1) It looks like the free nic samples will likely be a thing of the past.
2) No.
Just my interpretation, feel free to shout out, "THE SKY IS FALLING" to all within earshot.
Wall Street Journal Article about FDA regulations to be relased Thursday 4/23/14
- Thread starter 5150Marley
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
1) It looks like the free nic samples will likely be a thing of the past.
2) No.
Just my interpretation, feel free to shout out, "THE SKY IS FALLING" to all within earshot.
I'm not an American, so I don't know how the laws/rules the FDA imposes there works, but I have a few questions:
1. So free sampling is no longer allowed. Does this mean testing of juices in brick and mortar shops are no longer allowed? If so, what's to stop that shop from charging a $1 flat fee to try out the flavors? Since you paid for it, it's no longer free.
2. How can this regulation cover mods? In theory, they can sell these devices as personal vaporizers instead of e-cigarettes right? There are a lot of personal vaporizers in the market used for vaporizing essential oils. Are those governed by the FDA as well? Likewise, they can be sold as flashlights if the mod maker installs one of those 510 flashlight heads right?
3. For 0-nic juice, can these be sold as aromatic vapor fluid instead of e-cigarette juice?
It seems like it'll be difficult for them to regulate e-cigs outside cig-a-likes due to the diversity of products and devices in the market. Semantics may also play a role for non-nicotine containing juices.
1. So free sampling is no longer allowed. Does this mean testing of juices in brick and mortar shops are no longer allowed? If so, what's to stop that shop from charging a $1 flat fee to try out the flavors? Since you paid for it, it's no longer free.
2. How can this regulation cover mods? In theory, they can sell these devices as personal vaporizers instead of e-cigarettes right? There are a lot of personal vaporizers in the market used for vaporizing essential oils. Are those governed by the FDA as well? Likewise, they can be sold as flashlights if the mod maker installs one of those 510 flashlight heads right?
3. For 0-nic juice, can these be sold as aromatic vapor fluid instead of e-cigarette juice?
It seems like it'll be difficult for them to regulate e-cigs outside cig-a-likes due to the diversity of products and devices in the market. Semantics may also play a role for non-nicotine containing juices.
I'm not an American either, but this is how I see it:
1. You're probably exactly correct. Even a ten cent fee should cover costs for the eliquid used and therefore be defensible.
2. The regulations claim jurisdiction over mods. However it states that nothing that does not contain nicotine will be regulated under these rules. If they want to regulate devices, they will produce a new set of rules.
3. Nothing in the regulations claims to control anything that is not produced from tobacco. In fact I think that any attempt to do so would be beyond the reach of the law, which is a tobacco control law, and therefore be vulnerable to legal challenge. There may be ways around that -- does the USA have laws about candy cigarettes for example, which is how Australia is preventing e-cigarettes? If a 0-nic product was characterised as equivalent to a candy cigarette, then it might be possible to regulate it. But that seems like a stretch to me.
1. You're probably exactly correct. Even a ten cent fee should cover costs for the eliquid used and therefore be defensible.
2. The regulations claim jurisdiction over mods. However it states that nothing that does not contain nicotine will be regulated under these rules. If they want to regulate devices, they will produce a new set of rules.
3. Nothing in the regulations claims to control anything that is not produced from tobacco. In fact I think that any attempt to do so would be beyond the reach of the law, which is a tobacco control law, and therefore be vulnerable to legal challenge. There may be ways around that -- does the USA have laws about candy cigarettes for example, which is how Australia is preventing e-cigarettes? If a 0-nic product was characterised as equivalent to a candy cigarette, then it might be possible to regulate it. But that seems like a stretch to me.
For what it's worth, here's an even-handed assessment from Time Magazine -
Electronic Cigarette Executives Are Happy About FDA Regulations - TIME
The title of the article is misleading as the article notes that these regs are just a foundation and there can be future regulations that could ban internet sales, flavors, etc. However for now it's not nearly as bad as people anticipated.
What does give me a glimmer of hope is the 2 year window where companies (I'm assuming the big companies will have to shoulder this burden) will be able to conduct studies to show that vaping 1) is less harmful than traditional smoking and 2) is an effective means to smoking cessation. The latter should be rather easy to prove given the vast amount of anecdotal evidence that they can put together.
Electronic Cigarette Executives Are Happy About FDA Regulations - TIME
The title of the article is misleading as the article notes that these regs are just a foundation and there can be future regulations that could ban internet sales, flavors, etc. However for now it's not nearly as bad as people anticipated.
What does give me a glimmer of hope is the 2 year window where companies (I'm assuming the big companies will have to shoulder this burden) will be able to conduct studies to show that vaping 1) is less harmful than traditional smoking and 2) is an effective means to smoking cessation. The latter should be rather easy to prove given the vast amount of anecdotal evidence that they can put together.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
