FDA Should E-Cigarettes be regulated like a medicine? Such as nicotine patch, gums and inhalers

[BuGlen]

1. You are a statist if assume anything at all needs to be regulated without great reason... [snip]

I wanted to like your post as I agree with everything you stated, except for the accusatory statement above. I get that there are many people that need to broadly categorize others in order to try to make sense of opinions and views of the uninformed, and I've done this myself on several occasions. I also understand that there's a big difference between the truly ignorant (uneducated in the topic) and the willfully ignorant (zealots and others with an alternate agenda), and it's often difficult to distinguish between the two. I'm not calling you out specifically, but rather just using your post as an example to attempt to make a point.

With that said, I'd like to pose a question: Wouldn't it be better stating an opposing opinion like "Assuming that anything needs to be regulated without sufficient reason leads to statist / fascist government.", rather than "You're a [insert category here] if you believe [insert specific condition here].". For me, the former makes the point of how politics are truly embedded in this issue, without broadly categorizing others for opposing opinions (uneducated or otherwise) on specific topics. I guess I could just be getting leery of scaring people away from the community who might otherwise be engaged, and also fueling in-fighting within the community as the pressure builds.

To the OP's question: No, vapor products should not be regulated like pharma cessation products. To do so would severely diminish innovation and competition in the market, and virtually eliminate the current and potential future public health benefits. A "light touch" regulation, such as quality standards for e-liquid components and clean room environments (similar to the food / supplement industry) might work, but that's not even close to what has been proposed by the FDA. I suggest you read the articles published by Clive Bates, Michael Siegel, Carl V. Phillips, and others who understand the benefits of vapor products and understand the impact of over-zealous regulation.

 

[sofarsogood]

The stakes are so high. 40 million smokers spend $100 billion a year on cigarettes in the US. So wave a magic wand and suddenly they are all vapers following my skn flnt program. They rebuild and mix at home and only buy what they need. A $100 a year would be enough. $100 x 40 million smokers = $4 billion. That is a 96% decline in the cost to consumers. Then, if nobody is smoking there won't be new smokers trying to quit so there will be very few new vapers so that $4 billion will start to decline too and in a generation there might be nobody puffing on anything. If 59% of current smokers really are dual using may be a viral crash in tobacco sales isn't so far fetched. That would be fun to watch.

 

[supertrunker]

If nobody vapes or smokes then income tax will rise. After all, the money has to come from somewhere.
The alternative would be cuts in government expenditure...


T

 

[AndriaD]

If nobody vapes or smokes then income tax will rise. After all, the money has to come from somewhere.
The alternative would be cuts in government expenditure...


T

Well lessee... fire 50% of gov't employees. Those who are left, cut their salary 50%. That should do it.

Yeah, like that's ever gonna happen.

Andria

 

[Rossum]

The stakes are so high. 40 million smokers spend $100 billion a year on cigarettes in the US. So wave a magic wand and suddenly they are all vapers following my skn flnt program. They rebuild and mix at home and only buy what they need. A $100 a year would be enough. $100 x 40 million smokers = $4 billion. That is a 96% decline in the cost to consumers. Then, if nobody is smoking there won't be new smokers trying to quit so there will be very few new vapers so that $4 billion will start to decline too and in a generation there might be nobody puffing on anything. If 59% of current smokers really are dual using may be a viral crash in tobacco sales isn't so far fetched. That would be fun to watch.

Sir, are you TRYING to crash the economy or something? No, I don't mean the $96 billion no longer spent on cigarettes; that would be spent somewhere else. But there's all the MSA bonds that would end up in default -- that could put a real hurt on things -- kinda like all the MBS that caused so much unpleasantness in 2008.

 

[zoiDman]

Should E-Cigarettes be regulated like a medicine? Such as nicotine patch, gums and inhalers?

God Gawd No!

When we got to the Fork in that Road, Thank every Higher Power you believe in (and a Few that you may Not) that we Didn't go down that Road.

 

[AndriaD]

Sir, are you TRYING to crash the economy or something? No, I don't mean the $96 billion no longer spent on cigarettes; that would be spent somewhere else. But there's all the MSA bonds that would end up in default -- that could put a real hurt on things -- kinda like all the MBS that caused so much unpleasantness in 2008.

As little as I'd like to see it happen... a total crash of the economy is probably the only thing that could spark the revolution that so deperately needs to happen -- it's what finally brought on the French one.

Andria

 

[supertrunker]

Revolutions are not started by taxes on vaping, but by taxes on tea.

T

 

[AndriaD]

Revolutions are not started by taxes on vaping, but by taxes on tea.

T

Maybe in 1773. Nowadays no tax on any single item or group of items is going to spark a revolution -- the gov't is simply too entrenched. But a complete economic collapse? That would probably do it.

Andria

 

[supertrunker]

The problem with trying to regulate vaping like medicine is difficult because vaping does not treat any illness nor cure any disease.

It is however the route that the UK and Europe has decided to go.

What i personally find disappointing is that vaping, e-cigs, etc are not being treated as the something new that they are.
Instead they are being stuffed into legislative categories that don't really fit. Why is that?

T

 

[mudmanc4]

yes, yes I think regulating is a great idea.
Then we can move on to less important things such as water, see, we can't have everyone just drinking as much water as they want, sheesh.
When we finish there, we should sincerely consider finding a way for oxygen, I mean really, there are forests of trees out there, struggling in their own way, to make oxygen for people, I sincerely believe some people owe them tree's an apology.

 

[sofarsogood]

Sir, are you TRYING to crash the economy or something? No, I don't mean the $96 billion no longer spent on cigarettes; that would be spent somewhere else. But there's all the MSA bonds that would end up in default -- that could put a real hurt on things -- kinda like all the MBS that caused so much unpleasantness in 2008.

Are there any MSA bonds backed by the "full faith and credit" of a State government? I would be surprised. So now there is a credible scenario for how tobacco sales could collapse. There would be some serious ripples in the economy. Worker productivity should increase measurably. Sales of other consumer items would increase. Some party stores and gas stations would close. Child welfare would improve because parents would have more money to spend on their kids. Governmenet budgets would be stressed across the board since most of that $100 billin goes to taxes. Appropriations to education, research, and public health, and grants to local governments would decline and we would be reading about it in the news. A lot of scientists and public health officials would be making tacos. In the short run medical costs might go down but in the long run we all die of something.

A good macro economic computer model should be able to come up with interesting results.

If nobody vapes or smokes then income tax will rise. After all, the money has to come from somewhere.
The alternative would be cuts in government expenditure...

Vaping shouldn't be taxed because that hurts poor people trying to switch. Instead of increasing taxes Federal and State governments will abandon tax supported NGO's and local governments. Why do you think they are screaming the loudest?

 

[Rossum]

A good macro economic computer model should be able to come up with interesting results.

Hah! Tea leaves produce more reliable predictions than those models do.

 

[Jman8]

Revolutions are not started by taxes on vaping, but by taxes on tea flavored eLiquid.

T

*Fixed for accuracy.

 

[nicnik]

Think about traditional cigarettes! They regulate those but you don't see the ingredients listed on the pack. It would take a much larger area than a pack to list all those toxins. All they do is put a little surgeon general's warning.

Thanks for that perspective that I'll be sure point out to people now that you've mentioned it.

 

[zoiDman]

I totally agree!

Think about traditional cigarettes! They regulate those but you don't see the ingredients listed on the pack. It would take a much larger area than a pack to list all those toxins. All they do is put a little surgeon general's warning.

I wonder if RJ Reynolds was Required to List these "Ingredients"? Or if they just did it Because they wanted People to know what they are Smoking?

Cigarette Ingredients | R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company

Brand Compounds | R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company

 

[Elizabeth Baldwin]

I wonder if RJ Reynolds was Required to List these "Ingredients"? Or if they just did it Because they wanted People to know what they are Smoking?

Cigarette Ingredients | R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company

Brand Compounds | R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company

Notice this:

"Most of these ingredients are commonly used in foods and beverages, or permitted for use in foods by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), or have been given the status “Generally Recognized as Safe in Foods” (GRAS) by FDA, the Flavor and Extract Manufacturers Association (FEMA) or other expert committees."

 

[zoiDman]

Notice this:

"Most of these ingredients are commonly used in foods and beverages, or permitted for use in foods by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), or have been given the status “Generally Recognized as Safe in Foods” (GRAS) by FDA, the Flavor and Extract Manufacturers Association (FEMA) or other expert committees."

I guess what that Means is if you Peel a Cigarette and then Eat the tobacco, then it is Generally Considered GRAS to do so.

Of course, Heating those Chemicals and then Inhaling the Fumes would be Completely Different. But that is a Different Story.

 

[sofarsogood]

It is ironic that food grade flavoring is allowed in cigarettes then burned but food grade flavoring might not be allowed in ecigs which don't burn anything. I read this morning that a consumer research company says 59% of current smokers vape at least once a week. Could percentage possibly be that high. My own perception is anybody who doesn't stop vaping will eventually stop smoking. Could there be a delayed reaction thing going on here. In the next 18 months might we see a dramatic decline in smokers because those dual users finally quit?

 

[Rossum]

Could there be a delayed reaction thing going on here. In the next 18 months might we see a dramatic decline in smokers because those dual users finally quit?

Without good access to better stuff than what BT sells in the Stop & Rob stores? I kinda doubt it.