Don't forget the oranges. That orange zest so many healthers love on their food has a decent amount of nicotine as well.
Would a change dot org petition help us?
- Thread starter Lessifer
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
I think members of congress need a bit of educational info on nicotine.
Something like:
Current studies showed that nicotine by itself is not really a harmful substance, it is products of tobacco combustion derived from cigarette smoking that produce real harm to human health. Some studies even indicate that nicotine is beneficial ... (whatever for it is beneficial). vaping is one of the most effective methods of smoking cessation, thousands (millions?) people already quit smoking thanks to it. Over-taxation on the level of tobacco of nicotine for vaping will make this effective method too expensive and out of reach for average smoker. Please, save lives.
Something like:
Current studies showed that nicotine by itself is not really a harmful substance, it is products of tobacco combustion derived from cigarette smoking that produce real harm to human health. Some studies even indicate that nicotine is beneficial ... (whatever for it is beneficial). vaping is one of the most effective methods of smoking cessation, thousands (millions?) people already quit smoking thanks to it. Over-taxation on the level of tobacco of nicotine for vaping will make this effective method too expensive and out of reach for average smoker. Please, save lives.
Maybe just "higher"
And here's one "mainstream" article that may be a decent ref: Nicotine, the Wonder Drug? | DiscoverMagazine.com
That is one of the better articles, and written for the average person.
I'll try to wade through some of them today that would support our stance.
Food for thought:
Who benefits from the FDA Proposed Deeming of vaping. BG - MSA Money, BP and BM - Continued Treatment for Smoking Related Diseases, Smoking Secession Products Money, BT - Has it's Monopoly restored.
Deeming means vapor business closures, unemployment, and drives vapers back to smoking
No Identified Illness Related to Vaping, 'We Don't Know...' is The Best The FDA Can Offer As A Reason For Effectively Banning Vaping.
ETA: I've seen nothing to indicate that these regulations impact nicotine Gum, Patches containing Nicotine
Who benefits from the FDA Proposed Deeming of vaping. BG - MSA Money, BP and BM - Continued Treatment for Smoking Related Diseases, Smoking Secession Products Money, BT - Has it's Monopoly restored.
Deeming means vapor business closures, unemployment, and drives vapers back to smoking
No Identified Illness Related to Vaping, 'We Don't Know...' is The Best The FDA Can Offer As A Reason For Effectively Banning Vaping.
ETA: I've seen nothing to indicate that these regulations impact nicotine Gum, Patches containing Nicotine
Last edited:
Well done, fully support, but, I'm afraid that unless you include 535 individual checks or money orders for 2 - 5 million each it will fall on deaf ears..
All too true, but we have to try nonetheless... And do what we can on our local levels, whether just contacting our individual Congresscritters or actively working for/against as them as needs be...
I guess it couldn't hurt but as a citizen for almost sixty years and an active observer and participant in politics for about 40 years I'm gonna just throw this out there based on my observations...
Congress doesn't care about petitions or studies or polls or what the voters actually want or think.
The only thing that gets their attention is money.
Congress doesn't care about petitions or studies or polls or what the voters actually want or think.
The only thing that gets their attention is money.
saying ejuices are tobacco product because there might be a little nicotine in them is like saying cigarettes are wood products because there might be a little paper in (on) them.
Or a strong voting block - if we convince them that we can sway millions of votes away from them and toward their opponents in the next election, we might get their attention.
In a few cases yes..sadly, most times they still don't care until you actually unseat a bunch of them in one election cycle...then you may actually get their attention. Broken system is broken.
I wish something like the if.then.fund would take off because we could sure use something like this - they use member donations to sway congressional votes. Sorta like people banding together to use their money to buy votes the same way corporations do. You donate money, and the organization gives your donation to the congressman if he votes your way, or gives your donation to his opponent in the next election if he doesn't vote your way. I thought it was a good idea (I know - it would be better if congressmen couldn't be bought, but that's not happening), it's just not gaining much traction. if.then.fund - Reshaping Congress by empowering small dollar donors to make contributions based on what politicians do, not what they promise.
I agree with what you are saying but if we do nothing we are guaranteed to get nothing but the shaft since the powers that be will think we agree with them.
I think you've missed the point. Until the proposed FDA deeming regulations are finalized and become part of the FSPTCA, vapor products are NOT tobacco products, that is the main purpose of the proposed regulations.
High fructose corn syrup is derived from corn. Is a can of soda, whether or not it contains HFCS, an agricultural product? Is it a Corn product? Is it subject to the same rules, regulations, taxes and fee schedules as corn products? Does Pepsi get a subsidy check for not producing cans of soda?
We are not talking chemical definitions.
Good points everyone, I'll go through links and see what can be used to support the document. I'd like to stick to studies, though I'll probably put the Discover piece in there too. Blogs and opinions on studies are good and may go in at the end, but I feel more comfortable with hard data. CASAA site doesn't seem to get updated all too often.
What the government really wants to regulate is the tax $'s. They don't give a rats .... about us as long as we are good little consumers. Vaping is a new industry and they have as of yet not regulated their "fair share" of the money.
Yes and no?
If they wanted to go down to that level, I suppose nicotine in it's "raw" form would be a tobacco product. However, I would think that would nullify the exclusion of pharmaceutical products, since they are derived from the same nicotine. It also still leaves open the question of, if the FSPTCA is meant to reduce harm from tobacco products, and nicotine by itself does not cause the type of harms associated with tobacco products, should it be regulated the same? The nicotine might be what the FDA wants to regulate, but I'm not positive that the spirit of the law gives them the authority to do so.
They are going to do that Anyway. And that will be a Fight that has Nothing to do with the FDA.
So at this phase of the game, I would focus on getting a Petition out there so we can Demonstrate that we have a Significant number of People who can be Active.
They are simply choosing which agency will have control over the taxes and regulations. The FDA is just the front runner since they cover Food AND Drugs. If this fails (which it likely won't) some other agency will try to assert it's authority over the industry.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
