FDA Why are makers of Cigalikes lobbying to ban vaping?

[jdake3265]

RJ Reynolds, maker of Vuse e-cigarettes is lobbying to the FDA to put a ban on different PV. Now why would they submit a 119 page document to the FDA to do this? Because they are selfish and wealthy. They are not trying to ban cigalike products like theirs, they are trying to ban RBA's, RTA's, even tanks, and all the packaged juices that go with them. These big tobacco companies must not realize that in order for someone to vape it doesn't even need to resemble one of their cancer sticks. When I saw this I was genuinely shocked, i had known about big tobacco companies trying to ban vaping, but I did not know that companies with their own vaping products were in that boat. This just means that all vapers and modders need to be extremely cautious in these coming months and years, we need to show the FDA that there is no problem with the PV's that we love and cherish.
Withe the FDA on the prowl stay vigilant and stay safe.

BTW the Vuse is actually pretty good for a cigalike, user friendly, smart chip inside makes it easy to know when to replace cartridge, and charges fast. I mod mine anyway so I can put my own juice on it. That is when I am away from my mods.

 

[KurrptSenate]

control...

 

[jdake3265]

control...

good point, they should just keep their influence and money away from our PV's.

 

[Firestorm]

These big tobacco companies must not realize that in order for someone to vape it doesn't even need to resemble one of their cancer sticks.

BT absolutely realizes this, they just want people to use their products exclusively by banning competition. DIY and rebuildables are not in their interest - they want people to buy their disposable cartridges through their physical distribution channels as the only means to vape.

 

[Kent C]

It is more extreme in that they're trying to get gov't to ban all other products, but it is the same intent of any proprietary aspect of any product - like how the threading and spacing of certain Kanger coils don't fit Vision products and visa versa.... so you use their products, not others.

Almost all companies would like to be able to do this if they could. IF your local B&M could get local gov't to shut down all others, they would. It is gov't that makes that difference. A private company can't do that by themselves - iow, they have no control - they need the force of gov't to do it. If gov't allows the free market to exist, then the best products at the best price win out. Crappy products and bad business practices are forced (by the business' own actions) to 'exit the market'.

 

[zoiDman]

RJR is just Doing what it feels will be Best for RJR in a Regulated Market.

Doesn't Matter if what they Purpose will Completely Decimate the e-Cigarette Industry. As long as it is Good for RJR, that All that Matters.

 

[Augmented Dog]

control...

More than just control - monopoly. They see themselves losing considerable dollars from tobacco sales and want no competition for market share in the burgeoning PV and vaping industry to which they arrived late at the gate. They still have nothing to offer other than the faux cigarettes that most vapers avoid as ardently as analogs.

 

[KurrptSenate]

control is to monopoly

as

sharing is to commune

 

[Augmented Dog]

It is more extreme in that they're trying to get gov't to ban all other products, but it is the same intent of any proprietary aspect of any product - like how the threading and spacing of certain Kanger coils don't fit Vision products and visa versa.... so you use their products, not others.

Almost all companies would like to be able to do this if they could. IF your local B&M could get local gov't to shut down all others, they would. It is gov't that makes that difference. A private company can't do that by themselves - iow, they have no control - they need the force of gov't to do it. If gov't allows the free market to exist, then the best products at the best price win out. Crappy products and bad business practices are forced (by the business' own actions) to 'exit the market'.

Industries such as Big Tobacco have more control than you give them credit for. Politics is a big money game and they have some of the biggest money. Because of that, they own (yes, OWN) more power in govt. than any politician will admit. Enough power that they were able to buy their way out of more than a slap on the wrist for their knowing, direct culpability for the deaths of millions.

 

[Augmented Dog]

control is to monopoly

as

sharing is to commune

Truth.


:irrelevant mandatory characters:

 

[Augmented Dog]

good point, they should just keep their influence and money away from our PV's.

The way they see it, our rights as consumers end where their revenue stream begins...

 

[DrMA]

I've outlined my thoughts on this issue in a post on my ECF blog.

The tl;dr version is this has been BT's plan all along. Since they realized PVs will displace the entire tobacco market and that they've already lost the PV train, BT has concocted and pursued a plan to use FDA as a "pillar" of their business model. FDA is to enact onerous barriers to entry into the PV market such that only BT can afford it, and all others will be de facto regulated out of existence.

 

[zoiDman]

So now that we All know what RJR is Doing and Why, How do we Counter it?

Or do we just Sit Back and Watch them Do It?

 

[edyle]

Smokers spend a lot of MONEY PER MONTH on cigarettes.

The big tobacco companies seek to change the form but retain the revenues and business model.

What RBAs (and DIY) do is reduce that MONEY PER MONTH that a vaper would end up spending.

They see the mass of smokers out there as a source of monthly revenue.

They make more money selling pretty packs of cigarettes instead of selling a bagfull of tobacco and a pipe.
In the same way, they want to sell cigalikes that you keep buying, not an RBA and a plugin cord.

 

[Kent C]

Industries such as Big Tobacco have more control than you give them credit for. Politics is a big money game and they have some of the biggest money. Because of that, they own (yes, OWN) more power in govt. than any politician will admit. Enough power that they were able to buy their way out of more than a slap on the wrist for their knowing, direct culpability for the deaths of millions.

I put the 'credit' where it is. Again, without gov't, they don't have that control. Companies know this, so they attempt to 'buy gov't'. But if gov't isn't buyable, then it doesn't happen. The problem isn't with companies trying to buy gov't, All would, if they could. It's the politicians that make themselves for sale. Not all do, and the trick for people who don't like that, is finding those politicians who don't and voting for them - those who wouldn't, through gov't regulatory agencies such as the FDA, EPA, IRS, etc., use those agencies to promote their own agendas. They're out there, you just have to find them. On the other hand, there are people who like those agencies and have the mistaken assumption that they will act for 'their' - the consumer's - interests. That, historically, hasn't been the case.

Most put the 'cart' (business) before the 'horse' (gov't). Without the horse, the cart goes nowhere.

 

[Nate760]

BT does indeed have a good understanding of many things in this equation, but here's what I think they still don't understand: vapers are not smokers, their buying habits are quite unlike those of smokers, and you can't force them to behave like smokers. Vapers like their variety, and they're always trying new and different products. In this way it's the antithesis of smoking, where you find the brand you like, and then buy only that brand for the rest of your life. I don't think BT understands that, even if they were to get a massive assist from the regulatory authorities, cigarette-style brand loyalty is never going to exist among vapers. The horse is too far out of the barn.

 

[jdake3265]

I am just thinking that if the FDA bans rebuildables and PV's they are going to have a bigger black market sale than that of drugs. Seriously, if they ban them people will get it somehow, I think that is a reason that banning them is a horrible idea, also there would be huge outcries of injustice and corporate bullying tactics.

 

[zoiDman]

I am just thinking that if the FDA bans rebuildables and PV's they are going to have a bigger black market sale than that of drugs. Seriously, if they ban them people will get it somehow, I think that is a reason that banning them is a horrible idea, also there would be huge outcries of injustice and corporate bullying tactics.

If a RBA is Not Sold as a Device to Consume a Tobacco Product, and is Not Sold with a Tobacco Product, how effective do you think the FDA is going to be at Banning the Sale of a RBA?

 

[sonicdsl]

I am just thinking that if the FDA bans rebuildables and PV's they are going to have a bigger black market sale than that of drugs. Seriously, if they ban them people will get it somehow, I think that is a reason that banning them is a horrible idea, also there would be huge outcries of injustice and corporate bullying tactics.

That's a definite possibility. Please join CASAA and help us fight!

 

[jdake3265]

That's a definite possibility. Please join CASAA and help us fight!

do i have to donate?