Senate rejects challenge to FDA tobacco bill

[Wally]

The real bottom line to this disagreement is this: The device is whatever the FDA says it is.

That agency, charged with regulating drugs among other duties, has defined it in emails to suppliers of halted shipments as a "drug delivery device" and the e-liquid as a "new drug." Now, if you disagree, or you think it's really a ...., then file a lawsuit. Expect years in court and appeals.

But note what happens in the meantime: The FDA position does not change. The goods do not get delivered. Sellers will have nothing to sell.

I agree that the marketing of the devices was flawed - and stupid in many cases. If this were merely a novelty device to blow nicotine vapor rings, this problem might have been delayed (but the anti's will come after it with all they've got, sooner or later). However ... read the patents: This is not a novelty device but a nicotine delivery system using vapor. Without nicotine, it would be just a Chinese toy with minor market appeal. I, for one, could care less about it if that were the case.

Those who think smooth e-smiling lies ahead are about two chapters behind today's reality.

TB-

Yes, the e-cig will initially be whatever the FDA says it is, and it won't be smooth sailing. But I have to disagree with your complete pessimism, for two reasons. The first is that the FDA is, in fact, interested in input and has negotiated many, many drugs for easier, faster approval. Margaret Hamburg is a well known harm-reduction advocate in public health and the e-cig is right up her alley, whether she knows it yet or not. The second is that the FDA has a very nuanced approach to enforcement and, so far, their effort has been less than half-hearted. We have no idea yet about how vigorously the FDA intends to enforce the control. They are under a lot of political pressure to enforce it and they may have the intent of putting on a good display of enforcement with no real teeth in it. In fact, the sources of political pressure may have no interest in real enforcement. Politicians are often happy with their constituents having the impression of representation (a fact well demonstrated in the FDA/Tobacco bill.)

So let's breath a bit here and see where they go with this and what discussion they can be engaged in. It doesn't take a genius to see the huge harm-reduction potential of the e-cig and, contrary to much opinion on this forum, there are many intelligent, well-intentioned and concerned people at the FDA.

Wally

 

[Bones]

TB-

Yes, the e-cig will initially be whatever the FDA says it is, and it won't be smooth sailing. But I have to disagree with your complete pessimism, for two reasons. The first is that the FDA is, in fact, interested in input and has negotiated many, many drugs for easier, faster approval. Margaret Hamburg is a well known harm-reduction advocate in public health and the e-cig is right up her alley, whether she knows it yet or not. The second is that the FDA has a very nuanced approach to enforcement and, so far, their effort has been less than half-hearted. We have no idea yet about how vigorously the FDA intends to enforce the control. They are under a lot of political pressure to enforce it and they may have the intent of putting on a good display of enforcement with no real teeth in it. In fact, the sources of political pressure may have no interest in real enforcement. Politicians are often happy with their constituents having the impression of representation (a fact well demonstrated in the FDA/Tobacco bill.)

So let's breath a bit here and see where they go with this and what discussion they can be engaged in. It doesn't take a genius to see the huge harm-reduction potential of the e-cig and, contrary to much opinion on this forum, there are many intelligent, well-intentioned and concerned people at the FDA.

Wally

YES YES YES
Gotta like - Think POSITIVE dude! -
Rasta Mon vibration YEA - POSITIVE!

 

[nash076]

My one single ray of sunshine is this:

If the FDA can't keep freaking salmonella out of the damn peanuts, how the hell are they gonna crack down on e-cigs?

 

[Vapor Pete]

I've been following politics since the '70s. I have never experienced a single administration that couldn't be described in that way. If you listen to the rhetoric you can get a very skewed impression of what these guys are all about. But if you look at their voting records, the bills they author, the legislation they sponsor and so forth, you'll see very clearly that they ALL want to control as much of your life as they can. Republicans don't have any better record in this area than Democrats. In fact, the previous administration was far more "government interventionist" than the current one. Look beyond the rhetoric. They can, will and do lie to get votes all the time.

Ok, well like I said,

A. I am not into politics... beyond the fact that I know it will never go away, and I know no matter what, it will run the world.

B. There were administrations that were far less cradle to the grave than the current one.

Perhaps the ones that cry, "Look beyond the rhetoric" are the ones that need to pay attention to it. The American people arent talking about their concerns for the future of this country, and its downward spiral, because there is nothing else to talk about. Just sayin.


My best,
-VP

 

[Vapor Pete]

My one single ray of sunshine is this:

If the FDA can't keep freaking salmonella out of the damn peanuts, how the hell are they gonna crack down on e-cigs?

Because salmonella isnt illegal and being packaged up and sent across our borders, e-cigs are (or would be if banned). The Border Patrol and Customs Agents would get the call to crack down.

My best,
-VP

 

[Surf Monkey]

and being packaged up and sent across our borders

Wrong. You should look into how much food the US imports from places like China. It's a lot more than most people think.

 

[Vapor Pete]

Wrong. You should look into how much food the US imports from places like China. It's a lot more than most people think.

No Im not wrong. There has never been a package labled "Salmonella". There have been packaged e-cigs.

My best,
-VP

 

[Surf Monkey]

No Im not wrong. There has never been a package labled "Salmonella". There have been packaged e-cigs.

Anyone can retroactively change their statement to make it more accurate. You didn't say anything about "packages labeled salmonella" in the post I was responding to. But now that you have, no one is selling packages labeled "cancer" either. So?

 

[Vapor Pete]

Anyone can retroactively change their statement to make it more accurate. You didn't say anything about "packages labeled salmonella" in the post I was responding to. But now that you have, no one is selling packages labeled "cancer" either. So?

Yep. Anyone can. But I didnt. I said, "Salmonella isnt being packaged up..."
I didnt say specifically "labled", but "...being packaged up..." I thought to most would be a clear inference. Thats what I said and thats what I meant... no changing it to make it more accurate. I guess technically I had to restate it for you, so you could get my point, but not change it.
My post was an answere to a question of why the FDA cannot control salmonella in peanuts, so how can we expect them to crack down on e-cigs. My point was (which you appearently took as something else) because salmonella isnt illegal and being packaged up, and crossing our borders, the FDA is having a tougher time stopping its spread. In contrast, if e-cigs were banned, making them illegal, the FDA would then charge Border Patrol and Customs Agents with "cracking down" on the banned product.
Hopefully that clears up your confusion, and the "So?" at the end of your post.

My best,
-VP

 

[Surf Monkey]

Salmonella is found in food. Food is packaged.

I think you can see how your choice of language might be causing some... ambiguity here.

 

[Vapor Pete]

Salmonella is found in food. Food is packaged.

I think you can see how your choice of language might be causing some... ambiguity here.

Ya know what... and this isnt really directed at you Mr. Surf... but Im really getting tired of people who have to have every little thing spelled out so that they get a point. Because I didnt say the word "labled" you need me to clarify a statement used only to answere a question? What your doing is nit-picking... and its childish. If you didnt get my point, admit it. If you did get my point but dont agree with it, say it. But please, dont nit-pick it to the point of idiocy.
I said "Salmonella being packaged up..." not "Food containing salmonella..". There should be no ambiguity with that. Its clear, meaning taking salmonella, and packaging it, and sending over the border, as packaged salmonella...like a package, with salmonella in it, no food, just salmonella. I hope we're done with this now.

My best,
-VP

 

[Terraphon]

PSST...

This ain't the presidential debates or bipartisan socioeconomics 101.

Lighten up and stop sniping at each other, please.

 

[QueenInNC]

A little off topic but...Terraphon, your avatar cracked me up!

 

[Spikey]

A little off topic but...Terraphon, your avatar cracked me up!

I dig the new avatar too....

 

[Terraphon]

That's me in 30 years...

totally.

 

[enrogae]

I've been following politics since the '70s. I have never experienced a single administration that couldn't be described in that way. If you listen to the rhetoric you can get a very skewed impression of what these guys are all about. But if you look at their voting records, the bills they author, the legislation they sponsor and so forth, you'll see very clearly that they ALL want to control as much of your life as they can. Republicans don't have any better record in this area than Democrats. In fact, the previous administration was far more "government interventionist" than the current one. Look beyond the rhetoric. They can, will and do lie to get votes all the time.

And that's why I'm changing my vote to Libertarian next election. I may have no shot at winning, but at least my conscience will be clear. The entire point of that party is limited government...which is just want I want (and what our forefathers wanted).

Oh and Terraphon... I dig the new avatar too. I crack up every time I see it.