White House Weakens Proposed FDA E-Cigarette Regulations

[Jake6731]

"The changes noted are simply the edits that were made prior to the April publication of the proposed regulations.

Doesn't mean a thing."

This is nothing new. Was glad to see that the FDA worrying about Diethylene glycol got removed. Geez!!

 

[twgbonehead]

I noticed that in the original proposed regs, FDA mentioned "cartridges" with no mention of tanks, rda's etc. I think that indicates their intent.

Aik,

I would like to think that is true, but I fear it is not.

If you look at the examples they give to distinguish "components" from "accessories" it's got a HUGE gap across the middle of it.
Hookah Charcoal will be regulated. Hookah tongs will not. No mention of hookahs, themselves.
E-cig cartridges will be regulated. E-cig carrying pouches will not. No mention of other heads, mods, etc.

I believe the vagueness is intentional.

However, to those who say "If it doesn't contain nicotine they can't regulate it" I will reiterate that the FDA is CLEARLY planning on regulating a number of items with no nicotine at all, such as cigarette papers, the aforementioned "hookah charcoal", etc. To assume that they "can't" regulate something that doesn't contain nicotine just doesn't hold up. Yes, they might lose if challenged in court, but that is neither a given, nor cheap (look at the expense of the last lawsuit against the FDA when they seized imports of e-ciggs a couple of years ago). Everyone calls that a "victory" but that was a victory at a cost, and fortunately there was enough money tied up in the seizures that it justified at least part of the cost, and there were players that were large enough to fund the lawsuit.

 

[twgbonehead]

OK, so if all these changes were already in the released proposal, why the flurry of news reports now? Is this just another wave of e-cig bashing? Or did something actually happen yesterday?

 

[NorthOfAtlanta]

OK, so if all these changes were already in the released proposal, why the flurry of news reports now? Is this just another wave of e-cig bashing? Or did something actually happen yesterday?

Her's your answer, politics:

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/media-general-news/576953-white-house-weakens-proposed-fda-e-cigarette-regulations-2.html#post13518527

 

[salemgold]

I SO wanted this to be good news. We sure could use some right about now

 

[skoony]

what ever the FDA regulates they have to do it i a way that current regulations allow. that is what ever is used in the consumption of a tobacco product. literally it means consumed along with the product. papers and the glue that holds them. the tobacco itself. filters because of the harm reduction regs. clearly wicks are not intended to be filters. tanks don't burn up with the product. a hot wire and a battery do not a cigarette make. i think they can regulate pre-filled cartridges as i cant see how they could meet the labeling and packaging requirements. as far as bottles,if there pharmaceutical grade they would be hard pressed to do anything there other than labeling requirements. we do put our medicines in them,don't we? that leaves the 64 dollar question. what are they going to do about ejuice. i haven't a clue.
having said all that i also believe the FDA is going to attempt to regulate the whole nine yards. every do dad,wingit,wire,wick,tank,battery,ad infidum. run it all up the flagpole and see who salutes.

regards
mike

 

[Stosh]

what ever the FDA regulates they have to do it i a way that current regulations allow. that is what ever is used in the consumption of a tobacco product. literally it means consumed along with the product. papers and the glue that holds them. the tobacco itself. filters because of the harm reduction regs. clearly wicks are not intended to be filters. tanks don't burn up with the product. a hot wire and a battery do not a cigarette make. i think they can regulate pre-filled cartridges as i cant see how they could meet the labeling and packaging requirements. as far as bottles,if there pharmaceutical grade they would be hard pressed to do anything there other than labeling requirements. we do put our medicines in them,don't we? that leaves the 64 dollar question. what are they going to do about ejuice. i haven't a clue.
having said all that i also believe the FDA is going to attempt to regulate the whole nine yards. every do dad,wingit,wire,wick,tank,battery,ad infidum. run it all up the flagpole and see who salutes.

regards
mike

they don't need anyone saluting, if they clamp down hard. Even if it's all thrown out after a multi-million dollar two or three year lawsuit---who's left in the industry at that point?

 

[AndriaD]

I was feeling all happy and excited when I saw mentions of this on twitter, when I first sat down at the computer today. I should have figured the doom-and-gloom crew would have gotten hold of it already and pronounced it "just more bad news."

I understand that the FDA and the ANTZ are out to get rid of e-cigs by whatever means, because the Powers That Be want us all to keep smoking and dying and making them money, but I wonder how many people understand that giving a lot of mental energy to a pre-determined outcome is a really good way to make it actually happen? I'm not a Pollyanna and I do believe we need to be hustling on this, helping out CASAA in whatever ways that we can (including money!!), but this constant doom-and-gloom attitude just can't be a good thing for the outcome we want to see.

Andria

 

[AgentAnia]

....having said all that i also believe the FDA is going to attempt to regulate the whole nine yards. every do dad,wingit,wire,wick,tank,battery,ad infidum. run it all up the flagpole and see who salutes.

regards
mike

I think of it as flinging at the wall and seeing what sticks...

they don't need anyone saluting, if they clamp down hard. Even if it's all thrown out after a multi-million dollar two or three year lawsuit---who's left in the industry at that point?

I agree. But perhaps as a counterpoint, remember that they also have to think about their own careers, both current and thru-the-revolving-door prospective. Also, lawsuits will cost not just industry, but the govt. too. I suspect they've been busy (and still are) trying to make the reg litigation-proof. Which of course isn't going to happen. Whether this may serve to at least limit immediate damage to the industry remains to be seen.

 

[AndriaD]

I agree. But perhaps as a counterpoint, remember that they also have to think about their own careers, both current and thru-the-revolving-door prospective. Also, lawsuits will cost not just industry, but the govt. too. I suspect they've been busy (and still are) trying to make the reg litigation-proof. Which of course isn't going to happen. Whether this may serve to at least limit immediate damage to the industry remains to be seen.

Excellent point with respect to the elected pols, too. With every one of these CTAs that CASAA has issued, which entailed writing/sending something, I *always* make a huge point of the fact that no "right-minded American" can be in favor of anything which serves to keep people hopelessly addicted to something as lethal as cigarettes, or against something which frees them from that hopeless addiction... especially those right-minded Americans who depend on re-election...

It's just one little grain of sand... but hey, one little grain of sand can be really damn annoying in your underpants...

Andria

 

[wv2win]

.............. especially those right-minded Americans who depend on re-election... ..........

Andria

Some of the most powerful politicians leading the charge to eliminate vaping, both openly and behind the scenes, are not seeking re-election, unfortunately. Although many of them view themselves as "bullet-proof" anyway and based on how many times they have been re-elected, they probably are.

 

[AndriaD]

Well I was very pleased at the letter I received today from my Representative, Rob Woodall. I harangue him quite frequently on several topics including e-cigs, and he always sends a seemingly-personal letter back to me in email, which I do think is very nice -- it's probably not REALLY personal, but *someone* in his office actually read whatever I sent and responded to it. This is the letter I received today:

Dear Mrs. Duncan:

Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition to regulating electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes). It is good to hear from you, and I can assure you that we are in complete agreement about additional federal regulations.

I generally believe we need to move away from the idea of the Federal government regulating in a broad and expansive way. If e-cigarettes are to be further regulated, such measures should be developed and implemented at the state and local level rather than by unelected bureaucrats in Washington.

Thank you again for contacting me. If I can ever be of service in the future, please don't hesitate to call upon me.

Sincerely,
Signature
Rob Woodall
Member of Congress

Notice he doesn't totally decry the idea of further regulations, just decries it at the *federal level*. I'm not entirely sure how to feel about that, but I am glad to know that, at the very least, he is with us in this tussle with the FDA. Congress controls the money, after all.

Andria

 

[MD_Boater]

At least at the local level, you can pull up a chair in front of their desk.