FDA makes a move to effective outlaw vaping

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Desubot**

jasper76 wrote:
The study summary said "2 leading brands", so I'd guess whatever was among the most 'mainstream' e-cigarettes at the time were sampled for the test.

Eh its hard for me to figure.

not sure if it those refillable cartridge types that look like cigs or those bottled juices for tanks and rebuildables.

not refuting anything since its entirely possible for any industries to have people that cut corners and pump out deadly gak to turn a profit.

but 2 leading brands can mean anything.

**jasper76**

Yeah, I really don't know much about the brands and details around vaping.

In any case, I wouldn't trust anything coming from the 'vape industry' on the subject.

**Desubot**

Indeed, just watching what people vape, and seeing if they are breaking out in deadly cancers

**thesearmsarerob**

jasper76 wrote:
Yeah, I really don't know much about the brands and details around vaping.

In any case, I wouldn't trust anything coming from the 'vape industry' on the subject.

Would you trust Professor John Britton, the Director of the UK Centre for Tobacco & Alcohol Studies? Here he is describing switching from tobacco to E cigs as a no brainer.

https://youtu.be/giyO4xoaekg?t=1m43s

Basically the bottom line of the most recent findings I've seen ( not those from a couple of years ago) is that e cigs are by magnitudes safer than tobacco although not risk free. Regulations that stifle e cig usage and uptake by Tobacco users are therefore detrimental to public health.

**jasper76**

I never mentioned that I think that e-cigarettes are more safe or less safe than tobacco.

I wouldn't trust John Britton out of hand, because I don't know who he is, or what the organization he directs is all about. I'd certainly be casually interested in perusing summaries of any studies they might have done on the subject.

Hopefully, the threat of FDA oversight has encouraged self-regulation with the producers of these products.

Bottom line, I don't trust that vape producers are putting out safe products. I've seen evidence that they are putting out unsafe products, and no evidence (yet) that they are putting out safe products.

**thesearmsarerob**

My point was more, here's an independent person, a well respected academic in the field of tobacco control, who has looked at the safety of vape products. The conclusion that he draws is that if you are a smoker you should switch to a vape device and governments should be supporting this not suppressing it.
He also works with the Royal college of physicians, who as I mentioned proved the causal link between tobacco and cancer in 1962. They have had a huge impact in tobacco controls and public health since then and continue to inform our government in such matters. These aren't vapour industry figures and wouldn't support it if the evidence wasn't there.

The problem with a lot of the studies in the past, which are the ones I see sensationalised most is that the methodology in them was often flawed producing skewed results (eg causing the wicking material to burn and then being surprised that they detected chemicals from combustion)

The industry by and large is self regulating to an extent (there are always some out for a quick buck) as no one wanted to give anti vape movements ammunition. Which is why the diaycetal discovery caused so many vendors to either change recipes or withdraw products entirely for instance.

I'm probably coming across a bit more evangelical than I actually am on the subject but I do feel that the evidence is around to support vape products. No one claims that they are risk free but rather they are a better alternative to tobacco.
We do need some regulation to ensure minimum standards but not at the cost of the whole industry which is what we are faced with here (FDA estimates approx 98% of current products will not be available)

**Inquisitor Lord Bane**

thesearmsarerob wrote:

We do need some regulation to ensure minimum standards but not at the cost of the whole industry which is what we are faced with here (FDA estimates approx 98% of current products will not be available)

Not that I'm defending the FDA or anything, but do you have a source for that? I support some level of regulation, but I don't see them wiping out an entire industry. It would be much more profitable to fine them mercilessly !!FOR THE CHILDREN!!, which seems to be their shtick with the other branches of the tobacco industry.

**Desubot**

Inquisitor Lord Bane wrote:
thesearmsarerob wrote:

We do need some regulation to ensure minimum standards but not at the cost of the whole industry which is what we are faced with here (FDA estimates approx 98% of current products will not be available)

Not that I'm defending the FDA or anything, but do you have a source for that? I support some level of regulation, but I don't see them wiping out an entire industry. It would be much more profitable to fine them mercilessly !!FOR THE CHILDREN!!, which seems to be their shtick with the other branches of the tobacco industry.

IIRC for every product a juice company makes it needs to get tested by the FDA which costs a VERY large amount. which is why im kinda guessing any future vape companies will end up using kickstarter to fund it, or go underground, because its honestly not hard to make these juices. dunno about the mods though.

**thesearmsarerob**

After the grandfather date of 2007 no new vape products will be allowed to be released, after a grace period to move existing stock, approval from the FDA must be obtained. The fees to get a product certified for release are prohibitive for most companies (for instance each different strength of each liquid will require a separate application, which is the same as the tpd in Europe ) to date as far as I am aware since 2007 the FDA has approved 1 new tobacco product.
Even with the fees paid there is no garentee that the product will receive approval. Many companies are already stating that they will have to close as they cannot meet the financial burden of compliance.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Inquisitor Lord Bane wrote:
thesearmsarerob wrote:

We do need some regulation to ensure minimum standards but not at the cost of the whole industry which is what we are faced with here (FDA estimates approx 98% of current products will not be available)

Not that I'm defending the FDA or anything, but do you have a source for that? I support some level of regulation, but I don't see them wiping out an entire industry. It would be much more profitable to fine them mercilessly !!FOR THE CHILDREN!!, which seems to be their shtick with the other branches of the tobacco industry.

This is lifted straight from the FDA analysis of the impact of the new tobacco deeming regulations:

"We assume that between 168 and 1,675 electronic cigarette products could be listed in year 1, and that anywhere from 10 to 20 additional products could be listed in year 2. Approximately between 158 and 1,615 products might be delisted sometime during the 24month period of enforcement discretion; "

So they are expecting around 96% of the known vape products to be taken off the market due to the financial burden or registration.

Full report can be found here

http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/ReportsManualsForms/Reports/EconomicAnalyses/

I found this on page 34 of the analysis of the tobacco deeming regulations. They are fully aware that this will destroy the industry save for big business (tobacco and pharmaceutical companies) that can afford to absorb these costs.

**jasper76**

Seriously, this is a dummy's argument.

Quit smoking. Don't replace tobacco with vape product. Just quit. Forever. Get a divorce from nicotine.

If you replace tobacco with some other nicotine delivery system like vaping or nicorette or whatever, you will still be enthralled to nicontine. Just fething balls up, quit the curse that indigenous North Americans farmed into existence, and don't take any nicotine in your body, forevermore. Sure it will suck ass for 1 day to 2 weeks, but anyone can do it, its all in your head. Just give it up.

**Chief Tugboat**

jasper76 wrote:
Seriously, this is a dummy's argument.

Quit smoking. Don't replace tobacco with vape product. Just quit. Forever. Get a divorce from nicotine.

If you replace tobacco with some other nicotine delivery system like vaping or nicorette or whatever, you will still be enthralled to nicontine. Just fething balls up, quit the curse that indigenous North Americans farmed into existence, and don't take any nicotine in your body, forevermore. Sure it will suck ass for 1 day to 2 weeks, but anyone can do it, its all in your head. Just give it up.

A dummies argument is telling people who are addicted to anything, to "just quit". Much like telling a morbidly obese person to not eat so much, things can be a little more complicated than that. Also just an FYI, nicotine isn't the only addictive property to smoking, one of those being the oral fixation ( I call it the ritual) . There is a reason that other nicotine delivery systems aren't effective, they simply don't provide that feeling you get when buy a new pack, slap it a few times to pack them, rip open that box, put one of those cancer sticks in your mouth and that lighter up to your face.

I've met literally hundreds of people (through my family's B&M vape store) that haven't bought cigarettes once they fully committed to Vaping, and almost all of the time, they slowly lower the nicotine level they vape. They also have told me that they can breathe better, and just feel better in general. Anecdotal? Sure, but I've seen it countless times with my own eyes.

**ProtoClone**

jasper76 wrote:
Seriously, this is a dummy's argument.

Quit smoking. Don't replace tobacco with vape product. Just quit. Forever. Get a divorce from nicotine.

If you replace tobacco with some other nicotine delivery system like vaping or nicorette or whatever, you will still be enthralled to nicontine. Just fething balls up, quit the curse that indigenous North Americans farmed into existence, and don't take any nicotine in your body, forevermore. Sure it will suck ass for 1 day to 2 weeks, but anyone can do it, its all in your head. Just give it up.

Well, if it worked like that it would be a lot easier to quit, wouldn't it?

There is a saying when it comes to addiction: You never stop being an addict.

As a former smoker myself I can say this is true and it is not as easy as just balls up and quitting.

**kronk**

Chief Tugboat wrote:
jasper76 wrote:
Seriously, this is a dummy's argument.

Quit smoking. Don't replace tobacco with vape product. Just quit. Forever. Get a divorce from nicotine.

If you replace tobacco with some other nicotine delivery system like vaping or nicorette or whatever, you will still be enthralled to nicontine. Just fething balls up, quit the curse that indigenous North Americans farmed into existence, and don't take any nicotine in your body, forevermore. Sure it will suck ass for 1 day to 2 weeks, but anyone can do it, its all in your head. Just give it up.

A dummies argument is telling people who are addicted to anything, to "just quit".

I agree with Chief Tugboat. Saying "Just Quit" to a person with an addiction is a clear indication that you have no idea what you're talking about.

**thesearmsarerob**

Also just an FYI, nicotine isn't the only addictive property to smoking, one of those being the oral fixation ( I call it the ritual) . There is a reason that other nicotine delivery systems aren't effective, they simply don't provide that feeling you get when buy a new pack, slap it a few times to pack them, rip open that box, put one of those cancer sticks in your mouth and that lighter up to your face.

Tobacco looks like it may contain other addictive chemicals in addition to nicotine which is why they are hard to quit.

https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/tobacco/are-there-other-chemicals-may-contribute-to-tobacco-addiction

http://archives.drugabuse.gov/NIDA_Notes/NNVol13N3/tobacco.html

It is thought that these chemicals can increase the reinforcing properties of nicotine and this may be why traditional NRT is not always effective as it doesn't produce the same level of satisfaction. As only nicotine is added to vape liquids these chemicals aren't present and may be a reason why people are finding it easier to quit with the aid of vape products. Not that you will be able to tell people that under the FDA deeming regs.

**Ensis Ferrae**

Chief Tugboat wrote:

A dummies argument is telling people who are addicted to anything, to "just quit". Much like telling a morbidly obese person to not eat so much, things can be a little more complicated than that. Also just an FYI, nicotine isn't the only addictive property to smoking, one of those being the oral fixation ( I call it the ritual) . There is a reason that other nicotine delivery systems aren't effective, they simply don't provide that feeling you get when buy a new pack, slap it a few times to pack them, rip open that box, put one of those cancer sticks in your mouth and that lighter up to your face.

I recall reading an article from Australia (so maybe our death worlders can help here) about a study done down there that found that long term smoking reduces the likelihood of a person developing Alzheimer's... So just because its addicting doesn't mean it's ALL bad, right??

**Spinner**

Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Chief Tugboat wrote:

A dummies argument is telling people who are addicted to anything, to "just quit". Much like telling a morbidly obese person to not eat so much, things can be a little more complicated than that. Also just an FYI, nicotine isn't the only addictive property to smoking, one of those being the oral fixation ( I call it the ritual) . There is a reason that other nicotine delivery systems aren't effective, they simply don't provide that feeling you get when buy a new pack, slap it a few times to pack them, rip open that box, put one of those cancer sticks in your mouth and that lighter up to your face.

I recall reading an article from Australia (so maybe our death worlders can help here) about a study done down there that found that long term smoking reduces the likelihood of a person developing Alzheimer's... So just because its addicting doesn't mean it's ALL bad, right??

Depends on whether or not it's because long term smokers aren't lasting long enough to develop it.

I'm a little blown away by all the pushback against having the FDA look at what people are putting in their bodies. Isn't that what the FDA is for? I mean, imagine it was...chicken processing plants or something, and a lot of smaller chicken processing plants were upset because of the fees for having the FDA inspect them. I mean, yes, it sucks if the cost is prohibitive, but there's a reason it exists.

Maybe they could take up cricket farming?

**kronk**

Spinner wrote:

I'm a little blown away by all the pushback against having the FDA look at what people are putting in their bodies. Isn't that what the FDA is for?

Same here. I thought that gak had to be done before you put it on the market. We spent lots of time and $$$ before any of my UL products I was on the development team went to market. And you don't eat drywall.

**Ensis Ferrae**

Spinner wrote:
Depends on whether or not it's because long term smokers aren't lasting long enough to develop it.

Lol, my own personal, unscientific thinking on this is two-fold: First, I've noticed smokers constantly having to pat themselves down, trying to remember where they put their lighter. This "stimulates" brain activity, forcing it to remember things, which I suppose could work to prevent a disease that makes people forget things.

Secondly, smoking does tend to be a social activity today. Smokers seem to always smoke in groups (much like women going to the restroom when out in public

), and I know I've seen other studies done showing that higher levels of human, face to face interactions also aid in diminishing risks for certain diseases.

**Desubot**

Spinner wrote:

I'm a little blown away by all the pushback against having the FDA look at what people are putting in their bodies. Isn't that what the FDA is for? I mean, imagine it was...chicken processing plants or something, and a lot of smaller chicken processing plants were upset because of the fees for having the FDA inspect them. I mean, yes, it sucks if the cost is prohibitive, but there's a reason it exists.

Maybe they could take up cricket farming?

I can see the heavy push back when they set it up to kill the industry.

**kronk**

Desubot wrote:

I can see the heavy push back when they set it up to kill the industry.

Where is this coming from? I went to the FDA website, and all I can find is that this year, they are stating that the ENDS (Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems) must follow the same regulations as cigarettes and other tobacco products. It is defining the legal responsibilities of Vape shops and manufacturers. It's still tobacco.

http://www.fda.gov/TobaccoProducts/Labeling/ProductsIngredientsComponents/ucm456610.htm

FDA Regulation of ENDS

In 2016, FDA finalized a rule extending our regulatory authority to cover all tobacco products, including vaporizers, vape pens, hookah pens, electronic cigarettes (E-Cigarettes), e-pipes, and all other ENDS. FDA now regulates the manufacture, import, packaging, labeling, advertising, promotion, sale, and distribution of ENDS. This includes components and parts of ENDS* but excludes accessories.
However, products marketed for therapeutic purposes (for example, marketed as a product to help people quit smoking) are regulated by the FDA through the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER). FDA recently proposed a rule clarifying the jurisdiction over tobacco products, drugs, and devices.

Statistics about ENDS Use

More than 3 million middle and high school students were current users of e-cigarettes in 2015, up from an estimated 2.46 million in 2014.1, 2
Sixteen percent of high school and 5.3 percent of middle school students were current users of e-cigarettes in 2015, making e-cigarettes the most commonly used tobacco product among youth for the second consecutive year.1
During 2011-2015, e-cigarette use rose from 1.5 percent to 16.0 percent among high school students and from 0.6 percent to 5.3 percent among middle school students.1
In 2013-2014, 81% of current youth e-cigarette users cited the availability of appealing flavors as the primary reason for use.3
In 2014, 12.6% of U.S. adults had ever tried an e-cigarette, and about 3.7% of adults used e-cigarettes daily or some days.4

Electronic Nicotine Delivery System components
*“Components” or “parts” include, among other things, software or an assembly of materials intended or reasonably expected alter or affect the tobacco product’s performance, composition, constituents, or characteristics; or to be used with or for the human consumption of a tobacco product. For a full definition of ENDS components, parts, and accessories, please read the Deeming Tobacco Products To Be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Examples of components and parts of ENDS include, but are not limited to:
E-liquids
A glass or plastic vial container of e-liquid
Cartridges
Atomizers
Certain batteries
Cartomizers and clearomizers
Digital display or lights to adjust settings
Tank systems
Drip tips
Flavorings for ENDS
Programmable software

Vape Shops That Mix E-Liquids or Modify Products

If you operate a vape shop that mixes or prepares liquid nicotine or nicotine-containing e-liquids, or creates or modifies any type of ENDS, you are considered a manufacturer and must comply with all of the legal requirements for tobacco product manufacturers. As a result, some vape shops may have legal responsibilities as both manufacturers and retailers of tobacco products.

Retail Sales of ENDS, E-Liquids, or their Components or Parts Made or Derived from Tobacco

If you sell ENDS, e-liquids, or their components or parts made or derived from tobacco, please read this summary of federal rules that retailers must follow.
You may also share the fact sheet below with your staff and post it in your store.

You can find a list of retailer responsibilities for ENDS in Deeming Tobacco Products To Be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. In addition, our website offers more information on regulations, guidance and webinars for retailers.

**Desubot**

kronk wrote:
Desubot wrote:

I can see the heavy push back when they set it up to kill the industry.

Where is this coming from? I went to the FDA website, and all I can find is that this year, they are stating that the ENDS (Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems) must follow the same regulations as cigarettes and other tobacco products. It is defining the legal responsibilities of Vape shops and manufacturers. It's still tobacco.

http://www.fda.gov/TobaccoProducts/Labeling/ProductsIngredientsComponents/ucm456610.htm

FDA Regulation of ENDS

In 2016, FDA finalized a rule extending our regulatory authority to cover all tobacco products, including vaporizers, vape pens, hookah pens, electronic cigarettes (E-Cigarettes), e-pipes, and all other ENDS. FDA now regulates the manufacture, import, packaging, labeling, advertising, promotion, sale, and distribution of ENDS. This includes components and parts of ENDS* but excludes accessories.
However, products marketed for therapeutic purposes (for example, marketed as a product to help people quit smoking) are regulated by the FDA through the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER). FDA recently proposed a rule clarifying the jurisdiction over tobacco products, drugs, and devices.

Statistics about ENDS Use

More than 3 million middle and high school students were current users of e-cigarettes in 2015, up from an estimated 2.46 million in 2014.1, 2
Sixteen percent of high school and 5.3 percent of middle school students were current users of e-cigarettes in 2015, making e-cigarettes the most commonly used tobacco product among youth for the second consecutive year.1
During 2011-2015, e-cigarette use rose from 1.5 percent to 16.0 percent among high school students and from 0.6 percent to 5.3 percent among middle school students.1
In 2013-2014, 81% of current youth e-cigarette users cited the availability of appealing flavors as the primary reason for use.3
In 2014, 12.6% of U.S. adults had ever tried an e-cigarette, and about 3.7% of adults used e-cigarettes daily or some days.4

Electronic Nicotine Delivery System components
*“Components” or “parts” include, among other things, software or an assembly of materials intended or reasonably expected alter or affect the tobacco product’s performance, composition, constituents, or characteristics; or to be used with or for the human consumption of a tobacco product. For a full definition of ENDS components, parts, and accessories, please read the Deeming Tobacco Products To Be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Examples of components and parts of ENDS include, but are not limited to:
E-liquids
A glass or plastic vial container of e-liquid
Cartridges
Atomizers
Certain batteries
Cartomizers and clearomizers
Digital display or lights to adjust settings
Tank systems
Drip tips
Flavorings for ENDS
Programmable software

Vape Shops That Mix E-Liquids or Modify Products

If you operate a vape shop that mixes or prepares liquid nicotine or nicotine-containing e-liquids, or creates or modifies any type of ENDS, you are considered a manufacturer and must comply with all of the legal requirements for tobacco product manufacturers. As a result, some vape shops may have legal responsibilities as both manufacturers and retailers of tobacco products.

Retail Sales of ENDS, E-Liquids, or their Components or Parts Made or Derived from Tobacco

If you sell ENDS, e-liquids, or their components or parts made or derived from tobacco, please read this summary of federal rules that retailers must follow.
You may also share the fact sheet below with your staff and post it in your store.

You can find a list of retailer responsibilities for ENDS in Deeming Tobacco Products To Be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. In addition, our website offers more information on regulations, guidance and webinars for retailers.

IIRC as it is a tobacco product all juices need to be certified. aka they need to be sent for testing which is very cost prohibitive for manufacturers.
the Taxs on tobacco im sure everyone can deal with as well as the shops needing licenses.
its i believe part of the 500 page legal document that the FDA put out.

**kronk**

IIRC as it is a tobacco product all juices need to be certified. aka they need to be sent for testing which is very cost prohibitive for manufacturers.

I've worked in manufacturing since 1998. Everything I have ever made has had to go through extensive testing before going to market. That's particularly true when it comes to UL rated products (Fire ratings, etc).

The FDA is even more strict, I know. But shouldn't they be? You're selling a product that people consume. You have to know what is in the fumes it gives off, toxicity of any ingredients, etc. Were I a Vape manufacturer, I would start with ingredients that have already been approved, perhaps for another food/drink industry.

Dunno.

**Spinner**

Right. If you can't afford to make sure that your product won't give people super-cancer, maybe you should be selling something else.

Especially if it's marketed as a safer alternative to cigarettes.

**Desubot**

kronk wrote:
IIRC as it is a tobacco product all juices need to be certified. aka they need to be sent for testing which is very cost prohibitive for manufacturers.

I've worked in manufacturing since 1998. Everything I have ever made has had to go through extensive testing before going to market. That's particularly true when it comes to UL rated products (Fire ratings, etc).

The FDA is even more strict, I know. But shouldn't they be? You're selling a product that people consume. You have to know what is in the fumes it gives off, toxicity of any ingredients, etc. Were I a Vape manufacturer, I would start with ingredients that have already been approved, perhaps for another food/drink industry.

Dunno.

Well certainly
and certainly many do use food grade ingredients. but when they are mixed in any shape or form they have to put it through testing.

and i agree 100% you need to know whats being puffed since things dont always react the same in heat as it does in an ice cold drink.

and while i agree its 100% necessary to test these juices, its still going to kill a lot of businesses which is a shame.

**Chief Tugboat**

@ thesearmsarerob - Yes i know there are more chemicals that may cause addiction that they add to cigarettes, I was just naming one that gets looked over, the oral fixation of actually smoking.

@ Ensis Ferrae - I don't understand what your point is (maybe I'm dumb). My reply was to jasper76 and his nonchalant attitude about "hey man just quit smoking, its not that hard, you'll just be uncomfortable for a few days" which is ridiculous.

@Spinner - What blowback? Myself and others ITT, have repeatedly stated that we are all for research and regulations. All of the big E-juice manufacturers really aren't worried about the FDA's new regulations, because they have tons of $$. I think some people are more skeptical because it really will kill small E-Juice companies, which I'm personally torn on because I do believe there should be a "buy in" price, but I also hate to see little entrepreneurs get the shaft.

**thesearmsarerob**

It's not just the juice that comes under this but anything that is intended to be used to vape, so mods, batteries, wicking material and resistance wire are all within the scope if these deeming g regulations as it stands each separate item needing to be okayed with the fda. This is where the costs mount up, no one but huge companies could afford this.

It's like making all match companies and lighter manufacturers have to seek fda approval in case their products are used to smoke with. Paying separately for each product that they produce.

**jreilly89**

thesearmsarerob wrote:
It's not just the juice that comes under this but anything that is intended to be used to vape, so mods, batteries, wicking material and resistance wire are all within the scope if these deeming g regulations as it stands each separate item needing to be okayed with the fda. This is where the costs mount up, no one but huge companies could afford this.

It's like making all match companies and lighter manufacturers have to seek fda approval in case their products are used to smoke with. Paying separately for each product that they produce.

To be fair:

http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2016/05/10/e-cigarette-explodes-in-classmates-face-pkg.waff

http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Orange-County-Man-Loses-Eye-in-E-Cig-Explosion-378894001.html

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2015/10/28/florida-man-placed-in-coma-after-e-cigarette-explosion.html

Cigarettes may kill you, but they don't explode.

**Desubot**

jreilly89 wrote:
thesearmsarerob wrote:
It's not just the juice that comes under this but anything that is intended to be used to vape, so mods, batteries, wicking material and resistance wire are all within the scope if these deeming g regulations as it stands each separate item needing to be okayed with the fda. This is where the costs mount up, no one but huge companies could afford this.

It's like making all match companies and lighter manufacturers have to seek fda approval in case their products are used to smoke with. Paying separately for each product that they produce.

To be fair:

http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2016/05/10/e-cigarette-explodes-in-classmates-face-pkg.waff

http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Orange-County-Man-Loses-Eye-in-E-Cig-Explosion-378894001.html

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2015/10/28/florida-man-placed-in-coma-after-e-cigarette-explosion.html

Cigarettes may kill you, but they don't explode.

Yeah dont buy cheap mods or batteries from China

**thesearmsarerob**

If you mess about with lithium batteries and don't know ohms law you will have a bad time. Most of these cases are a result if people building with a too low resistance or in some cases carrying around batteries loose in their pocket with their keys etc. Cases of battery venting are usually down to user error however it has been the case that some battery rerappers overstate the capacity of their products. (eg efest batteries)
How many cases if these accidents have there been? Compared to the amount of tobacco related deaths I think we are still well within the harm reduction bracket..... (I am aware that is a bit of a mercenary way of putting it)
It's is also an argument for making sure people are educated about these products. Mech mods (basically a metal tube that creates a circit between the battery and atomiser) aren't beginner friendly devices as they have no inbuilt protections like other regulated mods, which is why I support some regulation, it is irresponsible for vape shops to sell these to a new vapers and a reputable establishment wouldn't (imo) . I just think as they stand these current regulations go too far and create an uneven playing ground between vape products and tobacco, which is known to be worse for you .

**Spinner**

Chief Tugboat wrote:

@Spinner - What blowback? Myself and others ITT, have repeatedly stated that we are all for research and regulations. All of the big E-juice manufacturers really aren't worried about the FDA's new regulations, because they have tons of $$. I think some people are more skeptical because it really will kill small E-Juice companies, which I'm personally torn on because I do believe there should be a "buy in" price, but I also hate to see little entrepreneurs get the shaft.

Maybe 'blowback' was a little dramatic, but if you look at the OP, that's the general tone I'm talking about.

Again, it sucks that it would hurt small businesses, but if you can't afford to make sure your product is safe, you shouldn't be selling it.

If we want to do away with that, it might be time to put together a small lead paint start-up...