FDA Sen Johnson (R-Wis) demands answers from FDA RE deeming
- Thread starter DrMA
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
You have to bear in mind that the FDA is more asking manufacturers to prove things are not unsafe - which is an impossible double negative to test for.
Of course the Government is spending Money to say Vaping isn't Safe. That's what you do Before you push a Heavy Tax onto something that only effects a Small Percentage of the Population. Also helps to Justify the FDA's Deeming.
Then Once the Market is Heavily Taxed, and the People who you want (that give you Money) have Dominated the Market, you can pull back and start say's...
"Ya Know? These FDA OKed e-Cigarettes aren't as Bad is before Regulations. So smokers should buy a VUSE."
Sure they can! If I don't get my cookies and vape, I'll have to go Viking berserk and kill people…. QED cookies,(sugar, bacon) and vaping have GOT to be public harm reduction.
Not amateurs. They are quite good at shutting down industries while Americans sleepFor all their edictation, we're being led by glib amateurs Rick. Stands to reason.
Good luck.
Sugar and Fat are the two worst enemies of health in America. It's certainly not vaping.
Imagine the outrage if 90% of products containing more than X% sugar and fat were removed from the market after a certain date. People would buy another freezer to stock up on Twinkies and Snickers before the initial invocation of the rule.
Imagine the outrage if 90% of products containing more than X% sugar and fat were removed from the market after a certain date. People would buy another freezer to stock up on Twinkies and Snickers before the initial invocation of the rule.
The FDA deeming regulations seem to be more of restriction placed on e-cigarettes in the form of compliance costs rather than a sin tax to the states like the MSA. It's more of a forced reduction in products and sellers caused by the high cost of compliance. It will, of course, take pressures of competition away from tobacco companies and slow the switch from tobacco cigarettes to vaping products. Few sellers and the demise of Mom and Pop vape shops will reduce availability to those who would switch to a safer source of nicotine.
Government isn't that adept at funneling money into projects where funding was intended to be spent. Even by their own admission far too much of the MSA money was spent on day to day budget items legally because the MSA didn't require them to spend it on smoking reduction efforts.
The Master Settlement Agreement and Its Impact on Tobacco Use 10 Years Later: Lessons for Physicians About Health Policy Making
Government isn't that adept at funneling money into projects where funding was intended to be spent. Even by their own admission far too much of the MSA money was spent on day to day budget items legally because the MSA didn't require them to spend it on smoking reduction efforts.
The Master Settlement Agreement and Its Impact on Tobacco Use 10 Years Later: Lessons for Physicians About Health Policy Making
True, if they want to fix a health problem, outlaw anything that contains high fructose corn syrup. That's a cheap, but profitable corn product since ethanol was added to gasoline.
Don't even get me started on HFCS. I have been ranting about it for years. They have ruined my favorite cookies and candy bars with that toxic mess. I keep having to find alternatives to things I love because industry keeps finding cheap ways to ruin them. And too many seem none the wiser for too long. There does seem to be a bit of a movement away from HFCS, but I am impatient to taste a Fig Newton again. ;P
I think eventually enough of the public catches on, just enough to change things a little. It's a long process though.
I've been working for Nabisco, the maker of the Fig Newton, for just shy of 27 years now. We've been under the umbrella of many corporate names (including tobacco, ironic huh?). Since we been under Mondelez there has been a progression of healthier (their words, not mine) snacks. It does seem, to me, that we don't sell as many as we used to, but we've also have saturated the market with a plethora of flavors. You may want to write them about the health advantages of not not using HFCS. Just a thought.
Back on topic, isn't the FDA supposed to respond to Sen Johnson's second letter today?
We probably won't know about a response (or, more likely, a lack thereof) until late Tuesday/Wednesday...
I'm going to go with "no" Mike21. And there is a part of me that hopes they continue to thumb their noses at accountability. It makes asking for an injunction make even more judicial sense.
I'm not sure How blowing off a Senate Oversight Committee can help the FDA in the Long Run?
Perhaps the OOTP, HHS, FDA are banking on a Change in Senate Seats in November?
Perhaps the OOTP, HHS, FDA are banking on a Change in Senate Seats in November?
The only benefit to prolonging it IMO is to come up with a more convincing lie.
- Status
