FDA to extend tobacco regulations to e-cigarettes, other products

[LiberalArkie]

Source: CNN

(CNN)The U.S. Food and Drug Administration announced Thursday that it will regulate all tobacco products, including e-cigarettes, cigars, hookah tobacco and pipe tobacco, among others. Until now, the FDA could only regulate cigarettes and cigarette-related products and smokeless tobacco.

Developing story - more to come

Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/05/health/fda-e-cigarettes-regulation/index.html?adkey=bn

[malthaussen]

1. Since when are e-cigarettes a tobacco product?

Answer: since they have been declared so by fiat. Damn, is making pi exactly 3.0 very far away?

-- Mal

[Pacifist Patriot]

7. It's probably because they contain nicotine.

According to the American Lung Association, "The main component of e-cigarettes is the e-liquid contained in cartridges. To create an e-liquid, nicotine is extracted from tobacco and mixed with a base (usually propylene glycol), and may also include flavorings, colorings and other chemicals."

http://www.lung.org/stop-smoking/smoking-facts/e-cigarettes-and-lung-health.html

So it probably isn't as big a stretch as it seems for the FDA to include them under tobacco regulated products.

[malthaussen]

10. Except that all e-cigarette fluids do not have nicotine...

... nor is nicotine derived only from tobacco. But of course, you're right so far as the fiat goes. And it is probably not being regulated because of any direct linkage to tobacco, but for convenience of categorization, much as marijuana and heroin are both schedule 1 drugs despite having nothing in common.

-- Mal

[Pacifist Patriot]

13. You're probably right.

I would suspect convenience of categorization did play a part in this decision.

[eShirl]

34. some of us use ecig contraptions for our medical marijuana ONLY.

my caregiver makes cannabis liquid for them

[virgogal]

35. Nicotine is also found in tomatoes and potatoes.

I guess they should be regulated also.

[bjo59]

53. Exactly. It's outrageous and everyone just takes it and takes and takes it.

"Please sir, may I have some more?" Of course vapor "juice" with nicotine in it is not a tobacco product. Furthermore, many younger people use juice with no nicotine in it at all. The whole thing is obscene and I'm stockpiling batteries and e-juice so that when they finally just completely ban e-cigarettes (or they end up being taxed through the roof), I'm prepared. Heaven forbid that the government should regulate banks or corporations... but those dangerous vaporizers certainly need regulating. My god, we wouldn't want people in a position to make their own decisions (decisions that effect no one but themselves), would we?

[Warpy]

2. This is a good thing. You never know what's in the cheap products coming in from Asia

and it makes a lot of sense to regulate nicotine delivery.

Regulation isn't a bad thing.

[Major Nikon]

4. I'm not sure how it makes sense

There's a significant social impact with cigarettes. Not so much with the others.

Regulation is always a bad thing when it's not needed. All of it should be continuously self-justifying or it should be dismantled and it should be self-limiting to only what's required to achieve a specific goal. The idea that regulation and more regulation is always a good thing is why things like cannabis are still criminalized. There's also social impacts to over regulation.

[Pacifist Patriot]

11. Here is some information from the American Lung Association

What Is in E-cigarettes?

The main component of e-cigarettes is the e-liquid contained in cartridges. To create an e-liquid, nicotine is extracted from tobacco and mixed with a base (usually propylene glycol), and may also include flavorings, colorings and other chemicals.

Because there is no government oversight of these products, nearly 500 brands and 7,700 flavors of e-cigarettes are on the market, all without an FDA evaluation determining what’s in them. So there is no way for anyone—healthcare professionals or consumers—to know what chemicals are contained in e-liquids, or how e-cigarette use might affect health, whether in the short term or in the long run.

Early studies show that e-cigarettes contain nicotine and also may have other harmful chemicals, including carcinogens.

http://www.lung.org/stop-smoking/smoking-facts/e-cigarettes-and-lung-health.html

[Major Nikon]

21. There are hundreds of chemicals contained in coffee beans, some of which are probable carcinogens

Is this a valid reason to similarly regulate coffee?

[noamnety]

29. Don't they already?

I thought beverages were included in the "food" part of FDA.

[Major Nikon]

31. Not that I know about

Nobody I've seen is proposing to ban coffee, or to otherwise limit its sale, or to prohibitively tax it anymore than any other food type product.

[noamnety]

39. Maybe I'm misunderstanding.

My assumptions: I thought the FDA regulates Food, Drugs and Alcohol - and included in that is all food, beverages, cigarettes, and medications. By regulate - I mean has oversight over the safety of the ingredients.

But I thought e-cigs were til now completely exempt from their oversight - meaning they could contain lead, other dangerous chemicals, etc.

The FDA's logic:
And now they are saying a:"If a product contains tobacco, it should be regulated the same as any other tobacco product regardless of delivery method" (which seems reasonable to me)

and b: "Whether or not e-cigs contain tobacco, there should be oversight of them because it's a marketed substance going into people's bodies." (which seems reasonable to me.)

also c: "smoking is inherently an activity we don't think minors should be involved in" (which also seems reasonable to me)

If I'm wrong in my background understanding let me know! And if we just disagree with the FDA's logic, I'm curious if that's because of point A, B or C - or some other thing I've not considered.

[Major Nikon]

49. The FDA doesn't regulate most things to the degree cigarettes are regulated

It certainly makes sense for the FDA to regulate e-cigarettes to some degree. For instance, the packaging of them along with the refills should have some form of child proofing.

Based on what we know and don't know, it does not make sense to regulate e-cigarettes in the same way cigarettes are regulated. While both are nicotine delivery devices, that's where the similarities end. It isn't smoking and it doesn't contain tobacco, which negates A, B, and C. It might make sense to limit their access by minors until more is known, but limiting their access by adults or even discouraging their use has no basis.

[christx30]

32. You don't have to be 18 to buy a cop of coffee

or a bottle of soda.

[LadyHawkAZ]

38. If it's done with some common sense then I agree with you

But I have little faith in that happening. We'll see, I guess.

[obamanut2012]

3. Good, about time

This will help with state and local laws, too.

[jtuck004]

5. Great. Republicans in the bedroom, Democrats in the medicine cabinet. n/t

[Pacifist Patriot]

8. I'd rather have someone making sure the products in my medicine cabinet

are safer than allow manufacturers to put whatever the hell they want in products I ingest.

Not convinced the privacy of a bedroom and the contents of a marketed product is a terribly good comparison in terms of intrusion by the respective parties.

[jtuck004]

19. That's fine, regulate the mfr. Not the users. Get their nose out of my business, what I do,

what my neighbors do, as long as they are not hurting someone else. But that's not what they do.

Same people on both sides. Regardless of the persuasion, they all have a religious motivation - to reform your bad habits, whether it is where you stick a penis or a cigarette.

“The most monstrous monster is the monster with noble feelings”
― Fyodor Dostoyevsky,

Describes it better than I could.

[beevul]

45. Well said. N/t

[yallerdawg]

6. About time!

Unregulated delivery of addictive substances like nicotine, and the potential harmful effects of 'bathtub' concoctions marketed (and inhaled) as a safe alternative to tobacco products is a great argument for oversight!

Quit smoking? Now try to quit vaping!

[TexasBushwhacker]

9. I'm not so sure inhaling the other things is good either

Propylene glycol is generally accepted as safe, but no long term studies have been done.

[yallerdawg]

16. We are all familiar with the excesses and exploitations of capitalism...

and 'free markets.'

Regulation, oversight, and serving for the 'general welfare' of the people is a necessary counter balance to the inherent evil of capitalism.

Until we have the 'revolution' - when everything will be regulated!

It's what we want, right?

[Major Nikon]

17. There's pretty good reasons why it's generally accepted as safe

There's no theoretical case for why it wouldn't be safe in practical applications, animal studies have concluded there's no potential for harm, and decades of use in all sorts of products have failed to show any reason to believe it's not safe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propylene_glycol#Safety_in_humans

[Major Nikon]

15. The absence of evidence is rarely a great argument for anything

Especially when it's completely contrary to what we already know.

[yallerdawg]

20. What we already know?

The FDA attempted to ban the sale of e-cigarettes following a 2009 study that found detectable levels of carcinogens and toxic chemicals in e-cigarette samples. But a court ruled in 2010 that the FDA had not cited evidence of harm.

[Major Nikon]

22. So we know that rationality prevailed

[yallerdawg]

23. After detecting bad stuff...

we need "evidence of harm?"

Perfectly rational.

[Major Nikon]

24. The water from your spigot contains detectable levels of arsenic

Should it be banned?

[yallerdawg]

26. The arsenic has been scientifically determined to be at safe levels.

Those levels are regulated and monitored.

What you buy at the vape shop and inhale deeply?

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/vapings-dirty-little-secret-e-cigarettes-vape-manufacturing-regulations

[Major Nikon]

27. Most commonly used chemicals also have a known toxicity level

Do you know of any chemical used in any e-cigarette which would come within a cab ride of exceeding those levels?

Because I found no such evidence of any in your link, which brings us back full circle to post #15.

[yallerdawg]

37. Rest assured that what we don't know...

is likely safe based on what we do know?

I'm sorry - I don't find that reassuring at all.

What is certain?

Not smoking and not vaping is best!

[Major Nikon]

48. We regulate things based on known or anticipated harm

Neither is true for vaping.

You don't know that not vaping is best. So no, that's not certain. For all anyone knows there could be positive outcomes, and there's strong reasons based on known evidence to suspect the later is preferred to the former. The obvious problem with regulating things based on poor assumptions is you also don't know what negative outcomes could result.

If you want to play "what if", what if the over regulation of vaping causes less people to switch to an alternative that has minimal to negative risks of harm. You might have just killed thousands of people based on what is now a piss poor assumption at best.

[noamnety]

30. You seem to be arguing in favor of poisoned Flint water.

We want water to be regulated to make sure it's safe. The alternative is not having any safety standards.

Why wouldn't we want the same for e-cigs?

[Major Nikon]

33. Nonsense

[onehandle]

12. The entire city of Philadelphia rolled them into existing smoking laws. For good reason. nt

[beevul]

46. "Good" being spelled A R B I T R A R Y. N/T

[Mosby]

14. I wonder if this opens the door to tax them like cigs?

[redstatebluegirl]

18. There are a ton of those shops in town.

At least half of them are within walking distance of the three high schools. Wonder who their customers are?

[Leith]

25. People Who Are 18 or Older

Just like shops that sell tobacco products.

I quit tobacco 2 1/2 years ago and started vaping. I don't wheeze or have any effects from smoking any more. The only thing that attacking e-cigs is doing is keeping people from quitting "traditional" cigarettes. Is that a good thing?

[Skeeter Barnes]

42. People like me, who smoked for 26 years and could never quit until I tried vaping.

Their customers are adults who have smoked half their lives or more and would like to quit but haven't been able to before vaping came along. FWIW, I now have over 14 months smoke free thanks to vaping. Too bad the Dem party is trying to ruin it.

[Travis_0004]

52. Probably adults who are at least 18 years old

[Hekate]

28. Good

[PennyK]

36. I'm disgusted

The required testing will cost so much that it will drive all manufacturers out of business...except for the companies owned by Big Tobaccco. I switched to an e-cig over two years ago and I buy my juice form a very well-respected company that goes overboard to make safe and careful juice. I'd really rather not go back to smoking...and I really don't want to buy one from a cigarette company!
Yet cigarettes remain legal.

[Skeeter Barnes]

40. That's the idea. Crush the industry and hand it over to their Big Tobacco cronies.

Whatever you do, don't go back to smoking. That's not an option, OK?

[Skeeter Barnes]

41. It was nice while it lasted. Vaping will become as expensive as smoking. Fewer people will quit now.

The cost of smoking vs vaping was the main factor in my decision to switch. The other factor was the great flavor of so many of the different eliquids out there. It tasted so much better than cigarettes! If flavors that people like aren't banned by the FDA with this action they are taking today, you can bet it's in the works. This is all designed to put the little guys out of business so BT can have the industry all to themselves. That is unfortunate because their shitty cigalikes suck ass.

I can just imagine the business the quality juice companies will be doing selling juice, bottles of PG, VG and nic for DIY mixing before all this shit comes down.

[billhicks76]

43. Big Tobacco Behind This

It's their competition.

[billhicks76]

44. Regulate All Caffeine ASAP!!!

[OhioChick]

47. Sounds to me like Big T is lining the "right" pockets n/t

[Nihil]

54. Sad +1 for that. (n/t)

[beevul]

50. This is a GIFT to big tobacco...

These rules are a GIFT to big tobacco, because eventually, big tobacco will be the only entity that can afford all the red tape and expenses.

Nice going, puritans.

[yallerdawg]

51. It is a revelation to see...

how many "free market capitalists" and Libertarians dip into DU on so many subjects.

A true revelation.