Valid reasons to keep flavors legal

[Berylanna]

One problem with campaigning to keep flavors legal is that most deciders on this don't have a history of smoking, so we know things they don't know. We need to express them.

Even though cigarette ads always talked about flavor and smokers talk about flavor, I don't know ONE smoker who started because of flavor. It was the very fast buzz and the feeling the cigarette gave us. The flavor was, frankly, horrible. We quickly learned to tolerate it.

But e-cigs do NOT give that fast hit and buzz. I don't think they are attractive for a fast feeling of relief either. No immediate buzz, no fast relief, basically they are MISSING what grabs combustible-users and addicts them. It's too subtle to "grab" you.

So, to grab smokers, e-cigs have to replace that fast buzz with longer-term relief like patches and gum, BUT. Patches and gum don't work because they give no pleasure to replace the pleasure of the buzz. As a long-term smoker, when I put the vape to my lips, I need SOMETHING immediately pleasurable to compensate me for the buzz I am NOT getting, to help me keep from reaching for a combustible.

For most of us, that is vapor AND FLAVOR.

E-cigs need to be attractive to HUMANS in order to attract smokers away from combustibles.

 

[ninfreak]

not worried bout the flavors.....it would be easy for vendors to bypass it......sell just unflavored nic and sell premixed flavorings as food flavorings on the side...not a damned thing the fda can do about that. the real issue is banning nic juice sales and only allowing prefilled cartos

 

[Berylanna]

not worried bout the flavors.....it would be easy for vendors to bypass it......sell just unflavored nic and sell premixed flavorings as food flavorings on the side...not a damned thing the fda can do about that. the real issue is banning nic juice sales and only allowing prefilled cartos

Good point. I had the equation backwards, I was picturing myself adding nic to flavored nic-free juices.

It's hard enough to convince people that vaping is not evil, it will be even harder to convince them that pandering to 2 big tobacco companies and the pharma companies does NOT constitute an acceptable level of freedom to keep me from smoking.

 

[Uncle Willie]

not worried bout the flavors.....it would be easy for vendors to bypass it......sell just unflavored nic and sell premixed flavorings as food flavorings on the side...not a damned thing the fda can do about that. the real issue is banning nic juice sales and only allowing prefilled cartos

It's not a ban we're facing, it's regulation .. vendors that are able to pass thru the approval process will likely still be able to offer the nic solution, although it may be limited to 4mg unless you have a permit or prescription to buy higher strength .. or, they may do nothing .. who knows ..

 

[the_vape_nerd]

i have a smoke shop right by my house that advertises flavor your can drip onto a real cigarette..so the flavor thing is a pretty dumb thing for the fda to try and bother with...maybe prefilled carts wont be allowed to have flavor

the choke point is going to be liquid nicotine...this is the only part of the equation that they can bother with...everything esle is easy to work around ...

 

[Berylanna]

i have a smoke shop right by my house that advertises flavor your can drip onto a real cigarette..so the flavor thing is a pretty dumb thing for the fda to try and bother with...maybe prefilled carts wont be allowed to have flavor

the choke point is going to be liquid nicotine...this is the only part of the equation that they can bother with...everything esle is easy to work around ...

Which means the Big tobacco and 1-2 Big Vaping companies that have millions of $$ will lobby the FDA to keep it to their approved prefilled carts that make them a huge profit. Trouble is, the juices that keep me off combustibles are made by small vendors. And I can't think of anything SHORT to say to make the point...to the average non-vaper, if they give us ANYTHING, it should be enough.

I'm praying the FDA will silently ignore anybody not making health claims.

 

[ninfreak]

It's not a ban we're facing, it's regulation .. vendors that are able to pass thru the approval process will likely still be able to offer the nic solution, although it may be limited to 4mg unless you have a permit or prescription to buy higher strength .. or, they may do nothing .. who knows ..

i see the fda trying to regulate it to the point where it is now with blu and other over the counter ecigs. only prefilled cartos. they can very very easily take away nic juice, just by deeming it medicinal. bp and bt want it for themselves, and the fda will see to it that only they have control. it is just a waiting game atm and noone at all knows what is gonna happen. just my speculation over the matter

 

[zoiDman]

It's not a ban we're facing, it's regulation ...

I think this is the Mindset that needs to be Broken. There is going to be e-Cigs in the Future.

But it is going to be the Form that we get e-Liquids in that I think people are going to have a Hissy Fit over.

That and the Price.

 

[Uncle Willie]

i see the fda trying to regulate it to the point where it is now with blu and other over the counter ecigs. only prefilled cartos. they can very very easily take away nic juice, just by deeming it medicinal. bp and bt want it for themselves, and the fda will see to it that only they have control. it is just a waiting game atm and noone at all knows what is gonna happen. just my speculation over the matter

While I don't disagree with your post, I will say there is actually more money to be made by keeping it non-prescription .. in 2012, the last numbers I saw were $300 million in USA sales of PV's and related .. the projected sales in 2015 are expected to exceed $1 Billion .. under the current wild west type industry .. that of course does not factor in any regs slowing things down ..

Now, if the nic were by RX only, there will naturally be a degree of people that will get it in a higher MG thru alternative methods .. however, the growth from new users will be choked due to the need for an RX .. IOW, the new user will think it's too much hassle and cost ..

So, at least in the case of BT, letting the market grow thru no or little regulation is the much wiser choice .. just step in and take it over slowy by targeting new users .. much like BLU is already doing ..

 

[Berylanna]

While I don't disagree with your post, I will say there is actually more money to be made by keeping it non-prescription .. in 2012, the last numbers I saw were $300 million in USA sales of PV's and related .. the projected sales in 2015 are expected to exceed $1 Billion .. under the current wild west type industry .. that of course does not factor in any regs slowing things down ..

Now, if the nic were by RX only, there will naturally be a degree of people that will get it in a higher MG thru alternative methods .. however, the growth from new users will be choked due to the need for an RX .. IOW, the new user will think it's too much hassle and cost ..

So, at least in the case of BT, letting the market grow thru no or little regulation is the much wiser choice .. just step in and take it over slowy by targeting new users .. much like BLU is already doing ..

They have already been told by the courts that it must be treated as a tobacco product, not a drug, hence no prescriptions. However, the Family Tobacco Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control act of 2009, passed and signed in 2010, gives them a new category, "New and Innovative Products" to reduce smoking and tobacco harm, which they are supposed to develop a "fast track" for.

Note, that before this act, they would not have had any say on the matter. But now they get to define a "fast track" and so far they are defining it as the same as the slow track, massive proof to be submitted to the FDA along with massive fees from the corporation requesting approval for their PARTICULAR product as "Innovative."

If the FDA "deems" ecigs to be tobacco products in April, they can then decide what their rules will be unless congress stands ready to amend the act to remove non-combustibles from the FDA's purview, which we think will be a very hard sell.

However, the more we can get NON-VAPERS that love us to understand that our needs are real and not whininess, BEFORE that April deeming, the better the odds that we can either make a case for what we need or mobilize congresscritters to rein in the FDA's power-and-money play.

Some of the things I've been posting on this board lately have been results of talking to my family and friends and finding this HUGE gulf between what they would "guess" is fair and reality. This thread is from Sunday night's dinner at a wonderful Japanese grill house with my brother and his wife. These two CARE about me and it still took too much explaining, imagine how strangers will react!

 

[the_vape_nerd]

They have already been told by the courts that it must be treated as a tobacco product, not a drug, hence no prescriptions. However, the Family Tobacco Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control act of 2009, passed and signed in 2010, gives them a new category, "New and Innovative Products" to reduce smoking and tobacco harm, which they are supposed to develop a "fast track" for.

Note, that before this act, they would not have had any say on the matter. But now they get to define a "fast track" and so far they are defining it as the same as the slow track, massive proof to be submitted to the FDA along with massive fees from the corporation requesting approval for their PARTICULAR product as "Innovative."

If the FDA "deems" ecigs to be tobacco products in April, they can then decide what their rules will be unless congress stands ready to amend the act to remove non-combustibles from the FDA's purview, which we think will be a very hard sell.

However, the more we can get NON-VAPERS that love us to understand that our needs are real and not whininess, BEFORE that April deeming, the better the odds that we can either make a case for what we need or mobilize congresscritters to rein in the FDA's power-and-money play.

Some of the things I've been posting on this board lately have been results of talking to my family and friends and finding this HUGE gulf between what they would "guess" is fair and reality. This thread is from Sunday night's dinner at a wonderful Japanese grill house with my brother and his wife. These two CARE about me and it still took too much explaining, imagine how strangers will react!

On reading the decision once over, I was of the opinion that the court held e-cigs to be tobacco products but it was pointed out by someone here that the court made no such holding. On re-reading the decision I think I agree. The court didn't make a legal declaration, i.e., these are a tobacco product. What the decision did was say "these are not drug delivery devices, you MIGHT be able to exercise your regulatory authority under the authority you have to regulate tobacco products, but you can't regulate them as drug delivery devices".

 

[patkin]

I started vaping last year with the ego c upgrade and cartos (no tanks) and have been wondering when those came out since the FDA has said products developed after 2007 will have to be newly assessed by them. I know the upgrade is fairly new but how long have the ego C & T been around? cartomizers?

 

[Berylanna]

I started vaping last year with the ego c upgrade and cartos (no tanks) and have been wondering when those came out since the FDA has said products developed after 2007 will have to be newly assessed by them. I know the upgrade is fairly new but how long have the ego C & T been around? cartomizers?

In the U.S. most of us think they cannot regulate anything with no nicotine as a tobacco product. All my batteries and mods come alone, no juice included. ViVi Novas also do not ship with juice. So we're really ONLY worried about e-liquid to fill them with.

I'd assume EMPTY cartos would be the same.

The rest of the world is another story. And I have a business trip to Prague coming up...I'll just hope personal use is not an issue.

 

[patkin]

In the U.S. most of us think they cannot regulate anything with no nicotine as a tobacco product. All my batteries and mods come alone, no juice included. ViVi Novas also do not ship with juice. So we're really ONLY worried about e-liquid to fill them with.

I'd assume EMPTY cartos would be the same.

The rest of the world is another story. And I have a business trip to Prague coming up...I'll just hope personal use is not an issue.

I can't find it a CASAA or here (thanks to the "new and improved" search engine) but manufacturers will have to jump through hoops to get any new products cleared... those on the market pre-2007. I will keep trying when I have time and post a link here.

Edit: found it http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...products-eliminate-many-most-companies-3.html and refreshed my memory. If the FDA goes the way Goodall talks about, it will be a matter of not being able sell both equipment (hardware) and nic-containing liquid at the same place. So, most likely, the situation will be akin to buying glasses today where you go a few steps away from the optometrist to the glasses vender... or, in this case, follow a site link but the two companies cannot be affiliated though will send each other business. So I guess my batteries will be sold somewhere.

 

[2coils]

Its ridicules for the FDA to go after flavors. I don't see how they can declare e-cigs have to be tobacco flavored. That's implying that nicotine tastes like tobacco. E-cigs are not analogs. Not even close! Who are they to determine what an e-cig SHOULD taste like? I don't know if I am explaining myself clearly. IMO that would be like saying cough syrup shouldn't have appealing flavors. Whats the difference?

 

[Berylanna]

Its ridicules for the FDA to go after flavors. I don't see how they can declare e-cigs have to be tobacco flavored. That's implying that nicotine tastes like tobacco. E-cigs are not analogs. Not even close! Who are they to determine what an e-cig SHOULD taste like? I don't know if I am explaining myself clearly. IMO that would be like saying cough syrup shouldn't have appealing flavors. Whats the difference?

They COULD say cough syrup should not have appealing flavors.

But there isn't a huge untapped market for companies to pay the FDA millions of dollars in fees to get new cough syrups approved. And there are not a lot of "cough patch" makers lobbying for "cough syrup" to be banned. And cough syrup bottles don't look like something EVIL that has killed lots of peoples' loved ones, and there aren't any states receiving billions of $$ in court settlement fees from cough syrup profits.

 

[2coils]

Believe me I get it. I am frustrated because cigarettes TASTE like tobacco because they ARE tobacco. I dont believe attaching the same label to e liquid is justified.