3 ms·
The FDA should most definitely regulate e-cigs in some way. If not the vaporizers, then certainly the fluid. At the very least, I would want my country's regula
by icegreentea 14y ago
The FDA should most definitely regulate e-cigs in some way. If not the vaporizers, then certainly the fluid. At the very least, I would want my country's regulatory body (Canadian here) to at least enforce labeling and quality standards (if you claim your fluid is 95% propylene glycol, and 5% nicotine concentrate, then you better be selling that). As a customer, I do not have the expertise, equipment, nor funding to do this testing myself, just as I do not have the expertise, equipment, nor funding to determine if ibuprofen actually has the stated amount of active ingredient, that my free range chicken actually is free range chicken, that my nicotine patches contain nicotine, etc.
- uvdiv 14y agoI believe he means the FDA will impose restrictions that will reduce the use of e-cigarettes. Not precisely what "regulate" means, but a common connotation.
- arrrg 14y agoIs there any indication that the FDA will actually do this?
- uvdiv 14y agoThere are already FDA regulations which severely restrict their advertising, FTA: "The companies are not allowed to market them as smoking cessation devices because that would put them in the category of other nicotine replacement products that are regulated by the FDA, such as nicotine gum or patches," Felberbaum says. Certianly this slows down their adoption. This is his point: FDA restricting something harmful without regard for harm reduction. This kills people, in the net.
- arrrg 14y agoI think you are quite confused about the issue. This is not a restriction imposed by the FDA, this is a restriction manufacturers impose on themselves. There would be no problem marketing those cigarettes as smoking cessation devices, they would then just fall under the same rules as other such devices (nicotine patches, gum) and manufacturers don’t want that. That’s the issue. Surely, if those cigarettes are marketed as smoking cessation devices they should have to follow the same rules as other such devices have to follow. As to why those devices are more tightly regulated? Well, duh. They claim to have a medical effect. If you want to claim that you better, well … This seemed perfectly clear from this passage in the article. You seem to be quite confused about it.
- uvdiv 14y agoThere would be no problem marketing those cigarettes as smoking cessation devices, they would then just fall under the same rules as other such devices (nicotine patches, gum) and manufacturers don’t want that. If they are being deterred, then maybe the FDA regulation is too burdensome.
- javert 14y agoThat isn't really a "maybe"; it's almost a certainty.
- arrrg 14y agoWell, that’s a nice get-out-of-jail-free card for those manufacturers, isn’t it? I’m sorry, but if you want to claim that something is a smoking cessation device you better back it up with solid evidence. If you don’t want to, you can still sell it, but don’t claim it’s something you didn’t prove it is.
- jdietrich 14y agoAll reputable manufacturers provide GC/MS data for their e-liquids. The best own their own analytical laboratories and provide test data for every manufactured batch. I double-dog-dare you to find any industry with higher standards of transparency and integrity.
- epsylon 14y agoAny industry in which testing is done by independant laboratories is better by nature.
- GhotiFish 14y agoMinor nitpick: I'm pretty sure that ratio would kill you immediately. You would inhale, and then spontaneously die. Which kind of supplements your point. Really nicotine is pretty scary stuff if it's isolated.