Why so many members take issue with the FDA

[Fulgurant]

Sorry Lion, I don't know how we can disassociate the FDA from politics. But I will try going forward.

We can disassociate the FDA issue from partisan politics pretty easily. You don't have to be a Republican to acknowledge that the FDA is fallible and corruptible, and you don't have to be a Democrat to acknowledge that large corporations can be unscrupulous. From there, it's just a matter of realizing that money and power attract one another. As the saying goes, it takes two to tango.

Anyone who would tout the moral authority of the government on the basis that CEOs are worse misses the point: CEOs offer generous salaries to outgoing government officials; therefore they influence government agencies' decisions. It happens almost daily. Which is worse -- the official who abused the public's trust by taking a bribe, or the businessman who proffered the bribe? That's a trick question: the answer is, "Who cares?"

In this case, the FDA's record of anti-rational and malignant behavior (with respect to vaping) is clear, and therefore our cause for concern is clear. There's still a chance that the FDA will do the right thing, but we've no good reason to believe that they will.

 

[DC2]

You guys are truly hopeless. I'm very grateful for vaping. I'm very embarrassed by the politics of the community. I'll just stay out of these threads. There aren't enough tin foil hats for all of us.

The person you quote with this response was 100% factually correct in everything she said.
Having said that, I'm not sure she doesn't have some tinfoil in her house, as it is very useful for many applications.

 

[Uma]

The 2nd and 3rd hand smoking fears were all lies. Yet people are still being evicted from their towns, homes and careers over it. The same fear mongers are attacking vapor, because it looks like smoking. One of these days thermopile will rise up against the real murderers, those who shoved grandpa in his wheelchair out into the cold along with his suitcase and his Medal of Honor badges.

 

[B1sh0p]

The person you quote with this response was 100% factually correct in everything she said.
Having said that, I'm not sure she doesn't have some tinfoil in her house, as it is very useful for many applications.

Actually, she isn't. Batteries, switches and tubes can't be regulated by the FDA if they aren't marketed for consumption. That would be like the DEA trying to regulate bathtubs and beakers because people cook .... with them.

 

[DC2]

We can disassociate the FDA issue from partisan politics pretty easily. You don't have to be a Republican to acknowledge that the FDA is fallible and corruptible, and you don't have to be a Democrat to acknowledge that large corporations can be unscrupulous. From there, it's just a matter of realizing that money and power attract one another. As the saying goes, it takes two to tango.

Anyone who would tout the moral authority of the government on the basis that CEOs are worse misses the point: CEOs offer generous salaries to outgoing government officials; therefore they influence government agencies' decisions. It happens almost daily. Which is worse -- the official who abused the public's trust by taking a bribe, or the businessman who proffered the bribe? That's a trick question: the answer is, "Who cares?"

In this case, the FDA's record of anti-rational and malignant behavior (with respect to vaping) is clear, and therefore our cause for concern is clear. There's still a chance that the FDA will do the right thing, but we've no good reason to believe that they will.

You are my new favorite poster.
Please post all day long, in every thread.

Thanks!

 

[B1sh0p]

The 2nd and 3rd hand smoking fears were all lies. Yet people are still being evicted from their towns, homes and careers over it. The same fear mongers are attacking vapor, because it looks like smoking. One of these days thermopile will rise up against the real murderers, those who shoved grandpa in his wheelchair out into the cold along with his suitcase and his Medal of Honor badges.

What in the hell?

 

[DC2]

Actually, she isn't. Batteries, switches and tubes can't be regulated by the FDA if they aren't marketed for consumption. That would be like the DEA trying to regulate bathtubs and beakers because people cook .... with them.

Yes, she is. And yes, they can be...
http://casaa.org/deeming_regulations.html


EDIT AFTER THIS POINT........................................

Oh wait, you're talking about raw materials.
So yeah, maybe not so much.

So screw all the smokers who haven't switched yet.

 

[B1sh0p]

Yes, she is. And yes, they can be...
The FDA & Deeming Regulations of E-cigarettes

Cigalikes? Seriously? Do you not see the difference here?

 

[cookiebun]

No one has mentioned Regulatory Capture? !
Regulatory capture - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Sundodger]

As far as I'm concerned, pipe tobacco is taxed as a food. I hope that the FDA does the same to eliquid. However, it was ruled as a tobacco product, so it can't be banned unless tobacco is banned.

There is already tax on everything involved with e-liquid and the hardware needed. Why another/more tax? I see it as just another way to regulate beyond what is needed by the consumer and a grand way for the gubmint to take more money. They will say "see we regulated it, now it's safe, so pay us more for it." No thanks.

 

[NiNi]

"It is sad to me that I see some defending the FDA here by calling posters names, marginalizing any person who questions the FDA, and refusing to see what a real threat to the vaping community the FDA represents. Many of the posters have legitimate gripes with the FDA.
"The purpose of this thread is to illustrate why certain members of this community are distrustful of the FDA."

Had to go back to see what the crux of the OP was...........carry on!

 

[B1sh0p]

Yes, she is. And yes, they can be...
The FDA & Deeming Regulations of E-cigarettes


EDIT AFTER THIS POINT........................................

Oh wait, you're talking about raw materials.
So yeah, maybe not so much.

So screw all the smokers who haven't switched yet.

The sooner the vaping community can disassociate with cigarettes the better. If that means a ban on vaporizers that look like cigarettes then so be it. Vaporizers aren't cigarettes. They're alternative nicotine delivery devices. IMO, the biggest mistake new vapers make is trying to synthesize real cigarettes by chasing the tobacco dragon. People need to accept vaping for what it is, which makes the transition far more satisfying.

Sorry for the rant. Got OT.

 

[Uma]

This might help fill in a few gaps about components

VPLive Vape Team Episode #85: Inside FDA Regulation - YouTube

 

[Uma]

The sooner the vaping community can disassociate with cigarettes the better. If that means a ban on vaporizers that look like cigarettes then so be it. Vaporizers aren't cigarettes. They're alternative nicotine delivery devices. IMO, the biggest mistake new vapers make is trying to synthesize real cigarettes by chasing the tobacco dragon. People need to accept vaping for what it is, which makes the transition far more satisfying.

Sorry for the rant. Got OT.

And God has spoken.

 

[B1sh0p]

There is already tax on everything involved with e-liquid and the hardware needed. Why another/more tax? I see it as just another way to regulate beyond what is needed by the consumer and a grand way for the gubmint to take more money. They will say "see we regulated it, now it's safe, so pay us more for it." No thanks.

That's a philosophical fight vapers can't win. We'll always be taxed for our vices. If alcohol and gambling couldn't beat it, good luck.

 

[FlamingoTutu]

This might help fill in a few gaps about components

VPLive Vape Team Episode #85: Inside FDA Regulation - YouTube

You ever tried watching YouTube on dialup? But thanks for posting the link

 

[Uma]

Once the ecig manufacturer buys a component, that component is now considered an ecig component and the component has to have its chemistry makeup forms filled out & disclosed. The batches that are not sent to the ecig manufacturer are not considered eCigs.
I don't know how to make this any clearer for you Bishop.

 

[WhiteHighlights]

(.. ignores yelling troll....)

Hm... as to the upcoming FDA decision: I wonder whether they will act any differently from their attempted action in 2009: The Rest of the Story: Tobacco News Analysis and Commentary: Despite 98 Suicides and 188 Suicide Attempts Reported Among Chantix Users and No Deaths Reported for E-Cigarettes, FDA Would Rather You Use Chantix

I read this link and it had me shaking my head. I knew about the side effects of Chantix and it's amazing to me that it is still on the market, but this extra bit got me:

"The article also notes that the FDA is requiring the makers of Chantix to conduct clinical studies to determine the incidence and severity of the adverse effects of Chantix: "To better understand the incidence of these adverse events and which patients may be at greatest risk, the FDA is requiring the manufacturers of both drugs to conduct additional randomized controlled trials. Unlike previous studies, these trials will include individuals with preexisting mental health conditions, who make up a disproportionate number of smokers."

The emphasis is mine, but it goes to their perception of smokers. I wouldn't be surprised if they had the same bias towards e-cigs. It's going to take many, loud voices to overcome their deaf ears.

 

[kristin]

Batteries, switches and tubes can be regulated if they are packaged with nicotine liquid. It's unlikely devices sold separately will fall under FDA regulations, but companiies that sell disposables and pre-filled nicotine cartridges in kits could find their devices required to meet certain specifications. For example, in the UK, they are trying to require devices to regulate the amount of nicotine delivered. But keep in mind that legislators are almost completely ignorant of any e-cigarettes beyond the "cigarette-style" sold along with pre-filled nicotine cartridges. Because anyone NOT buying those tend to buy piecemeal (a tank here, a battery there,) it would be nearly impossible for the FDA to regulate those - especially when they are not sold with a consumable nicotine product. The FDA regulates the wrappers for cigarettes because they come filled with tobacco. The FDA doesn't regulate empty pipes and rolling papers (the equivalent of our empty devices,) which is why head shops can exist. The FDA was sued for trying to ban flavored rolling papers, but the case was dismissed because the FDA had taken no action. The company's argument in the lawsuit was that FSPTCA gave the FDA powers over tobacco products, which are defined as being made of or derived from tobacco, and the components IN cigarettes (so, the paper ONLY if it contains tobacco.) Rolling papers sold separately from tobacco (and e-cigarettes sold separately from tobacco-derived nicotine) simply do not fall under the definition of the products the FSPTCA gives the FDA over.

 

[Uma]

You ever tried watching YouTube on dialup? But thanks for posting the link

Bummers. It's a good watch. Maybe you can borrow the library's internet next time you're by that way? Parking lots even pick them up from what the homeless van guys say...