FDA has what control it has over e-cigarettes it has due to it's failed attempt to ban them.
Based on the 'history link' it was a failed attempt to ban the import of them, while classifying them as drug delivery devices.
They seized property and attempted to snuff vaping out. They were stopped in court, where the US Circuit Court Judge found them to be tobacco products. This is at the core of the mistrust of the FDA. When the first action of an entity is to seize property and usurp authority from the people, it is quite telling.
Again, as the history shows, other countries including WHO had spoken on the issue prior to FDA issuing an import alert. So, if we are honest, let's not limit the mistrust to only FDA, as it wasn't first, nor last entity, on this planet, to call for ban on import of these devices.
Also to be clear/honest, the eCig hardware are drug delivery devices. FDA requires "preapproval, registration and listing with the FDA" as a matter of law, or I would say common sense. The history notes that in 2006-2007 eCigs are introduced into the U.S. I think clarification is needed there to say, "illegally introduced."
I would say that history is much more important when we try to understand why vapers have antipathy towards the FDA. Again, the point of this thread is to illustrate WHY the FDA is mistrusted by our fellow vapers.
And on open forum, I think it is (perhaps) helpful to address that mistrust, as that position matters going forward. I don't support the position of FDA on this topic, but because I understand their position, doesn't mean I fully trust them. Frankly, if I don't have trust in someone/something, I'm not sure what the wisdom is in making that public. When I see that (on any forum, or medium), it comes off as an emotional reaction that when addressed with reasoning, often leads to those who have expressed lack of trust as shouting down those who care to have a rational discussion on the matter. The "I hate government, can't trust FDA" people occupy the discussion and ultimately lead it nowhere constructive.
The FDA is key player in going forward. A general statement of mistrust offers nothing useful in how to address this key player.
Black Market? You feel this is an acceptable resolution to a flavor ban? I do not feel going underground is a winning play. In any case, you continue to steer further an further away from the point of the thread.
No, bringing up Black Market as way to address impending changes to the eCig market is not off topic. It is not the best way, I agree, but it is a reasonable response to whatever is deemed 'worst case scenario that FDA may institute with regards to eCigs, specifically eJuice.' It is why the FDA can't win on this issue. To ignore this and harp on the emotional plea for mistrust is going off topic with regards to the FDA discussion. Tell me, what's your mistrust of FDA adding to the discussion to help vapers understand options for all of us going forward?
You are blaming vapers? That is an interesting perspective. Your attack on vapers as a group is quite telling.
It would be interesting and telling if you spin it with your misinterpretation of what I said when I say, "I see this battle as one we have brought on ourselves." I believe I was clear in follow up to that statement by saying ANTZ is reason why we are in the place we are. It is why FDA has a leg to stand on with FSCPTA. Some vapers (who carry the torch for ANTZ) are a drop in the bucket. My point was with regards to Americans' position toward smoking/using nicotine. We've done a complete 180 on that issue, and as such it has lead us to a point where devices that remotely resemble smoking are to also be treated as 'extremely dangerous.' If you are a vaper who doesn't take issue with that classification being applied to smoking, then I find that to be an ignorant position. It also shows up as naive when the eCig debate is considered for all of 10 seconds as a matter of national discourse outside of a vaping forum.
The sound bite version of what I just said in previous paragraph is - if we (Americans) rolled over on the rights of smokers in our society, it ought to be no surprise that the same Americans will roll over on rights of vapers.
I see this as a fight started by the FDA
History link doesn't exactly back this up. IMO, it precedes what the history document chose to start with, and does relate to smoking rights. The fight as I think you are presenting it deals with FDA wanting to control eCigs either through classification as drug delivery devices or as tobacco products. Now (in 2013), many vapers aren't too happy with the classification as tobacco products and how that relates to control via FSCPTA. That act deals with smoking and, indirectly, with rights of smokers. Reality is, most Americans are happy to see rights of smokers decimated. I believe many vapers are happy to see those rights decimated as well. I am not and think that has gone so far overboard, I'd be pleasantly surprised if vaping is allowed to continue in America.
Science is on our side, the rule of law is on our side, only the brainwashing of anti-smoking zealots is against us.
I honestly feel the science is still in question. I've seen enough anecdotal evidence to convince me that the discussion is definitely on our side. I've seen mixed scientific research, and thus it is still in question. I think it favors our position, but hard to say for certain.
When you say "rule of law" is on our side, I'm curious what you mean by that? If eCigs are classified as tobacco products, I don't think I agree with you that the law is on our side. And it is because of ANTZ and the nearly lost war on smoking that has gotten us to where we are today. Where products that are classified as 'tobacco' are plausibly deemed by vast majority of Americans as unwanted in our public places, and best if they are regulated, hopefully out of existence. As I know smoking will NEVER be regulated out of existence, I'm certain it won't happen with vaping.
And didn't the FDA originally approve this medication in 1993 based on the BP's "thorough testing" of this product?
I think I'd rather risk the side effects than go 
