resources may have been absent. But it's been in the industry's best interest long ago to do so. Betting on FDA to do nothing hasn't worked out very well. We must inevitably extract vaping from tobacco legislation or it will forever remain entangled in the regulatory morass that is tobacco.
Good luck.
Well the "no harm" argument, or any "no harm" regulatory clause that can be found, would be one dead certain way to try and extract vaping from tobacco.
We should distance ourselves from the word "cigarette". And what if a manufacturer brews his nicotine from the other sources? If someone did an eggplant extracted nicotine juice, then how could this fall under FDA rule? Of course, not to mention nic-free juice.
Sorry, not this thread.
I meant the thread linked below (and above). Please click on the link in red:
FORM LETTERS - For Congress, State, Commissioners
The thread (linked above) was created especially for vapers' advocacy letters, so no, it's not spamming. The idea behind that thread was to have all the letters in one place for easy reference (and/or inspiration) for other letter writers. There's no chitchat allowed--just letters.
Thanks again.
ETA:
@retired1 @classwife @Robino1
I think that the title "Form letters" is somewhat misleading. Those are not form letters; "advocacy letters" or "inspirational advocacy letters" or something similar would be more accurate, methinks. Just a suggestion...
Sorry Kat, I didn't see this earlier. What do you think of SAMPLE instead of FORM?
- Status
