They are not stupid, just corrupt. Plus they have enough power to go unpunished for being corrupt. They are happy to look stupid, if there are enough bucks in it for them.
Tobacco mints tied to kids poisoning
- Thread starter scintar
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
They are not stupid, just corrupt. Plus they have enough power to go unpunished for being corrupt. They are happy to look stupid, if there are enough bucks in it for them.
When i see you write like this Bob, it scares me because it's exactly what i have been thinking. All Britain's Political parties are out of control and they now know that they can do whatever they want with impunity as "the people" won't fight back. Vapers will become Criminals sometime this year after Government have changed The Management. After that our Internet access will be limited (as the Digital Economy Bill has been passed) to "acceptable content" so any Forums like these will become "unavailable"
As Karl Marx observed "The oppressed are allowed once every few years to decide which particular representatives of the oppressing class are to represent and repress them."
The next lot are really going to turn the screw.
That's shocking, Deewal. I thought you had freedom of speech, like we have here. Once they take that away, our freedom is gone.
I thought that when your politicians did nasty things, they had to answer for it to the Queen.
I thought that when your politicians did nasty things, they had to answer for it to the Queen.
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 66
While Connolly's grossly misleading fear mongering article against Camel Orbs may have generated lots of media coverage, its nonsense from a scientific and public health perspective.
Connolly also now has a significant conflict of interest, which may/should disallow him from voting on the issue as a member of the FDA tobacco products scientific advisory committee.
The FDA has requested public comments on dissolvable tobacco products at:
Public Dockets for Comment
I'll be sending some comments, and urge others to do so as well.
Connolly also now has a significant conflict of interest, which may/should disallow him from voting on the issue as a member of the FDA tobacco products scientific advisory committee.
The FDA has requested public comments on dissolvable tobacco products at:
Public Dockets for Comment
I'll be sending some comments, and urge others to do so as well.
The correct docket number is
FDA–2010–N–0123
Copy the Docket ID # above (Highlight and press Control-C), then go to http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#home
and paste (Control-V) into the field "Enter Keyword or ID:" Then click the orange Search button.
There are 12 results currently (the FDA's document is -001 and the other 11 are comments.)
FDA–2010–N–0123
Copy the Docket ID # above (Highlight and press Control-C), then go to http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#home
and paste (Control-V) into the field "Enter Keyword or ID:" Then click the orange Search button.
There are 12 results currently (the FDA's document is -001 and the other 11 are comments.)
Last edited:
Just stumbled across this letter from the FDA to R.J. Reynolds concerning the dissolvable products: Letter to Industry on Dissolvable Smokeless Tobacco Products (R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company)
Elaine: My post still has not shown up, while I see two from you there. What should I do? I even posted my FDA post on this forum! This irks me no end. I spent a good deal of time on a reasoned presentation, and added an attachment to the response. What now?
P.S. Your responses were great, as always. I virtually guarantee you that NO ONE who responds has more personal experience with dissolvables than I do. And I make that perfectly clear.
P.S. Your responses were great, as always. I virtually guarantee you that NO ONE who responds has more personal experience with dissolvables than I do. And I make that perfectly clear.
TB, the only way it will get on their web site is if you call them.
Well there you have it, the official word that I've seem before but not documented in an FDA letter. Children have now officially been reclassified to 25 and under. That should raise the driving age to somewhere around 23 and the drinking age to 30.
Twenty five year old children indeed !! What planet do these FDA people live on ?
I'm sorry, but that is utterly taking the urine. Have the FDA lost the plot completely, or are they so wrapped up in their own little tyrannical anti-world that they think they can run roughshot over the rules as they go?
I have a good idea. Someone aged 23, go rob a liquor store and plead that you are under the age of criminal responsibility when caught. After all, you are a 23yo minor, right?
I really think that govt should step in and regulate how these charlatans at the FDA do their business. They are acting like criminals with a badge, as I see it.
I so agree. I guess we are just never going to encourage people to "grow up." Based on how our politicians, news/media persons, and some governmental agency persons act nowadays I shouldn't be surprised - totally discouraged and outraged - but not surprised.
I so agree. I guess we are just never going to encourage people to "grow up." Based on how our politicians, news/media persons, and some governmental agency persons act nowadays I shouldn't be surprised - totally discouraged and outraged - but not surprised.
This might be the new strategy. If you can't ban tobacco entirely, just ban selling to minors and keep raising your definition of minor to anyone under 100. After all we are all someone's children and we are developing into a nanny state.
We will all be the Government's children and they will make all the decisions for us.
the should go after cough meds.. more kids go into hospital from the grape flavored cough meds than nicotine gum, pills ext..
I also find this an inappropriate requirement:
There is an implication that the product needs to be free of all risks of accidental or improper use. Does FDA impose this requirement on any other product it regulates?
Last edited:
If you left a comment that is not being displayed:
Please contact the FDA Division of Dockets Management at 301-827-6860 to inquire about the status of your comment and let them know that you want yours to be published.
In the future, do not select "Individual Consumer" as the Submitter Category. We found out that FDA is "protecting our privacy" by not displaying these unless the commenter contacts them and asks to have it published. (What a waste of tax $$!). I am selecting "Consumer Group" from now on.
- Status
Similar threads
