FDA Deadline Extended for E-Cigarette Comments

, The National Law Journal

   | 2 Comments

The Food and Drug Administration has extended until August 8 the deadline for comments on its plan to expand its regulation of tobacco products to include electronic cigarettes.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at customercare@alm.com

What's being said

  • Laura Y

    With relativity new but rapidly growing e-cigarette market it is very hard to find right and competitive coverage for your business. One of our specialties at http://statecoinsurance.com/content/e-cigarette-insurance is electronic cigarette or so called e cigarette insurance. We helped numerous new and established businesses in this novel market. State & Co Insurance works with several insurance carriers in U.S. that place this risk.

  • kathologist

    The questions being considered are not necessarily the most important or relevant ones from the FDA-CTP.

    Consumer protections are needed for consistent labeling practices, production and SOME regulation. However, most regulation, ordinances, and restrictions being enacted now and in the near future are subjective-
    Don‘t vape where we can see you, don‘t stand where we can see you, don‘t go to our parks where we can see you, and some go as far as don‘t vape indoors unless several expensive and unnecessary measures are taken to soothe the unfounded fears of the willfully ignorant.

    I live in California, which is tinder dry for the third year in a row. The immediate benefit to all communities is the huge reduction in fire danger. Fighting fires is dangerous, expensive and deadly.

    I also live in a rural area that the majority are lower middle class at best. They are older, in fair to poor health and grandparents are raising their grandkids. This is the demo that needs this safer alternative the most. An affordable alternative that greatly improves the quality of life for the community.

    Why the propaganda from the American Lung Association, the American Cancer Society and organizations like the Legacy Foundation funding spokespeople like Stanton Glantz to confuse the issue by INSISTING that vaping is equal to tobacco smoking and the ordinances, laws and regulations are right to do so is now becoming apparent with the latest move (May 2014) in the CA Senate over SB648.

    When Ms Corbett amended her Bill to be strictly about restrictions on e-cigarettes from vending machines to minors, the anti-smoking/anti-nicotine groups did an about face during the Hearing and were against it. Asked straight out, the groups sheepishly replied yes to agreeing it was okay for minors to access e-cigarettes from vending machines.
    Note: To my knowledge, there are NO actual "e-cigarette vending machines" known to those of us in the vape industry.

    This awkward move reveals the agenda beneath their campaign against a smokeless alternative that is magnitudes safer that combusted tobacco cigarettes. These electronic devices do not require USP nicotine to be effective whereas ALL brand name Nicotine Replacement Therapies (and almost all available OTC) DO.

    Retail e-liquid IS NOT a tobacco product. Retail e-liquid is not a SERIOUS health problem. Retail e-liquid flavors are not the issue. Think about it.

    In the bigger picture, all of those issues pale in comparison to the quality of life improvements that are an immediate result of switching to a smokeless product to VASTLY OVERSTATED DANGERS.
    http://casaa.org

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202665657672

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.