FDA Why Isn't Vaping the FDA Center for Tobacco Product's Biggest Ally?

[classwife]

Let's keep the personal jabs out of the conversation please.

It's enough of a mess with out being snarky to each other.


Thank you

 

[MizMickey]

Let's keep the personal jabs out of the conversation please.

It's enough of a mess with out being snarky to each other.


Thank you

Leaving this thread, as I already ran out of diplomatic ways to say ". I never said that, read the post again."

 

[Stosh]

Maybe I will have to do that Seriously, though nicotine can currently be bought over the counter. Where does it say in the regulations this would be changed?

I am just asking.

Sorry if I came off harsh, but the amount of misinformation flying around is staggering. (on the internet in general and also some on ECF) DVAP has some blogs reguarding WTAs and the difficultly in processing (he's a real chemist).

The regulations as proposed will require all manufacturers and vendors apply to register their "tobacco products" with studies detailing why at a "population level" they will not increase the smoking population OR at a "population level" reduce the number of smokers from quitting. If they are able to accomplish this, then they also need to submit an environmental impact study....

The FDA would not ban tobacco, smoking, nicotine, vaping....but tie it up in mountains of red tape to accomplish a de facto ban. Realize in 1937 the federal government never banned the other stuff, but only passed regulations to require a tax stamp, and it took 77 years to begin to make any substantive changes.

 

[classwife]

Folks...

It's a discussion...please keep it civil and in the proper frame.


Thank you

 

[DeeLeeKay]

Sorry if I came off harsh, but the amount of misinformation flying around is staggering. (on the internet in general and also some on ECF) DVAP has some blogs reguarding WTAs and the difficultly in processing (he's a real chemist).

The regulations as proposed will require all manufacturers and vendors apply to register their "tobacco products" with studies detailing why at a "population level" they will not increase the smoking population OR at a "population level" reduce the number of smokers from quitting. If they are able to accomplish this, then they also need to submit an environmental impact study....

The FDA would not ban tobacco, smoking, nicotine, vaping....but tie it up in mountains of red tape to accomplish a de facto ban. Realize in 1937 the federal government never banned the other stuff, but only passed regulations to require a tax stamp, and it took 77 years to begin to make any substantive changes.

I appreciated you frankness. There is too many lies going around that someone who knows the truth would give us all the right info.

 

[Stosh]

I appreciated you frankness. There is too many lies going around that someone who knows the truth would give us all the right info.

Simple truth is the power to regulate and/or tax is the power to destroy...

 

[LDS714]

The FDA would not ban tobacco, smoking, nicotine, vaping....but tie it up in mountains of red tape to accomplish a de facto ban. Realize in 1937 the federal government never banned the other stuff, but only passed regulations to require a tax stamp, and it took 77 years to begin to make any substantive changes.

And it's easier to find stamps that technically don't exist...

So you're saying that Mitch Zeller has the potential for becoming the modern-day Harry Anslinger?

 

[Gato del Jugo]

Find a good chemist, it's an involved and inherently dangerous process. Most of the processes you can "google" are bogus, and the ones that are more accurate are very lacking in safety or necessary testing.

Eh, po' folk & desperate folk get "creative"..


There are many instances of people drinking Sterno to become intoxicated. Bluesman Tommy Johnson alludes to the practice in his song Canned Heat Blues recorded in 1928.

The practice is said to have become popular during the Great Depression in hobo camps, or "jungles", when the Sterno would be squeezed through cheesecloth or a sock and the resulting liquid mixed with fruit juice to make "jungle juice" or "squeeze".

Sterno - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Gato del Jugo]

Sorry if I came off harsh, but the amount of misinformation flying around is staggering. (on the internet in general and also some on ECF) DVAP has some blogs reguarding WTAs and the difficultly in processing (he's a real chemist).

Here's the thing, Stosh..


Whether there's bad information floating around these days..

If things get bad enough someday? People will try stuff in their own kitchens/basements/garages -- regardless of its safety or effectiveness..

And you'll see an explosion (pun not intended) of this kind of how-to stuff available on the internet...


Is this what the FDA wants?

Because there are consequences to their actions...

 

[Stosh]

Yup, that's what is very scary, the squeeze wouldn't kill you if you happened to touch it, or breathe it's vapors. Making your own beer and making your own uranium presents different challenges.

Eh, po' folk & desperate folk get "creative"..


There are many instances of people drinking Sterno to become intoxicated. Bluesman Tommy Johnson alludes to the practice in his song Canned Heat Blues recorded in 1928.

The practice is said to have become popular during the Great Depression in hobo camps, or "jungles", when the Sterno would be squeezed through cheesecloth or a sock and the resulting liquid mixed with fruit juice to make "jungle juice" or "squeeze".

Sterno - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[toddkuen]

I would argue vaping itself is born of exactly the same kind of "home brew" mentality being derided.

I believe its the "tobacco will kill you" propaganda that in fact created vaping - "ah heck, I'm gonna die from theses here cigarettes anyway, stuffed full of chemicals and all, so what the heck, I'll hit that vape."

If DeeLeeKay thinks she will die of lung cancer as a foregone conclusion from FDA propaganda then why not take a bigger risk with potentially many more years to live via vaping?

Some guy sees a need for a "better way" and now, only 8 or 9 (or whatever) years later, we have millions of vapers world wide.

How long do you think the guy who whipped up the very first e-cig with nicotine took to man up and take a that very first hit?

(Echo's of "Nicotine will kill you" and all that swirlling through his head.)

Ditto for newbie home chemists hitting their own ejuice the first time.

I think the general "danger" or "it requires science" etc. argument is bogus because vaping itself is born from exactly that home brew model.

Its always scary to be the first but look at the "good" done by it.

The FDA, on the other hand, represents the "herd safety" model (safety in numbers and no risk taking).

Better to live in a herd (where the FDA wants you) with the lions killing some of us each day than venture out and try and kill a lion ourselves.

Think about it...

 

[Anjaffm]

http://nicotinetruth.blogspot.com/2012/03/chronic-conditions-require-ongoing.
Frontiers | Cotinine: Beyond that Expected, More than a Biomarker of Tobacco Consumption | Neuropharmacology

I am not making up these claims. It wasn't until I talked to a schizophrenic that I realized the need, yes need for some people to never stop smoking/vaping.

The young man I talked to said to me, "If I stop smoking I will go insane". He meant it. Does he have a choice?

Excellent link! Thank you very much for sharing it.

And I agree about the mental patients. I have read several articles like this. One young man killed himself:

End 'cruel' smoking ban, says health campaigner

''The system in place has failed,'' Coleman's father, Mark, said. ''The anti-smoking laws, as they stand, are too rigid.
''When people like my son are admitted, they are already suffering from conditions such as severe depression, anxiety issues and suicidal tendencies - without the added burden of suddenly being told they must quit. It seems cruel and unjust.''
He called on the O'Farrell government to show ''compassion''.

Family Drug Support founder Tony Trimingham is also campaigning for changes after witnessing the ''horror'' that was endured by an autistic and schizophrenic family member in Goulburn Hospital's mental health ward in October.
''All was fine until he wanted a cigarette and was told that policy now said he couldn't,'' he said.
Mr Trimingham said the situation triggered an ''emotional outburst'' which led to him being placed in ''total isolation'' for 48 hours.

And even Simon Chapman (the Australian image of Mr. Glands) agrees.

As to forcing mental health patients to give up their best means of comfort during a horrible episode in their lives:

A spokesman for the Mental Health Council of Australia, Simon Tatz, said forcing a nicotine addict to endure withdrawal symptoms while battling an acute episode of mental illness may impose a disproportionate level of suffering on people who were already suffering enough.
"No one wants to defend smoking, but when you're dealing with people in extreme crisis, their mental health and wellbeing has to be the priority, not quitting smoking," Mr Tatz said.

Desley Casey, who has worked in the mental health field for 15 years and has been an acute psychiatric inpatient several times, said forcing people to quit when they are acutely unwell is inhumane and "goes against a patient's human rights".
She is concerned that some patients will not seek help or admit themselves to hospital if they know tobacco is banned.

Tobacco ban leaves mental health groups fuming

 

[wv2win]

Might help if you quote my posts in entirety, rather than excerpts. I strongly believe I am giving more detailed rationale to points I make than those on the side that say "black market is not a solution" and leave things at that.



Would be rather impossible to construct a black market scenario with 'no risk involved to anyone.' Can't even do that with the current legal market, but you are asking for the impossible under black market scenario.

Challenging also to say what black market will look like for you, plus challenging to offer genuine help in thread where I reckon people are looking to dismiss that option as a genuine way to obtain product under quasi-strict regulations. Also, just challenging to offer specifics about overcoming legal restrictions on an open forum. But, if genuinely interested in list of scenarios I see as viable going forward, feel free to PM me.

In general, I think you'll find local means via friends that strike you as slightly risky, but are basically trusted sources, and are not dangerous. Also plausible you'll find it online with sites that are either blatantly attempting to circumvent the restrictions or doing so in way that they realize may be questionable, but worth the risk from their end given high product demand. I also think China will on the surface give lip service to US restrictions, but have enough places online that appear like China laughs in the face of US policy on this matter.

In general, I would say that there will be a transition period that likely lasts months, if not years, and that all current vendors will be possibly willing to engage in gray-ish market where it is risky for both buyer and seller, pending outcome of litigation, but transactions will occur. The moment it becomes too risky for seller, means those products will go to places where buyers will be found, but might not be easily found via internet search engines.



I reckon we are at least 5 years, and probably closer to a decade away from it being impossible to get liquid nic via online order. May never occur, and I imagine backdoor channels will be available forever via the net. Again, don't need for everyone to have source product for black market to operate efficiently.

Also, don't need internet to find it locally. Though, even then, I'm sure net will be used, but not for finding specific places that you can type in 'liquid nic' and get local results.



It is challenging to say how costs will be effected, yet not impossible to conclude that it won't be drastic changes on cost. Here in the legal market we have sellers offering liquid at around $1 per ml, and finding buyers willing to pay that. Black market isn't one homogenous group, so there may be sellers at $1 per ml, while others find comfortable profit margin at 25 cents per ml.

One of the ways I see underground market being established is if all current vendors are allowed to operate legally, but all are in agreement that to keep things legal, it must be taxed up the wazoo, so that buyers are buying product around $1 per ml. I see an underground market cutting into that, which won't be necessarily more popular than legal market, but will allow a segment of the purchasing population to get decent product closer to 50 cents per ml.

I currently do not see an underground market being established because liquid nicotine is deemed illegal for sale anywhere in the US. I feel if that scenario were to arise, it would be at least 5 years from now, and more like a decade away.

And all this, is currently known to black market players. In fact, I could see black market people being those who favor bans, as they would stand to benefit greatly under such a scenario.

Your response is filled with so many ifs, ands, buts and maybes that it is hard for me to believe that a black market will solve all are vaping prohibition problems and that smokers will simply flock to this new vaping black market and the "new" vaper demographic will just explode in growth. I don't know who your friends and acquaintances are, but very few of mine will feel comfortable with navigating any black market that his risks involved.

And I would still like you to explain how PayPal will not process any US vaping purchases currently with no threat of government action but that if the Deeming Regs are passed, the government will completely ignore all financial institutions in their fight to enforce their regulations.

 

[Stosh]

Our government would never put pressure on banks, like what was done to PayPal...OH wait they are already doing it...

The DOJ’s “Operation Choke Point”

 

[toddkuen]

Most fascinating to me are the stories that surround the discovery of vitamins, e.g., B3 (nicotinic acid, vitamin C, and so on).

It would seem to me that, in the olden days of say 50 or 60 years ago health professionals and scientists would take up stories such as DeeLeeKay and Anjaffm describe and invest a career into associating missing dietary elements with specific health problems.

Today it would seem from other posts here that the dogma of "evil tobacco" dictates that no such finding is possible and should not even be discussed in polite company much less pursued.

If someone in college or medical research today proposed such a line of study I imagine they would quickly be sent packing.

I recall the episode DeeLeeKay describes of the young man telling her "if he stopped smoking he would go insane."

What courage and selflessness it must take to casually explain away the young man's feelings as simple "addiction" due to his own failures.

Like pallagra, scurvy and the rest it must simply be the victim's fault.

I wonder how these positions and actions will be looked at in, say 50 years?

 

[DC2]

Theres been a lot of criticism of vaping because vapers are replacting nicotine with nicotine and in their opinion, that's not really "quitting". If you took away their new form of nicotine, many would go back to smoking combustionable cigs. It might be more effective to point that out and ask the FDA if they are ready to see a spike in smoking from banning ecigs?

If they took away my electronic cigarettes I would go back to smoking.
Not because I need the nicotine, but because I LIKE smoking.

 

[LDS714]

Today it would seem from other posts here that the dogma of "evil tobacco" dictates that no such finding is possible and should not even be discussed in polite company much less pursued.

If someone in college or medical research today proposed such a line of study I imagine they would quickly be sent packing.

I have an acquaintance who is a doctoral candidate in neurological sciences. We were discussing vaping one day, and I mentioned beneficial effects of nicotine.

Her reply?

"Absolutely, but we're not supposed to mention it to anyone because smoking is bad."

 

[Anjaffm]

@toddkuen:

thank you very much indeed for your lovely posting. And for saying the words that I bit down. About the "courage" and "selfnessness" that it must take to look down upon another human being. Especially a human being in need.

..........

aikanae1
Theres been a lot of criticism of vaping because vapers are replacting nicotine with nicotine and in their opinion, that's not really "quitting".

But dear, if somebody is using patches or gums, they also replace nicotine with nicotine. Where is the criticism of that?
And if they are using a nicotine inhaler - where they actually inhale the stuff - are they accused of "not really quitting"?
That is just a bunch of hogwash. Uttered by those whose salaries depend on cigarette smoking and / or pharma profits. They are criticizing their paymasters' competition. That is all.

The "logic" goes like "You have quit smoking only if you have quit nicotine intake. Unless, of course, you consume nicotine that is sold by Big Pharma. In that case we concede that you have quit smoking when you stopped inhaling smoke".

Duh.

 

[NorthOfAtlanta]

I have an acquaintance who is a doctoral candidate in neurological sciences. We were discussing vaping one day, and I mentioned beneficial effects of nicotine.

Her reply?

"Absolutely, but we're not supposed to mention it to anyone because smoking is bad."

In other words until the FDA/BP/BT Drug Cartel can find a way to totally control it for the big profits no one is allowed to recommend that you go to the local vape shop and obtain it for a competition controlled price.

 

[Jman8]

Your response is filled with so many ifs, ands, buts and maybes that it is hard for me to believe that a black market will solve all are vaping prohibition problems and that smokers will simply flock to this new vaping black market and the "new" vaper demographic will just explode in growth.

Do you see the words "will solve all our vaping prohibition problems" as misleading or mischaracterizing my position? If no, please quote where I have said it will do this.

I don't believe the date of 'black market is now open' will be announced, therefore, there won't be an explosion in that marketplace. But I do think that over course of 5 years, that market will be more popular than the current one, as in more people in that market, not all of which will be smokers/ex-smokers.

In the current paradigm, FDA regs and all, I think it'll continue to be smokers/ex-smokers for awhile before a plateau is reached. If vaping survives 20 more years (I think it will), then it will be a market made up of substantial amount of people who never have smoked, likely never will, but who thoroughly enjoy vaping. I hope I'm alive to see that era. I wish it were happening right now. When I see signs of that occurring now, I rejoice.

I think black market will deliver that era sooner than 20 years, but to be clear, I a) would really rather not see a black market and b) am pretty sure that liquid nic will not be so choked so as to bring about this particular form of black market that we are discussing.

I don't know who your friends and acquaintances are, but very few of mine will feel comfortable with navigating any black market that his risks involved.

I hear you. Not sure what to say in response to it, and for these people who do not want to take simple risks, it could be devastating to them. But to be clear, the moment the current rules go into effect, kids will be subject to an underground market. I believe many will seek it out, and have little problem finding almost anything they desire.

And I would still like you to explain how PayPal will not process any US vaping purchases currently with no threat of government action but that if the Deeming Regs are passed, the government will completely ignore all financial institutions in their fight to enforce their regulations.

I'm unclear where in current proposed regulations you think federal government will be active in financial institutions (banks) and dictating what is allowed for purchase and what is not. If these proposed regulations went into effect tomorrow, every place that you currently get vaping stuff would still be fully open for business. 2 to 4 years later, that may be a different story, but then again it may not. If company is selling something that does not contain nicotine (i.e. empty clearomizer) and US government has instructed all banks to deny such online transactions, then a) we are dealing with something other than what is in current proposal, b) we are dealing with situation that would be highly impractical to enforce and c) we are living in an America where vaping stuff would arguably be the least of your concerns. If I wanted to purchase something online today that is used in conjunction with "other stuff," I would have no problem. But, you are saying federal government will suddenly be more harsh on liquid nicotine and all related products than it has been with very prominent and very well funded War it has been engaged in for 30 or so years. Sorry, that does not compute.