Tobacco Control Act. We must find a middle ground

[tumbafox]

One way or another, vaping will live long and prosper in my opinion despite the implementation of the Tobacco Control Act which is now law. The FDA will promulgate regulations. Will they be reasonable? That should be our goal. We have to deal with it.

The worst case scenario in my opinion would be that e-cig products would have to be sold through brick and mortar suppliers, i.e. Tobacco shops, Convenience Stores, Drug Stores, Gas Stations, vaping Stores (which would flourish) due to the "face-to-face" transaction requirement of the Tobacco Control Act.

Regulation may have a benefit by protecting us from buying tainted juice from online suppliers who are springing up exponentially. We all take risks buying juice that is made in someones kitchen somewhere and sold online. There should be some sort of safeguards.

Can the e-cig industry be trusted to police itself with no regulation or consequences for wrongdoing. I doubt it. So far we have been lucky. I DIY my own juice because I don't know who I can trust anymore.

People have been smoking for thousands of years while there was no internet. We are spoiled. I feel terrible for the online vendors who might have to shut down if they can't convert to brick and mortar distribution.

I know for a fact that eliquidplanet is thinking ahead as they have already started selling there juice in tobacco shops in nassau and queens county NY. Sometimes I buy my juice from them at a local tobacco shop. Its a little more costly since the store has to make a profit but its obtainable. They also have a little retail shop on Long Island, NY.

Its seems that the biggest concern of legislators is that the Internet and pre-paid debit cards make it possible for minors to obtain tobacco products whereas they could not otherwise in a retail store.

I also know several vapers who vape 0% nic juice and are very satisfied. They have broken their physical dependence on nicotine yet still enjoy the oral sensation of vaping.

Frankly, even though I dread the loss of my freedom to shop online, I have always been stunned that nicotine could be so easily purchased online and via mail or even in stores. It is a very hazardous substance.

I always wondered what might happen is a shipment containing nicotine bottled in glass or plastic containers would develop a serious leak and perhaps the liquid might spill onto the skin of an unsuspecting postal carrier or package delivery employee and theoretically that person could get more than very ill.

I have enough nicotine in my apartment that is scares me sometimes.

So we may have to vape 0% nic juice while wearing nicotine patches to get our fix in the future. But we will be able to vape. In any case, I will have enough nicjuice stored to last me for years. I might have to freeze it in order to preserve its shelflife if thats possible but I for one am not one bit worried.

There are many other dangerous items that are regularly traded online. The world is changing. There will have to regulation and safeguards.

I bought a high powered laser pointer online and I know it can be used to cause harm.

We do have to protect our kids and our security as a nation after all.

Mankind is facing a new predicament due to the information age. It has good and bad ramifications.

Who knows whats next. But for today I am vaping on my Provari and am happy.

 

[rothenbj]

Make me vomit. Forget that Provari, forget the DYI, forget the nic bottles. Pick up your 4mg sealed cartridges to be used in your 110mah e cigs that you can pick up, with proper identification, at you local convenience store.

I tend to agree with the idea of regulating the high nic contend bottles used by DYIers, there are dangers in delivery and users mixing from these supplies. There's no reason that this type liquid could't be limited to sales to registered suppliers. DYIers can still DYI to with cut supplies.

Some common sense promulgation makes sense. However, I don't believe we can get that from the FDA without the aid of the legal system. The internet provides quick market corrections for those suppliers providing inferior product. I'd like to see the industry develop a trade association and police itself, but it may be too late.

Sure, there would still be an underground, but the overall health benefit for the country could be serious handicapped if the FDA does the anticipated.

 

[Vocalek]

com·pro·mise/ˈkämprəˌmīz/

Noun:

An agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions.

Compromise is only possible when the two sides are fairly evenly matched in power. If one side has the vast majority of the power, the weaker side has only two choices:

Capitulate

Fight


If you believe that the worst case scenario is that we will have to make our purchases at brick and mortar stores, then you haven't been reading Bill Godshall's analysis of the wording of the Tobacco Act. The worst case scenario is much worse.

Section 905 calls for extensive proof of "substantial equivalence" for marketing any tobacco product that was introduced to the market later than February 15, 2007. (See Page 1794).

So, assuming that the FDA doesn't come up with some trick to ban the products altogether, they could insist that we give up the newer improved products that are working well for us and go back to the Ruyan RN 4081 model that is made to look like a cigarette, that uses batteries that go dead after a few hours (take plenty of spare, charged batteries with you!), with cartridges that hold 1/3 ml of liquid soaked into a fibrous filling that begins to shed threads for you to inhale when the liquid level drops too low.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-111publ31/pdf/PLAW-111publ31.pdf

The odds of someone becoming very ill by being exposed to nicotine liquid from a package that has sprung a leak is rather slim. The liquid, which contains from 0% to 3.6% of nicotine on average, is nowhere near as poisonous as we have been led to believe. Many of us have been spilling liquid onto our hands for years with no ill effects.

I don't believe that legislators are really concerned about minors ordering tobacco products over the internet. That's an excuse. They want to quash internet sales to preserve and protect taxes.

I'm sorry, but vaping 0% nic juice while wearing a nicotine patch will not do it for me. If the nicotine patch didn't work by itself, why would vaping 0% nic juice make it work any better?

Since I have insufficient power to compromise, and I have no desire to capitulate, I'm left with the only other option: Fight.

 

[tumbafox]

Cool heads my friend.

I have seen the number of vapers rise from a few hundred thousand when I started vaping three years ago to over 3 million estimated today.

Thats a lot of collective political power. The politicians are aware of the numbers. Some say Obama even vapes. Maybe its just a rumor.

I worked in the cable news media during several elections and the margin by which elections are decided today is very slim. If you remember the Bush - Gore race it came down to less than a thousand votes in Florida to pick a President. There is not much opposition to vaping by the general public that I know of. Thats favorable for us.

I'm pretty sure the FDA does not have the power to tax by regulation. That would take new laws.

We do have power. Also doctors and researchers are becoming more aware every day. Every Vaper should be educating their doctor about e-cigs and how it has changed their lives. Two of my doctors now suggest vaping to patients that cannot quit and where medication failed because I did my little part and educated them. I personally have spread the word to over ten doctors.

We need to connect with all the e-cig users that are not members of ECF and thats the majority.

There are many studies going on right now. Legitimate science is turning in our favor. This information has to be collected and presented in an intelligent way to authorities.

We won't win if we behave like militia men.

The tide is turning and that is why I am not worried.

It took only one case to give women the right to end a life without even giving her name or a reason.

We need clear rational leadership. Its happening.

The cost of healthcare for the ill effects of smoking and second hand smoke caused by the 30 + million who still smoke exceeds any tax revenue generated by the cigarette industry.

I know how ECF feels about spam but spam is actually legal when done properly

Read about the Can-Spam Act which outlines how e-mail can be used for commercial advertising purposes. Check out:
http://business.ftc.gov/documents/bus61-can-spam-act-compliance-guide-business

Done with legal advice the ECF, CASSA, whoever can start sending millions of legal messages to citizens. After all isn't all Television advertising and all advertising for that matter SPAM.

Information IS POWER so no one is going to get away with sweeping this under the rug.

The Tobacco Control Act is not just targeting e-cigs. We just got swept up in it because the FDA lost is lawsuit when it tried to ban e-cigs.

The result is the e-cigs were redefined as Tobacco related devices. Be grateful the FDA lost its case in the first place.

That bought us time.

We should be using this time wisely.

 

[tumbafox]

By the way. The word compromise is also a verb as in "to compromise".

 

[lawnman3]

they just need to GO AWAY... AND BOTHER THE ONES WHO SPIT IN CANS AND BOTTLES FOR THEY ARE THE ONES SPITTING THERE JUICES IN OUR WALK WAYS GARBAGE CANS AND WERE EVER THEY WANT TO SPIT THERE JUICES NOT TO MENTION THERE KISSING OUR LADIES AND MOST ALREADY HAVE GUM CANCER ..

funny part is the gubment already knows about this and still allows us to buy the stuff...

lawnman3...


my ..... is they should keep there spit to there self... not that i have not used dip and snuff but i didnt spit all over the place its just simply nasty in my opp..

 

[kristin]

The Tobacco Control Act is not just targeting e-cigs. We just got swept up in it because the FDA lost is lawsuit when it tried to ban e-cigs.

The result is the e-cigs were redefined as Tobacco related devices. Be grateful the FDA lost its case in the first place.

That bought us time.

We should be using this time wisely.

Umm...what do you think we are doing?

The FDA loss was in no small part due to the efforts of organized vapers, including CASAA, getting involved. CASAA actually joined in an amicus brief that was filed. We are grateful - but we weren't just sitting on the sidelines with our fingers crossed - we helped the FDA lose. If we don't stay on top of them, they will try to win in other ways - like regulating e-cigarettes to the point where they are completely ineffective, hard to get and overpriced. They do not have a hand in taxation, but don't fool yourself that their policies aren't influenced by the demands of legislators looking to keep their tobacco tax revenue flowing. But their real boss is not politicians nor the legislators - its the drug industry. They have pretty much made that clear. Dr. David Graham (former senior drug safety researcher at the FDA & whistle blower) revealed that a former office director for the Office of Drug Safety came right out and stated to him "The [pharmaceutical] industry is our client [as opposed to the public.]"

This kind of culture in the FDA, along with FDA higher-ups who are unapologetic ANTZ, guarantees that the FDA will do everything in its power to eliminate competition for the drug companies' nicotine products. Since they can no longer ban them as drug delivery devices, their likely plan of attack will be to make them as unappealing to smokers as possible through excessive and unreasonable regulations. We would be foolish to think they have any intention to compromise. We, as consumers and stakeholders, must be there every step of the way to fight for REASONABLE regulations that don't favor ineffective and expensive NRT.

Allowing the FDA to regulate e-cigarettes back into the e-cigarette dark ages or worse is not a compromise - it's the FDA and ANTZ getting exactly what they wanted and e-cigarette users losing.

 

[kristin]

they just need to GO AWAY... AND BOTHER THE ONES WHO SPIT IN CANS AND BOTTLES FOR THEY ARE THE ONES SPITTING THERE JUICES IN OUR WALK WAYS GARBAGE CANS AND WERE EVER THEY WANT TO SPIT THERE JUICES NOT TO MENTION THERE KISSING OUR LADIES AND MOST ALREADY HAVE GUM CANCER ..

funny part is the gubment already knows about this and still allows us to buy the stuff...

lawnman3...


my ..... is they should keep there spit to there self... not that i have not used dip and snuff but i didnt spit all over the place its just simply nasty in my opp..

I seriously hope this post is satire and meant to be ironic.

 

[DC2]

So we may have to vape 0% nic juice while wearing nicotine patches to get our fix in the future.

Absolutely, completely, and totally unacceptable.
And if that happened, I for one would go back to smoking.

 

[zoiDman]

I’m not going to get into this one because as Kristin has pointed out, I love a Good Debate.

But why is the Focus Always on Healt and Safety?

Every time I read one of these type threads the Litany is Always “e-Cig are Safe.”, “Second Hand Vape Isn’t Harmful”, “The FDA wants to Ban e-Cigarettes for No Reason”, "There's more Nicotine in Eggplant... Bla Bla Bla".

Isn’t what is Really going on here about Money? Or maybe the Lack of Money Reaching the people who feel they deserve it. ie: Big Business and Governments.

I’m not going to “Debate” this issue but I know one thing. Governments, State and Federal, can’t Tax Something until it is Regulated. And Big Tobacco Companies have been shown to be Friends of Government when it comes to Taxes.

Funny if the ANTZ where just Tools of Big Tobacco. Just so the Sham of Health and Safety could be Placated. Only to have Big Tobacco do an End Around and be the ones Selling e-Liquids in a Regulated and Taxed market.

---

BTW – Without Compromise, there are NO Long Term Solutions.

 

[DC2]

BTW – Without Compromise, there are NO Long Term Solutions.

I agree with Elaine, there won't be compromise as long as we lack any significant power.
The more power we have, the better our position will be when the time comes.

So we need to fight, to show our power.
And we need every vaper to help, because this is "all hands on deck" time.

JMO

 

[kristin]

Trying to compromise with the FDA over e-cigarettes is like trying to compromise over a dead gazelle with a hungry lion.

No matter how much you want to compromise, the lion is going to do whatever it wants.

 

[BoiseMike]

Tyranny does not deserve compromise. Let's just say you give in 50% as a compromise. Then once you're used to it they come back and you compromise away another 50% or what you had. Now you have 25% of what you started with. They keep coming back and you compromise away everything by the time you're done. The power hungry government types really don't want to allow you individual freedom or responsibility. They realize that if you are happy compromising then they just have to come back again in awhile to gain more power. The frog in a pot scenario. Meanwhile we think we're actually retaining a sense of self-determination as we lose all freedom. It's been going on for over 100 years in this country. Now we're a country of sheep that feel priveleged to grovel and compromise for our meager bits of freedom. Look at how far smoking bans have gone. Our current government doesn't deserve compromise. I won't say what I think it really deserves, but I hope you get the idea.

 

[zoiDman]

........................

 

[TomCatt]

Trying to compromise with the FDA over e-cigarettes is like trying to compromise over a dead gazelle with a hungry lion.

No matter how much you want to compromise, the lion is going to do whatever it wants.

All Hail the ANALOGY QUEEN!

Good one Kristin!

 

[zoiDman]

If a Vaper considers this a form of "Compromise", should a Vaper consider it a Good or a Bad thing?

Hat’s off to you DC2 for your effort. And an Encouraging dialog with the Cal-AG office.

It sounded like a Do-able Compromise. Age Verification for Unrestricted Sales.

 

[sailorman]

Tyranny does not deserve compromise. Let's just say you give in 50% as a compromise. Then once you're used to it they come back and you compromise away another 50% or what you had. Now you have 25% of what you started with. They keep coming back and you compromise away everything by the time you're done. The power hungry government types really don't want to allow you individual freedom or responsibility. They realize that if you are happy compromising then they just have to come back again in awhile to gain more power. The frog in a pot scenario. Meanwhile we think we're actually retaining a sense of self-determination as we lose all freedom. It's been going on for over 100 years in this country. Now we're a country of sheep that feel priveleged to grovel and compromise for our meager bits of freedom. Look at how far smoking bans have gone. Our current government doesn't deserve compromise. I won't say what I think it really deserves, but I hope you get the idea.

The kind of behavior and attitude I bolded is not inherent in "government types". Don't fool yourself into thinking that this is some immutable law of nature that applies to "government types" or government. This isn't about tyranny or power, it's about the oldest motive in history...money. Any business or governmental body that tries to act like a business, will defer and cater to the biggest, wealthiest client they have. If a citizen, or a small business, needs to be sacrificed at the altar of a larger client, so be it. That's what happens when government is run "like a business". So be careful what you wish for.

Kristin hit the nail on the head with her quote from the FDA guy. It's about money, not power. This is a direct result of a philosophy of gov't. regulation that, beginning in the Reagan admin., strayed from the values of public service and carried through subsequent administrations right up to the current one. This new "business friendly" philosophy of gov't. demands that regulatory bodies view the industries they are charged with regulating as their "clients". Citizens are mere consumers of what the client is offering. This trend is carried to the ultimate absurdity in the FDA, which is no longer a governmental body at all, but is a privately funded agency, granted regulatory power while dependent for its very existence on the corporations it was created to regulate. The FDA is government run like a business and, naturally, it will defer to the demands of it's biggest customers, namely Big Pharma.

The attitude isn't limited to the FDA. I heard, with my own ears, an identical comment from the head of the Army Corp. of Engineers as he explained that his job had evolved from looking after the interests of the environment and the public to "facilitating" the approval of permits. His "clients" are no longer the public, they are the shipping and dredging interests. The public are mere consumers of his clients' products.

The result of this new form of "business-freindly" government can be seen in all it's dramatic glory in the BP oil spill. From the lax permitting process, to the inspection process, to the way the "clean up" was handled. The whole affair reeked, and still reeks, of government officials bending over backward to placate the interests of their big business "clients" and ensure their future careers as lobbyists and executives in the industries they are supposed to be regulating.

So, no. This isn't about some inherent tendency for governments to grab power.
There are far fewer control-freak megalomaniacs in government than it might appear.
But there is no lack of ambitious people who seek to pave their way to a lucrative career in the private sector.
This is about Corporate Influence.
More specifically, this is about a phenomenon known as "Regulatory Capture".
Your ire, although justified, is misplaced and would naturally lead to solutions that are likely to be worse than the problem.

The solution is to slam the "revolving door", prohibit any regulator from taking employment in an industry he is supposed to be regulating, remove industry insiders from the regulatory agencies, muzzle the lobbyists and restore the adversarial system that worked quite well for nearly 100 years. Regulatory agencies need to be regulating and not "facilitating". WE are their "clients", not big business.

 

[sailorman]

I agree with Elaine, there won't be compromise as long as we lack any significant power.
The more power we have, the better our position will be when the time comes.

So we need to fight, to show our power.
And we need every vaper to help, because this is "all hands on deck" time.

JMO

I like the sentiment but I fear the best we can do is "rear guard " activity to temporarily delay the result of whatever BT and BP want.
Fact is, compared to BP, we have no power. In politics, money is power. When vapers organize to fund friends of vaping and outspend foes of vaping, we will win. Elections will never be won or lost on the issue of vaping, but on the size of a particular candidate's war chest. When BP really wants a vaping advocate to lose, they will lose. When they want an ant-vape candidate to win, they will win, statistically 96% of the time.

Once the growth of e-cigs really starts to threaten BP and BT, watch for PR and media smear campaigns to begin in earnest. These may even be an more efficient way to spend money than direct political contributions. Mainstream media is happy to have another new source of revenue, especially in off-election years. They will echo BP and demonize e-cigs in "news" reports. They will further ingratiate themselves to an industry that they are already dependent on for ad revenue.

Meanwhile, as long as BP or BT can "money bomb" any friendly politician, we are just a group of people with our fingers in a dike. BP and BT won't take their eyes off the prize. They'll continue to fight. Year after year. When they need new politicians, they'll buy them. They'll lose and they'll come back again and again. When necessary, they'll buy another politician or two or three and fight again until they win. I've seen this repeatedly with other issues over the years. Corporations never just give up and go away. They're persistence is infinite and their resources nearly so.

Statistics prove that ~96% of elections are won by the candidate with the largest war chest. How many pro-ecig state, or even federal, legislators can withstand an assault by an opponent who has received a million or two or five from the likes of GSK? E-cigs are not a pivotal election issue for the vast majority of people, and they never will be. The influence of massive money will be felt when, how, and where big money wants it to be. As long as elections are glorified auctions, all the letter writing and etc. will achieve no more than temporary respite. That's not to say temporary respite is not a worthy goal; it is. We will win battles. But don't expect to win the war until Citizens United is overturned and elections are not just auctions where the highest bidder gets the lawmaker who will do his bidding. Politicians are like anyone else. They dance with the ones who brung 'em. No politician expects a $3,000,000/yr. lobbyist job with the e-cig industry when he's out of office. PHARMA has lots of them.

Sorry if I sound pessimistic or cynical. Forty years of astute political observation informs my pessimism. And, as they say; One man's cynicism is another man's cold, hard reality.

 

[Semiretired]

Absolutely, completely, and totally unacceptable.
And if that happened, I for one would go back to smoking.

The problem is so would a lot of other people. Is that what they really want? I sure hope not. I avoided ecigs in the beginning because I thought that the only thing available were the gas station version and there was only one place within 20 miles carrying them. Now there are 6 places carrying them that I know of and everyone of them are the cheap disposable junk versions that do not last more than a few days and cost more than a provari to operate for a month...

 

[Thulium]

But why is the Focus Always on Healt and Safety?

Because we are talking about a product that purports to replace the act of lighting something on FIRE and inhaling the SMOKE--an activity that is a natural threat to health and safety.

Every time I read one of these type threads the Litany is Always “e-Cig are Safe.”, “Second Hand Vape Isn’t Harmful”, “The FDA wants to Ban e-Cigarettes for No Reason”, "There's more Nicotine in Eggplant... Bla Bla Bla".

I don't see anyone saying that e-cigs are safe. NOTHING in existence is safe. E-cigarettes and other smoke-free products are "not a safe alternative" in exactly the same way that reading books is not a safe alternative to burning them.

Isn’t what is Really going on here about Money? Or maybe the Lack of Money Reaching the people who feel they deserve it. ie: Big Business and Governments.

Yes, it is most certainly all about money...but there's a real good chance that the biggest profiteers on the whole thing don't even realize how much it is about money. ANTZ actually believe most of the lies they spew and think they are actually doing the world a favor by enacting draconian laws to demean, demoralize, and denormalize people who are unwilling to quit or who have successfully quit smoking but have been unable to maintain long term nicotine abstinence.

I’m not going to “Debate” this issue but I know one thing. Governments, State and Federal, can’t Tax Something until it is Regulated. And Big Tobacco Companies have been shown to be Friends of Government when it comes to Taxes.

Actually unregulated products are taxed all the time: Just go to any GNC in a state with a sales tax.

Gigantic Corporations like those associated with Tobacco and Pharmaceuticals do tend to support increased taxes and regulations on their products because, although this increases their overhead--those costs are passed onto the consumer in the form of higher prices in exchange for the fact that it makes it nearly impossible to compete in the market unless you are also a gigantic corporation with nearly unlimited resources. Who doesn't like higher prices and less competition? The consumer, that's who.

Funny if the ANTZ where just Tools of Big Tobacco. Just so the Sham of Health and Safety could be Placated. Only to have Big Tobacco do an End Around and be the ones Selling e-Liquids in a Regulated and Taxed market.

---

BTW – Without Compromise, there are NO Long Term Solutions.

I hope you're wrong about that. Like Elaine said, compromise requires that BOTH sides make concessions. We've given up lighting anything on fire and inhaling smoke, and we're probably willing to give a little bit of ground on where we are allowed to vape indiscretely and/or what flavors should be available in retail stores and maybe even pay a reasonable tax....but exactly what concessions do you think FDA and their "clients" who sell BILLIONS of dollars worth of drugs and other products every year to treat diseases caused by smoking will be willing to concede?? We've resorted to calling them Anti-Nicotine/Tobacco ZEALOTS for a reason.