The final countdown to August 8th - your FDA comments NEEDED
- Thread starter Oliver
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
It's not acceptable to me either. I'm just sharing my expectations, which are extremely bad for both public health and the economy. But they're going to do something and I just can't figure out what it will be, assuming they come to their senses.
Best case scenario would be VG-dissolved (PG produces worse breakdown products, apparently) nic at pharmacies available through the sudafed counter in convenient concentrations to which you would then add your own purchased flavorings. A much worse, but more likely, scenario would be requiring a prescription for the stuff. It will be a death knell for tobacco absolute and quality coffee flavors, of course, since those are usually extracted in-house and would require hundreds of thousands of dollars of validation.
I just can't wrap my head around how the FDA plans to stick itself in the picture without it either being laughable "well, at least we did something" regulation or the utter death of e-cigs across the country.
There's no real middle-ground.
This is my cat Dolce...she has fangs and likes to sleep upside down. For pity's sake send in your comments!!!
This is my cat "Genevieve" she also likes to show hers and hang upside down, maybe they are related? I sent in my comment......
There are 18,670 active members on ECF. I am post #566. It's pretty sad that the rest of the 18,104 members haven't replied to this thread confirming their participation. Maybe they have elsewhere. Hopefully they have.
Receipt emailed to CASAA.
Receipt emailed to CASAA.
Are you guys running out of gas as we approach the finish line?
The propaganda the ANTZ are spewing in their comments centers on protecting the children. Do any of you have children? Grandchildren? Do the following comments make sense to you? Do you think they might make sense to the FDA? Im offering my thoughts, hoping to be helpful. My child is grown, I have no grandchildren yet, so you guys are it for me now. Deal with it.
But whether you think it's helpful or not, will you please post your comment on the FDA site? Please? Post your comment if you care one whit about the chiiillldreeen.
OK, according to the ANTZ, it's all about the chiiillldreeen. No problem. What about your children? Your grandchildren? Might they need your companionship, guidance, love and financial and emotional support? What would happen tothemif you were to fall ill or die prematurely from lung cancer, heart disease, emphysema, or some other smoking related illness? If you don't have children or grandchildren, or even if you do, what about other smokers' children? Maybe those children would like to live in an environment where there's no second hand smoke, where their parents don't stink, where their parents aren't looked down on by their classmates, where their parents don't sneak out in the cold, darkness and freezing rain, like lepers, to smoke their nasty cigarettes? And maybe those children would prefer it if their moms and dads could run and play sports with them without coughing and wheezing and running out of breath. And maybe they would prefer it if their parents and grandparents survived to attend their graduation ceremonies.
Maybe smoking parents would derive joy if they could survive to have and enjoy grandchildren. And maybe those grandchildren would derive scientifically verifiable benefits from having grandparents. My dad, a wonderful, kind and wise man, and in otherwise excellent health, died prematurely of lung cancer and never even met his lovely, smart and lively granddaughter. I believecorrection: I know with absolute certainty that he would have lived to see her and love her, and she him, if e-cigarettes had been invented 45 years ago.
Because of e-cigarettes, and only because of them, I hope to meet and enjoy my grandchildren. I hope they like their old granddad. I will take them water skiing, snow skiing, hiking, sightseeing, and I will help them pay for college. And I will offer them all manner of gratuitous and mostly worthless advice on how they should live their lives. That is, of course, if my almost lifelong smoking habit doesn't kill me first.
The propaganda the ANTZ are spewing in their comments centers on protecting the children. Do any of you have children? Grandchildren? Do the following comments make sense to you? Do you think they might make sense to the FDA? Im offering my thoughts, hoping to be helpful. My child is grown, I have no grandchildren yet, so you guys are it for me now. Deal with it.
But whether you think it's helpful or not, will you please post your comment on the FDA site? Please? Post your comment if you care one whit about the chiiillldreeen.
OK, according to the ANTZ, it's all about the chiiillldreeen. No problem. What about your children? Your grandchildren? Might they need your companionship, guidance, love and financial and emotional support? What would happen tothemif you were to fall ill or die prematurely from lung cancer, heart disease, emphysema, or some other smoking related illness? If you don't have children or grandchildren, or even if you do, what about other smokers' children? Maybe those children would like to live in an environment where there's no second hand smoke, where their parents don't stink, where their parents aren't looked down on by their classmates, where their parents don't sneak out in the cold, darkness and freezing rain, like lepers, to smoke their nasty cigarettes? And maybe those children would prefer it if their moms and dads could run and play sports with them without coughing and wheezing and running out of breath. And maybe they would prefer it if their parents and grandparents survived to attend their graduation ceremonies.
Maybe smoking parents would derive joy if they could survive to have and enjoy grandchildren. And maybe those grandchildren would derive scientifically verifiable benefits from having grandparents. My dad, a wonderful, kind and wise man, and in otherwise excellent health, died prematurely of lung cancer and never even met his lovely, smart and lively granddaughter. I believecorrection: I know with absolute certainty that he would have lived to see her and love her, and she him, if e-cigarettes had been invented 45 years ago.
Because of e-cigarettes, and only because of them, I hope to meet and enjoy my grandchildren. I hope they like their old granddad. I will take them water skiing, snow skiing, hiking, sightseeing, and I will help them pay for college. And I will offer them all manner of gratuitous and mostly worthless advice on how they should live their lives. That is, of course, if my almost lifelong smoking habit doesn't kill me first.
Maybe ECF as a whole should redirect to:
Regulations.gov
for all of the remaining time left of the comments period, let people see what could happen if this goes away, might make them act.
Just a thought.
Regulations.gov
for all of the remaining time left of the comments period, let people see what could happen if this goes away, might make them act.
Just a thought.
Are you guys running out of gas as we approach the finish line?
The propaganda the ANTZ are spewing in their comments centers on protecting the children. Do any of you have children? Grandchildren? Do the following comments make sense to you? Do you think they might make sense to the FDA? I’m offering my thoughts, hoping to be helpful. My child is grown, I have no grandchildren yet, so you guys are it for me now. Deal with it.
But whether you think it's helpful or not, will you please post your comment on the FDA site? Please? Post your comment if you care one whit about the chiiillldreeen.
OK, according to the ANTZ, it's all about the chiiillldreeen. No problem. What about your children? Your grandchildren? Might they need your companionship, guidance, love and financial and emotional support? What would happen tothemif you were to fall ill or die prematurely from lung cancer, heart disease, emphysema, or some other smoking related illness? If you don't have children or grandchildren, or even if you do, what about other smokers' children? Maybe those children would like to live in an environment where there's no second hand smoke, where their parents don't stink, where their parents aren't looked down on by their classmates, where their parents don't sneak out in the cold, darkness and freezing rain, like lepers, to smoke their nasty cigarettes? And maybe those children would prefer it if their moms and dads could run and play sports with them without coughing and wheezing and running out of breath. And maybe they would prefer it if their parents and grandparents survived to attend their graduation ceremonies.
Maybe smoking parents would derive joy if they could survive to have and enjoy grandchildren. And maybe those grandchildren would derive scientifically verifiable benefits from having grandparents. My dad, a wonderful, kind and wise man, and in otherwise excellent health, died prematurely of lung cancer and never even met his lovely, smart and lively granddaughter. I believe—correction: I know with absolute certainty— that he would have lived to see her and love her, and she him, if e-cigarettes had been invented 45 years ago.
Because of e-cigarettes, and only because of them, I hope to meet and enjoy my grandchildren. I hope they like their old granddad. I will take them water skiing, snow skiing, hiking, sightseeing, and I will help them pay for college. And I will offer them all manner of gratuitous and mostly worthless advice on how they should live their lives. That is, of course, if my almost lifelong smoking habit doesn't kill me first.
That was very touching, and I mean that with the utmost sincerity. I do hope you submitted a comment with all of that
It is so important to remind the FDA that by supporting harm reduction methods, they are saving lives.
DrMA has a blog where he's posted 13 or so comments that he's submitted to the FDA. First, they are worth reading and compact. Second he's given permission to use them in comments posted to the FDA and when I get winded rather than submitting blubbering comments, I intend to resubmit some of his comments. IMO they are that good. There are several threads with comments that bear repeating on ECF. No shame in using them.
I'm not a geek but I didn't casually see a way that regulations was tracking IP addresses and linking anoynmous comments together.
I know it's possible to mod a flashlight or Altoids tin and believe it or not, there are ways around it such as requiring a stamp (for tax purposes). Payments are also a vunerable gateway and it wouldn't be the first time an unpopular industry was squeezed at that choking point. This is not new or partucular to any political party. It's been going on for over 15 years that I'm aware of. Legality is secondary.
The cost of a pack of cigarettes to produce, including materials and labor, is apx $1. Consider the markup. Tobacco industry has developed around that business model and I doubt they expect to change. Consider the pharmacetical industry. The markup over materials and labor is estimated between 200% and 2,000% and I don't think they expect to change their business model either. Research and development is usually at taxpayer expense and now tobacco industry is poised to take advantage of the same kind of grants.
A lot of this has been discussed at length in many many threads previously. The FDA has had five years to develop these regulations - which is NOT saying this is a slam dunk for them and IMO they are obviously nervous about getting this over with. I think it's safe to say these regulations were rushed since there are huge swaths of infomation missing, intentionally or on purpose.
Anyway, I should be writting to them not preaching to the choir.
I'm not a geek but I didn't casually see a way that regulations was tracking IP addresses and linking anoynmous comments together.
I know it's possible to mod a flashlight or Altoids tin and believe it or not, there are ways around it such as requiring a stamp (for tax purposes). Payments are also a vunerable gateway and it wouldn't be the first time an unpopular industry was squeezed at that choking point. This is not new or partucular to any political party. It's been going on for over 15 years that I'm aware of. Legality is secondary.
The cost of a pack of cigarettes to produce, including materials and labor, is apx $1. Consider the markup. Tobacco industry has developed around that business model and I doubt they expect to change. Consider the pharmacetical industry. The markup over materials and labor is estimated between 200% and 2,000% and I don't think they expect to change their business model either. Research and development is usually at taxpayer expense and now tobacco industry is poised to take advantage of the same kind of grants.
A lot of this has been discussed at length in many many threads previously. The FDA has had five years to develop these regulations - which is NOT saying this is a slam dunk for them and IMO they are obviously nervous about getting this over with. I think it's safe to say these regulations were rushed since there are huge swaths of infomation missing, intentionally or on purpose.
Anyway, I should be writting to them not preaching to the choir.
That was very touching, and I mean that with the utmost sincerity. I do hope you submitted a comment with all of that
It is so important to remind the FDA that by supporting harm reduction methods, they are saving lives.
Thank you, and I edited it and submitted it. I'm out of gas myself, so I'll turn in to bed now, hoping that others will pick up the torch. Or is it take up the torch? Grab it? Catch the ball? Run with it? For the Gipper? Who the heck is the Gipper, anyway?
Don't worry, I'll grab that torch from you
I'm forcing myself to stay up cuz my juice arrives in the mail in approximately 4 hours so...comment Comment COMMENT!!!
Most pick individual consumer. If you work in health care you can list yourself as a health professional, or if you work in the industry you can put that in. Whatever suits your situation best
Most pick individual consumer. If you work in health care you can list yourself as a health professional, or if you work in the industry you can put that in. Whatever suits your situation best
Awesome, thank you! Comment submitted. I plan on sending more tomorrow. I guess today since it's 3:27am... Sigh.
I just wrote this on the fly and submitted it to the FDA I'm quite proud of this little comment:
The current deeming regulations do not appropriately take into account the potential for harm reduction products to substantially reduce disease and death caused by smoking. These regulations treat all tobacco products as if they pose similar health risks when this is simply not the case. Given the inherent difficulty in quitting smoking, any sensible regulation would involve protection of reduced harm products so that they can be easily accessed by those who find smoking cessation difficult. Instead, the deeming regulations serve to further restrict access to such products and confuse the public into believing that there is no use in switching from smoking to a non-combustible product to protect their health. In particular, the proposed regulations serve to choke off supply of e-cigarettes to such an extreme as to render them nonexistent. This is absurd beyond measure. The FDA is charged with protecting and promoting public health, and in their attempt to do so they are taking one of the biggest public health crises and making it monumentally worse. I submit that the FDA should take the current deeming regulations, rewrite them so that they only apply to combustible tobacco products, and write up separate, more appropriate regulations for harm reduction products such as e-cigarettes and snus. These new regulations should be designed to encourage the development of new reduced harm products rather than hinder it, and should also serve to discourage more harmful products from continued production. Furthermore, the new language should allow reduced harm products to claim that they are safer than smoking tobacco so the public is aware of their true options for smoking cessation. There have already been many scientific studies done on these reduced harm products - the FDA cannot legitimately use lack of knowledge as an excuse for such preposterousness any longer.
I'm quite proud of this little comment:The current deeming regulations do not appropriately take into account the potential for harm reduction products to substantially reduce disease and death caused by smoking. These regulations treat all tobacco products as if they pose similar health risks when this is simply not the case. Given the inherent difficulty in quitting smoking, any sensible regulation would involve protection of reduced harm products so that they can be easily accessed by those who find smoking cessation difficult. Instead, the deeming regulations serve to further restrict access to such products and confuse the public into believing that there is no use in switching from smoking to a non-combustible product to protect their health. In particular, the proposed regulations serve to choke off supply of e-cigarettes to such an extreme as to render them nonexistent. This is absurd beyond measure. The FDA is charged with protecting and promoting public health, and in their attempt to do so they are taking one of the biggest public health crises and making it monumentally worse. I submit that the FDA should take the current deeming regulations, rewrite them so that they only apply to combustible tobacco products, and write up separate, more appropriate regulations for harm reduction products such as e-cigarettes and snus. These new regulations should be designed to encourage the development of new reduced harm products rather than hinder it, and should also serve to discourage more harmful products from continued production. Furthermore, the new language should allow reduced harm products to claim that they are safer than smoking tobacco so the public is aware of their true options for smoking cessation. There have already been many scientific studies done on these reduced harm products - the FDA cannot legitimately use lack of knowledge as an excuse for such preposterousness any longer.
Done, but I have a feeling there's a ton of people who are being lazy and couldn't be bothered
You are probably right, but we are glad you are not one of them!!! I think that quite a few have stepped up to the plate from many different areas, not just this forum. Every voice counts. Thanks
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
