The Elephant in the Room

[Plastic Shaman]

In all probability, you're correct. Unless the statute is found unconstitutional, as in it wasn't properly passed under their powers and didn't have a proper basis, is discriminating against a protected class, violates constitutional protections, ect. Since vaping isn't a right and we aren't a protected class, Congress could probably do it. I could be wrong though. If anyone knows more, feel free to correct me.

 

[PapaSloth]

You're an educated guy, you probably know how Neville Chamberlain's policy of appeasement worked out just before WWII, right? So, which do you think is more likely to preserve our rights as vapers: appeasing the government by going along with whatever hare-brained regulations they want to impose on us, or fighting them every step of the way? And given that, do you maybe see why some of us want the government to actually PROVE that vaping is harmful before we're willing to go along with regulating the industry?

 

[six]

Common sense disclaimers but they have to be put on products because you know someone has done one of these.

I'm way behind on this thread... so apologies if this got said somewhere between where I'm reading and the end...

I have a bottle of nic base in front of me right now that has a read bordered section of red text that says, "Danger - Toxic if swallowed - Wash from skin immediately. Keep out of reach of children and pets. Toxic to aquatic life. Dispose of properly. When handling, use gloves, eye protection, ventilation, and protective clothing."... and also includes the poison control center hotline phone number.

I think everyone is really used to these sorts of warning labels... and I think that because everyone is used to these sorts of labels, it probably isn't entirely unreasonable to expect e-juice to have such labels...

My real feelings are that there's no need to nerf the whole world and maybe it's not so bad to let darwin clean the gene pool... But the fact is consumers expect to see the warnings, and it's easy for anyone who gets the power to regulate to demand such labels... and the fact of the matter is, when ANTZ argue the lack of such labeling, most people think, "Hmmm. You know. That's right. There's a label on my windex - there's a label on my laundry soap - there's a label on every package of everything I buy for every reason I have to buy stuff. Why is there no such label on the stuff those vapers are using? What are they trying to hide?"

And for you Monty Python fans... "It doesn't say anything here about larks vomit. I think it's more appropriate that the box bore a great red label WARNING LARKS VOMIT!" We aren't using crunchy frog nor peddling spring suprise... but ingredients labels and warning labels are something everyone expects to see.... but almost no one actually reads.

 

[Plastic Shaman]

Well, I don't think that appeasement is an issue. We aren't bargaining with the government nor do I know what people are suggesting we do. I guess we could protest. However, unless a court decides otherwise when challenged, the FDA will probably have jurisdiction. Now, they could make some exceptions or alternative solutions when they establish rules, which I hope they do when they see the scope of the issue. The FDA does have to show evidence when they do things. That's a given. Whether or not we agree with its validity is another question.

 

[FlamingoTutu]

Well, I don't think that appeasement is an issue. We aren't bargaining with the government nor do I know what people are suggesting we do. I guess we could protest. However, unless a court decides otherwise when challenged, the FDA will probably have jurisdiction. Now, they could make some exceptions or alternative solutions when they establish rules, which I hope they do when they see the scope of the issue. The FDA does have to show evidence when they do things. That's a given. Whether or not we agree with its validity is another question.

They did a bang up job with Chantix. I'd say the evidence goes against them.

I don't want the local head shop mixing my antibiotics, a nurse's aid adjusting the x-ray machine and I sure as heck don't want the FDA messing with any part of my or anyone else's vape.

 

[PapaSloth]

Well, I don't think that appeasement is an issue. We aren't bargaining with the government nor do I know what people are suggesting we do. I guess we could protest. However, unless a court decides otherwise when challenged, the FDA will probably have jurisdiction. Now, they could make some exceptions or alternative solutions when they establish rules, which I hope they do when they see the scope of the issue. The FDA does have to show evidence when they do things. That's a given. Whether or not we agree with its validity is another question.

Well, one thing we could do is not natter on about how OH NOES, TEENS ARE VAPING! MY GOD, BIG BROTHER BETTER STEP IN RIGHT AWAY AND FIX EVERYTHING. That just makes us look like a divided community, and makes anyone who reads this on a "fact finding mission" think that they can basically just steamroll over us without us batting an eye. Forget about protest, what we're doing right now in this thread is practically begging them to regulate us. And that's why I think this thread is an extremely bad idea, all 81 pages of it (so far).

 

[Plastic Shaman]

They did a bang up job with Chantix. I'd say the evidence goes against them.

I don't want the local head shop mixing my antibiotics, a nurse's aid adjusting the x-ray machine and I sure as heck don't want the FDA messing with any part of my or anyone else's vape.

Yeah, I agree. The FDA is not known for their stringent research process. Never mind Chantix. The FDA is constantly approving psychiatric drugs, and drugs that they know will be used off label, with trial period of a month or two. Keep in mind that these are drugs that end up having black box warnings and the trial periods basically look at whether or not someone keeled over and died from the medication.

Still, I don't think that it's that simple with vaping. First off, there are a lot of barriers that they would have to get around to impose things like flavor bans, which would require them being classified as cigarettes. I can't even imagine how they could do that with vaping, but not cigars, pipe tobaccos, and all those flavored smokeless tobaccos. Also, these things will take a lot of time to do. Everyone concerned with this should go read the statutes. For example, they would need a new set of rules to regulate nicotine levels, which can take a while. Then there would be a year before that would actually go into effect. A lot can happen in that time.

Why don't you want a nurse's aide setting an x-ray? I can't imagine that they can do that much harm!

 

[Plastic Shaman]

Well, one thing we could do is not natter on about how OH NOES, TEENS ARE VAPING! MY GOD, BIG BROTHER BETTER STEP IN RIGHT AWAY AND FIX EVERYTHING. That just makes us look like a divided community, and makes anyone who reads this on a "fact finding mission" think that they can basically just steamroll over us without us batting an eye. Forget about protest, what we're doing right now in this thread is practically begging them to regulate us. And that's why I think this thread is an extremely bad idea, all 81 pages of it (so far).

I respectfully disagree. I see what you're saying, but I don't know if this small community would cause that much of an impact.

Don't you think that there are people who are passionate vapers, but strongly believe that teens should not vape? Shouldn't they have a voice?

Also, I think you can make an argument that people could use solidarity against vapers on an issue like teen vaping. Can you imagine what the public would think if there was a news story, pointing to this site, that told people that vapers believe that teens should be able to legally buy and use e-cigarettes? Frankly, I think that being passionate about vaping, but believing that there should be restrictions for minors makes us look a lot more reasonable. I think a lot of people don't see it as appeasement because they believe that it's true. It's not that they are negotiating the issue, they believe that that's the correct action.

 

[FlamingoTutu]

If I'd been awake, I'd have said I don't want TSA messing with the x-ray machine.

They've said they have flavors in their sights yet you can buy FDA approved nic gum in all sorts of flavors. I'm pretty sure that is also approved for children 12 and up, almost positive that's where I first saw a box labeled with it.

The people I'm most concerned for with the FDA are the folks that haven't started vaping yet. They are the ones that will be screwed the most. Short term, local and state government are the biggest worries. Right now, Virginia has a bill (HB 1310) that would tax liquid at $.040 a ml. Tack on the cost of the FDA taking charge of all this and it will be cheaper to smoke. Worried about what's in your juice, wait until the only person you can afford to buy it from is the dealer on the corner. Worse, your naive kids may be buying from that same dealer.

 

[Shilo]

I'd rather see a teenager vaping than smoking. There is a distinction between teenager and "children". I am pretty sure when we were all smoking in high school and getting cigarettes that was illegal too. It's a little bit easier to be judgmental about it when we have long passed the legal age. Do I prefer the law to be 18 and up? Yes. Do I think there will always be teenagers finding themselves addicted to smoking and find a way to get vaping items? Yes.

 

[Plastic Shaman]

I totally trust the TSA people at the security checkpoints with x-rays. Those people usually have a lot of scientific and medical education.

Well, they asked for comments on classifying e-cigs as cigarettes. To me, that says that they don't really have any kind of idea about how they could do that, especially when you look at the fact that almost all other types of tobacco have some sort of flavor or sweetness that teens might like. I just have such hard time seeing that they could pull this off. Since congress specified cigarettes as the only thing requiring flavor bans, I think that the clear intent of Congress was to single out cigarettes. It's illogical to reclassify things that are not cigarettes as cigarettes when Congress was only concerned with cigarettes themselves.

I think you're right about state and local laws. Personally, I believe that these efforts are destructive and pointless since people can still get stuff online. All these laws will do is close small businesses and, as you said, make it harder for smokers to get into harm reduction. Also, as a matter of personal views about how I see the role of states, I don't believe that they should be concerned with issues of national health when state and local governments have so many other domestic issues that they should be looking at.

 

[WharfRat1976]

You're an educated guy, you probably know how Neville Chamberlain's policy of appeasement worked out just before WWII, right? So, which do you think is more likely to preserve our rights as vapers: appeasing the government by going along with whatever hare-brained regulations they want to impose on us, or fighting them every step of the way? And given that, do you maybe see why some of us want the government to actually PROVE that vaping is harmful before we're willing to go along with regulating the industry?

LOL---Classic. Gotta good chuckle from this one.

 

[towelie]

good lord 30 more pages in a day?

the elephant in the room is that the fda should not exist.

 

[towelie]

how is vaping not a right? alcohol consumption, a right? at least that got an ammendment or two lol.

 

[Rossum]

how is vaping not a right?

It is. As is smoking, drinking, or whatever other way you choose to pursue your happiness, provided you don't hurt or infringe on the rights of others by doing so.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

 

[skoony]

I don't agree, vg, pg, and nicotine can all be altered, please don't act naïve. Nobody's talking about altering or tampering (that's a total different subject), I've seen many liquids that have no list of ingredients except the nic strength. Just because a seller says the imported liquid they sell has FDA approved ingredients doesn't mean a thing. Do you really think liquid coming out of China is all up to standards of FDA ingredients or USP, please get real. Don't tell me what's happening, perhaps you should address the parents of the teens who where hospitalized after using certain E liquids. But guess what?? You can still buy that bad E liquid.

who in there right mind would deliberately alter juice. food and pharmaceutical grade
is what it is. China stuff is just the same as ours and ours is mostly imported from China.
any distributor selling PG,VG,nic base or,flavors that are mislabeled is in violation
of laws already on the books.
that juice the teens got was not e-juice.they tried to smoke it using a vaping device.
similar to bath salts. it never was intended to be used as e-juice.(wink,wink,nod,nod)
other than listing ingredients there is no need for the FDA to protect us from something
that isn't happening.
i myself am not going to sit around imagining scenarios of harm and desolation that
are not happening now and could not be stopped by any FDA regulation if someone
so chose to break existing law.

regards
mike

 

[Vermonster13]

Maybe, could happen, a possibility, etc, all very empowering reasons to regulate, control and tax for our benefit. Get elected and become the moral and scientific expert for all.

 

[skoony]

I'm sorry, but one of the criticisms of the statute was it's inability to allow the FDA to regulate actual nicotine levels. There's nothing in the statute that says they can do this. If you can point me in the direction of some instance where the FDA has done this, I'd be more than willing to check it out.

Edit: After doing some research, I believe I was wrong. Whoops. We all make mistakes! I'm still trying to figure out how they do it though.

the FDA most certainly requires the tobacco companies to know
how much nicotine is in each cigarette and in each puff as part of
the acceptance process when the law was passed.
you can't call a Winston a Winston if the nicotine levels are not
what you say they are.
the beef with the law was the FDA couldn't set those levels,
not that the tobacco companies didn't have to prove what they were.

regards
mike

 

[TomGeorge]

I don't agree, vg, pg, and nicotine can all be altered, please don't act naïve. Nobody's talking about altering or tampering (that's a total different subject), I've seen many liquids that have no list of ingredients except the nic strength. Just because a seller says the imported liquid they sell has FDA approved ingredients doesn't mean a thing. Do you really think liquid coming out of China is all up to standards of FDA ingredients or USP, please get real. Don't tell me what's happening, perhaps you should address the parents of the teens who where hospitalized after using certain E liquids. But guess what?? You can still buy that bad E liquid.

If you are so worried about what is in your eliquid, maybe you should take a break from vaping until its regulated and you can feel safe.

 

[skoony]

Really?? So you're absolutely convinced you know exactly what's in the juice you purchase? If you answer yes, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you.

well what do you think "they" are putting in it?
my breathing is still improved,check.
that rash is still gone,check.
no green spots in front of my eyes,check.
i have a pulse,check.
no i am not worried at all.

regards
mike