Would a change dot org petition help us?

[SleeZy]

lessifer I am Canadian I confess the deeming thing somewhat confuses me BUT I do know what ever the FDA says gets bandied about here and what ever happens south of the border always makes its way north eventually.

I just wanted to quote this. This is very true everwhere, sadly.
Edit: To clarify it's already happening in EU so i can feel you US ppl.

 

[beckdg]

Another thought.

A blurb about responsible adults, harm reduction and mention of how the industry is growing, learning and self regulating proactively with some examples would be a good thing.

Tapatyped

 

[KattMamma]

mention of how the industry is growing, learning and self regulating proactively with some examples would be a good thing.

I think this is a great idea!

 

[KattMamma]

BTW Lessifer... don't worry about typos, spelling, grammar, etc. You're doing a wonderful job of getting the right ideas together, and your form and grammar are nearly perfect anyway. Keep at it, and when you think it's done, we can make those minor tweaks then.

I am so delighted and thankful that someone has stepped up to do this for us all. You have my eternal gratitude and respect @Lessifer !

 

[zoiDman]

We don't want to "have support". We want to force the issue.

We're not going to get the support you seek by any means, zoiD.

Don't you see that?

We don't want to "have support". ...

Again

We don't want their support. ...

OK...

But if we Don't want their [Senators] Support, why are we doing a Petition to send to them?

 

[Wow1420]

.

Okay, here's the second draft, some additions, some changes, some reordering. Let me know what you think.

To Members of Congress:


Soon you will be presented with regulations proposing to deem electronic cigarettes and other vapor products as tobacco products, bringing them within the regulatory control of the FDA under the FSPTCA.

We, the members of the vaping community, including users of vapor products, ex-smokers, current smokers, and friends and family of smokers and ex-smokers whose lives have been changed by vapor products, and concerned citizens urge you to reject the proposed deeming regulations.

The classification of vapor products as tobacco products is tenuous at best. While some vapor products do contain nicotine, many do not, and this is where the link to tobacco ends. The goal of the FSPTCA is to minimize the health effects of tobacco on public health. In 1976 Professor Michael Russell wrote: “People smoke for nicotine but they die from the tar.”1 Vapor products are free of tobacco, contain no tar, and are not combusted and as such are orders of magnitude less potentially harmful than combustible tobacco.2 In fact, more recent studies that look at nicotine, absent tobacco smoke, show that nicotine is possibly not addictive and could have potential health benefits related to treating Parkinson’s symptoms and staving off Alzheimer’s.3

The Federal government and each state have spent hundreds of millions over decades attempting to discourage people from smoking cigarettes. We now have a viable alternative to tobacco products that could do just that. This disruptive technology has the potential to accomplish what Tobacco Control has failed to do for the past fifty years, unless it is smothered in its infancy. Vapor products, as a recreational consumer good, have the potential to replace combustible tobacco, keeping millions from potential tobacco related illnesses. According to recent CDC surveys, in the time frame that vapor products have been available, smoking rates in the United States have plummeted to an all time low.4 However, if vapor products are subjected to the same strict regulatory control intended to minimize harm from tobacco products, they could be rendered ineffectual due to the stifling nature of those regulations.

By rejecting the classification of vapor products as tobacco products we can:

1 Protect access to flavors, which are an integral part of the vapor experience.5

2 Protect access to online sales that allow consumers to procure the equipment and e-liquids that are best suited for their needs.

3 Protect access to all nicotine concentrations, which allow the consumer to tailor their experience to their needs which could range from higher concentrations to aid in transitioning from smoking to nicotine free for enjoyment and maintenance.

4 Protect access to open, reusable container system that are more cost effective and environmentally friendly.

Vapor products are not tobacco products, they are a safer alternative to tobacco products which may or may not contain nicotine. Vapor products are also a driving force behind thousands of small and medium businesses across the country, creating jobs and feeding the economy, many of which will not survive the exorbitant fee structure of tobacco product approval that has kept the cigarette market in the hands of only the major tobacco companies. Instead of relegating vapor products to tobacco control, a new category of product regulation can be implemented, one that could inspire innovation along with public health and safety. The best way to protect this life altering technology is to not place it under the auspices of the FSPTCA, by not deeming vapor products as tobacco products.



Cited References

1 Russell M. Low-tar medium-nicotine cigarettes: a new approach to safer smoking. British Medical Journal 1976;1:1430-1433

2 IJERPH | Free Full-Text | Nicotine Levels and Presence of Selected Tobacco-Derived Toxins in Tobacco Flavoured Electronic Cigarette Refill Liquids

3 Nicotine, the Wonder Drug? | DiscoverMagazine.com

4 Adult cigarette smoking rate overall hits all-time low| CDC Online Newsroom | CDC

5 Big Survey 2014 - Initial Findings Eliquid | Vaping.com

Additional Resources:

E-cigarettes generate high levels of aldehydes only in “dry puff” conditions (irrespective of the power levels)

The research behind giving up cigarettes: a Q&A with leading expert Peter Hajek - On Health

EPA & FDA: Vapor Harmless to Children - Minnesota Vapers AdvocacyMinnesota Vapers Advocacy

Evaluation of the cytotoxic potential of e-cigarette vapor on cultured cardiac cells: a new study

Clinical Research: Electronic Cigarettes

E-cigarette research, studies and papers - 2014

What 20 REAL Experts Say About E-Cigs

Safety evaluation and risk assessment of electronic cigarettes as tobacco cigarette substitutes: a systematic review

http://notblowingsmoke.org

That is awesome Lessifer. Thank you for putting it together! And Thank You to all who have contributed refinements and references.

 

[Tmg666]

Everyone should give this thread a read as well.

https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/f...third-workshop-regarding-e-cigarettes.681286/

And head over to

Regulations.gov

Leave your comment and any research/scientific data and links to it. Comment submission ends July 2nd.

 

[beckdg]

OK...

But if we Don't want their [Senators] Support, why are we doing a Petition to send to them?

Not for their support.

So they realize there's going to be a long battle to bend us over.

A ...... wants to win and claim their prize. Not to get wounded and leave DNA evidence at the crime scene.

But by all means. Let's take several steps backward now that we have some forward progress and rehash this instead of plowing on.

Tapatyped

 

[zoiDman]

Not for their support.

So they realize there's going to be a long battle to bend us over.

A ...... wants to win and claim their prize. Not to get wounded and leave DNA evidence at the crime scene.

But by all means. Let's take several steps backward now that we have some forward progress and rehash this instead of plowing on.

Tapatyped

Ok beck.

LOL

 

[beckdg]

Ok beck.

LOL

Lol indeed

Tapatyped

 

[aikanae1]

May I make a suggestion? I like the concept basically because in the past the petitions (Whitehouse,etc) has been riddled with errors, poorly worded and have been myopic, i.e. they are written from the vapers perspective. The reality is that the people we need to support us don't have that much interest in vaping.

We need to frame a petition from their perspective. What do they NEED to know. Short and sweet.

1. The truth is that vaping is less harmful than smoking. Everyone has agreed to that principle, including major public health figures. There's no debate about that one principle / statement.

2. That's all we really need to know to encourage current smokers to adopt a less harmful alternative. 80% of smokers want to quit yet current cessation aids help less than 6% to do so. Imagine another chronic medical condition with a treatment of less than 10%? Vaping appears to have a much, much higher success rate.

3. Vaping has the potential for being the single most important public health break through this century. To eliminate it's potental before it was realized by limiting access or regulating it to large tobacco companies could lead to billions of needless and unnecessary deaths. Less harmful products have been attempted since the 80's and now it's possible. Smoking rates have dropped faster since vaping than in any other time period in history. If vaping were a gateway to smoking, wouldn't those rates climb instead?

4. Projections are that vaping can SAVE money with Medicaid. Demographics from CDC state most smokers are lower income, less education and a strikenly high percentage are in Medicaid. That's going to cut the tax burden (I can lay you odds that every non-smoker hearing about a tax on vaping is also thinking "better them than my property taxes").

5. Ex-smokers who have battled the addiction do not want to see others become addicted to what they fought against, child or adult. That's ridiculous. Ex-smokers usually become the most militant, intolerant non-smokers. A parent that vapes will be able to smell if their child had a cigarette much faster than if they were still smoking.

6. Smoking is more addictive now than it was in the 70's and even though fewer are smoking, more are dying from them (Surgeon General's report). That means that cigarettes have become even more lethal thanks to the additives tobacco companies have used to make them more addictive. Tobacco companies did not buy into the vaping industry until 2012, invested nothing into research or development of current successful products, but gained a seat at the negotiating table with the FDA when it came time for regulations. Tobacco companies support local bans, regulations and taxes on vaping products since they have little to loose; smoke or vape. They also are the least likely to be concerned if someone new becomes addicted.

7. The OMB office projects 500,000+ products on the market today will be reduced to 25 products, all of them owned by tobacco companies with current FDA deeming regulations. The SBA notes serious lack of clarity and burdens that would force most small and medium sized business to close. The estimate then was 5,000 to 7,000 business would be forced to shut their doors.

8. Since when does technology go backwards? Yet that is what the FDA proposes to do with deeming regulations that push a fast moving industry back to 2007.

9. Smoking is an addiction and vaping was developed by ex-smokers to help current smokers quit. Like AA was developed for alcoholics, community support and comodre with other ex-addicts is a tool used. So is enjoying flavors again now that taste buds are not numbed from tobacco. Can you blame ex-smokers acting like they are kids in a candy store when they haven't tasted anything for the last 20 or 30 years?


It's hard to know when to quit. Ideally only 3 to 5 points should be focused on since that's the attention span of most people casually interested in and most points need to be read in 2 seconds for the most effectiveness.

Skip the details of smoking vs. tobacco; skip "our" stories. Most non-smokers can't relate and it doesn't make a difference in their personal lives. If they want to know more, they can look up more. Do add quotes and links. I know there are a number of websites that just list studies and references.

Anyway, that really is my thoughts. Sorry this was so long.

 

[Lessifer]

Another thought.

A blurb about responsible adults, harm reduction and mention of how the industry is growing, learning and self regulating proactively with some examples would be a good thing.

Tapatyped

My personal compromise on this one is, I won't mention extending access to vaping to teens, but I'm also going to avoid using the word Adult, or anything that would imply adult only access. That's the best I can do on that one.

I will see if i can work in harm reduction and how the industry has moved towards self regulation.

 

[aikanae1]

Thought I'd add these:

E-Cigarettes Poised to Save Medicaid Billions > Publications > State Budget Solutions

BMC Public Health | Abstract | Peering through the mist: systematic review of what the chemistry of contaminants in electronic cigarettes tells us about health risks

Pharmacological and Chemical Effects of Cigarette Additives
Pharmacological and Chemical Effects of Cigarette Additives

 

[philoshop]

Thanks Lessifer, for getting this started! Very promising and exciting indeed! I'll sign it right now.

Excellent points aikanae1 in [HASHTAG]#111[/HASHTAG] above!

The appeal, in the end, has to make someone (a lawmaker) actually care about something that may or may not even be on their radar screen of "caring". They tend to follow their prevailing winds just like we mere mortals.
The ANTZ are gonna 'hate' no matter who around them sees the reality, and the gov-fetishists are going to support regulation simply because it's gov't regulation and they consider that a good thing in and of itself regardless of it's impact. (I've had some rather heated debates recently with a very good friend who fits this latter profile. Very frustrating.) A little sympathy in the middle is what we need, and this petition is a good way to get it.

Modwhompers trying to sway the mugwhumps?

 

[Lessifer]

May I make a suggestion? I like the concept basically because in the past the petitions (Whitehouse,etc) has been riddled with errors, poorly worded and have been myopic, i.e. they are written from the vapers perspective. The reality is that the people we need to support us don't have that much interest in vaping.

We need to frame a petition from their perspective. What do they NEED to know. Short and sweet.

1. The truth is that vaping is less harmful than smoking. Everyone has agreed to that principle, including major public health figures. There's no debate about that one principle / statement.

2. That's all we really need to know to encourage current smokers to adopt a less harmful alternative. 80% of smokers want to quit yet current cessation aids help less than 6% to do so. Imagine another chronic medical condition with a treatment of less than 10%? Vaping appears to have a much, much higher success rate.

3. Vaping has the potential for being the single most important public health break through this century. To eliminate it's potental before it was realized by limiting access or regulating it to large tobacco companies could lead to billions of needless and unnecessary deaths. Less harmful products have been attempted since the 80's and now it's possible. Smoking rates have dropped faster since vaping than in any other time period in history. If vaping were a gateway to smoking, wouldn't those rates climb instead?

4. Projections are that vaping can SAVE money with Medicaid. Demographics from CDC state most smokers are lower income, less education and a strikenly high percentage are in Medicaid. That's going to cut the tax burden (I can lay you odds that every non-smoker hearing about a tax on vaping is also thinking "better them than my property taxes").

5. Ex-smokers who have battled the addiction do not want to see others become addicted to what they fought against, child or adult. That's ridiculous. Ex-smokers usually become the most militant, intolerant non-smokers. A parent that vapes will be able to smell if their child had a cigarette much faster than if they were still smoking.

6. Smoking is more addictive now than it was in the 70's and even though fewer are smoking, more are dying from them (Surgeon General's report). That means that cigarettes have become even more lethal thanks to the additives tobacco companies have used to make them more addictive. Tobacco companies did not buy into the vaping industry until 2012, invested nothing into research or development of current successful products, but gained a seat at the negotiating table with the FDA when it came time for regulations. Tobacco companies support local bans, regulations and taxes on vaping products since they have little to loose; smoke or vape. They also are the least likely to be concerned if someone new becomes addicted.

7. The OMB office projects 500,000+ products on the market today will be reduced to 25 products, all of them owned by tobacco companies with current FDA deeming regulations. The SBA notes serious lack of clarity and burdens that would force most small and medium sized business to close. The estimate then was 5,000 to 7,000 business would be forced to shut their doors.

8. Since when does technology go backwards? Yet that is what the FDA proposes to do with deeming regulations that push a fast moving industry back to 2007.

9. Smoking is an addiction and vaping was developed by ex-smokers to help current smokers quit. Like AA was developed for alcoholics, community support and comodre with other ex-addicts is a tool used. So is enjoying flavors again now that taste buds are not numbed from tobacco. Can you blame ex-smokers acting like they are kids in a candy store when they haven't tasted anything for the last 20 or 30 years?


It's hard to know when to quit. Ideally only 3 to 5 points should be focused on since that's the attention span of most people casually interested in and most points need to be read in 2 seconds for the most effectiveness.

Skip the details of smoking vs. tobacco; skip "our" stories. Most non-smokers can't relate and it doesn't make a difference in their personal lives. If they want to know more, they can look up more. Do add quotes and links. I know there are a number of websites that just list studies and references.

Anyway, that really is my thoughts. Sorry this was so long.

I like your ideas, and I think I have a lot of that in there, but yeah, I wanted to keep it somewhat short and to the point.

I'm wary of putting too much emphasis on vaping as smoking cessation. It's in there, as kind of a side benefit. I think there might be room for one more good point, if you want to read through the second draft and let me know what's really important that is missing I'll try to work it in. I'm thinking I want to get this submitted by tonight or tomorrow, we're running out of time.

GENERAL NOTE TO EVERYONE
I've addressed the statement to congress, I'm not quite sure how the change dot org site works, when i looked it said I'll have the opportunity to give contact info for those we're trying to reach, I'm not sure how I would do that to all of the congress. Who specifically do we want to see the results of this? Speaker of the House, and Senate majority/minority leaders?

 

[zoiDman]

...

Who specifically do we want to see the results of this? Speaker of the House, and Senate majority/minority leaders?

I would include the Majority and Minority Leaders of both Houses of Congress if you can.

 

[beckdg]

I like your ideas, and I think I have a lot of that in there, but yeah, I wanted to keep it somewhat short and to the point.

I'm wary of putting too much emphasis on vaping as smoking cessation. It's in there, as kind of a side benefit. I think there might be room for one more good point, if you want to read through the second draft and let me know what's really important that is missing I'll try to work it in. I'm thinking I want to get this submitted by tonight or tomorrow, we're running out of time.

GENERAL NOTE TO EVERYONE
I've addressed the statement to congress, I'm not quite sure how the change dot org site works, when i looked it said I'll have the opportunity to give contact info for those we're trying to reach, I'm not sure how I would do that to all of the congress. Who specifically do we want to see the results of this? Speaker of the House, and Senate majority/minority leaders?

Every senator, representative, mayor and the pres.

In the entire country.

Submitting it now is likely going to put a deadline on it by default. (Not sure, but that's how the ones I've signed in the past worked.)

Methinks this deadline is going to put us way short of the required signatures for it to be seen unless we have forward movement prior to submitting to change dot org.

Tapatyped

 

[Lessifer]

Every senator, representative, mayor and the pres.

In the entire country.

Submitting it now is likely going to put a deadline on it by default. (Not sure, but that's how the ones I've signed in the past worked.)

Methinks this deadline is going to put us way short of the required signatures for it to be seen unless we have forward movement prior to submitting to change dot org.

Tapatyped

Okay, I'm not sure how many people can be specifically named to be notified.

I'm not sure what kind of time limit they put on it, and I'm not opposed to getting support going before the actual petition is submitted, but I think we do want it going before the regs are released, right?

 

[zoiDman]

Okay, I'm not sure how many people can be specifically named to be notified.

I'm not sure what kind of time limit they put on it, and I'm not opposed to getting support going before the actual petition is submitted, but I think we do want it going before the regs are released, right?

I would suggest Definitely getting it Up and Running ASAP.

 

[beckdg]

Okay, I'm not sure how many people can be specifically named to be notified.

I'm not sure what kind of time limit they put on it, and I'm not opposed to getting support going before the actual petition is submitted, but I think we do want it going before the regs are released, right?

Sure

But who's marketing this to enough folks for the minimum signatures?

We have to realize this will have to be redone indefinitely until we have enough support. And that there's a very high likelyhood of accomplishing nothing by starting with this Avenue first.

I'm okay with that if you are.

I'll sign it regardless.

Tapatyped