I frequently see vapers arguing that e-cigarettes are not a "tobacco product," because they do not actually contain tobacco. They argue that nicotine e-cigarettes are not the same as tobacco or smoking cessation products and should have a classification all of their own.
However, nicotine isn't regulated in the U.S. by what form it takes, but instead by "intended use."
If the nicotine is contained in a product with an "intended use" as a smoking cessation or other treatment, it is then regulated as a "drug" and must go through clinical trials, studies, etc., and the product must meet strict manufacturing protocols before release to the public. If the nicotine is contained in a product with an intended use of "recreational" (ie. intended for human consumption but not as a treatment of any kind) it is regulated as a tobacco product. (A third classification is a pesticide, but that form of nicotine is not allowed for human consumption.)
My views on tobacco and nicotine consumer issues, nanny state policies, Libertarian viewpoints, harm reduction, electronic cigarettes, snus, Consumer Advocates for Smoke-Free Alternatives Association, Smokefree Wisconsin and other random topics that pop up.
Showing posts with label tobacco. Show all posts
Showing posts with label tobacco. Show all posts
Thursday, July 25, 2013
Thursday, June 27, 2013
Please. Just smoke already and quit lying.
Thursday, June 20, 2013
Is distrusting the MHRA's regulation of e-cigarettes "conspiracy theories?"
Recently on a forum for e-cigarette enthusiasts, a commenter said he "saw no harm" in the move to regulate electronic cigarettes as medicine in the U.K., if what the MHRA was saying about just wanting to have e-cigarette companies "apply for licensing and to make sure the nic juices deliver consistent amounts of nicotine as advertised" was true. Apparently expecting doubt from other commenters that the MHRA was being forthright, the commenter said, "Conspiracy theorists have at it."
How is it a conspiracy theory, I asked? These people have 30 years of lying to the public about tobacco, nicotine and low risk alternatives as evidence they have no interest in telling the truth.
How is it a conspiracy theory, I asked? These people have 30 years of lying to the public about tobacco, nicotine and low risk alternatives as evidence they have no interest in telling the truth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
