The Vape Shop Times
by Joshua Brown
Thursday, March 5, 2015
Politicians can tax sin, but not medicine.
The FDA has ruled that propylene glycol, vegetable glycerin, food flavorings, and nicotine are all safe for human consumption. The FDA currently regulates all of these items, including nicotine, as part of their broad function of regulating what we put into our bodies. The only odd-man-out in this bunch of components is nicotine.
As we’ve discussed before, propylene glycol is used as a drug delivery system for many creams and all nebulizers on the market. Vegetable glycerin and food flavorings are regulated as food additives and stabilizers. Nicotine, however, is only regulated when used for “smoking cessation” purposes.
The reason for this was once a single fold issue, being that nicotine is a common component in pesticide, and to regulate it beyond the realm of “smoking cessation” would force the FDA to overreach into the bounds of the US Department of Agriculture.
The second fold is now the admittance of vaping as a form of smoking cessation.
You see, if the FDA steps in and is required to study the effects of vaping they’re going to study the reasons why, the results of, and the health impact from vaping. This includes, but is not limited to, smoking cessation.
So, why is it so scary that the FDA look into vaping as a form of smoking cessation? It’s not for the everyday commoner like you and I, but instead, our elected officials in state and federal office who are fearful of losing tax revenue generated by current tobacco users.
To tax vaping and e-cigarettes like standard tobacco (we’ve not seen anyone use the term “analogue” in a while, so we’re gonna try and bring that back), you have to prove its harmful and detrimental impact on society as a whole. It’s easy to prove with tobacco, but much harder to prove with vaping, for two reasons:
First, it’s hard to prove that vaping should receive what are essentially sin taxes because it’s not any more harmful than drinking soda with caffeine in it.
Second, if it’s proven to have significant health benefits as a form of smoking cessation, then vaping builds an image similar to that of nicotine gum and patches, which are medicine.
So, FDA, we encourage you to go beyond your currently regulation of e-liquid components, and research and regulate all four components of e-liquid in the state that they are combined. We’re ready to once-and-for-all put an end to this political babble bullshit and move on with a healthier, happier, far less harmful lifestyle.
source:
http://vapeshopsi.blogspot.com/2015/03/politicians-can-tax-sin-but-not-medicine.html
by Joshua Brown
Thursday, March 5, 2015
Politicians can tax sin, but not medicine.
The FDA has ruled that propylene glycol, vegetable glycerin, food flavorings, and nicotine are all safe for human consumption. The FDA currently regulates all of these items, including nicotine, as part of their broad function of regulating what we put into our bodies. The only odd-man-out in this bunch of components is nicotine.
As we’ve discussed before, propylene glycol is used as a drug delivery system for many creams and all nebulizers on the market. Vegetable glycerin and food flavorings are regulated as food additives and stabilizers. Nicotine, however, is only regulated when used for “smoking cessation” purposes.
The reason for this was once a single fold issue, being that nicotine is a common component in pesticide, and to regulate it beyond the realm of “smoking cessation” would force the FDA to overreach into the bounds of the US Department of Agriculture.
The second fold is now the admittance of vaping as a form of smoking cessation.
You see, if the FDA steps in and is required to study the effects of vaping they’re going to study the reasons why, the results of, and the health impact from vaping. This includes, but is not limited to, smoking cessation.
So, why is it so scary that the FDA look into vaping as a form of smoking cessation? It’s not for the everyday commoner like you and I, but instead, our elected officials in state and federal office who are fearful of losing tax revenue generated by current tobacco users.
To tax vaping and e-cigarettes like standard tobacco (we’ve not seen anyone use the term “analogue” in a while, so we’re gonna try and bring that back), you have to prove its harmful and detrimental impact on society as a whole. It’s easy to prove with tobacco, but much harder to prove with vaping, for two reasons:
First, it’s hard to prove that vaping should receive what are essentially sin taxes because it’s not any more harmful than drinking soda with caffeine in it.
Second, if it’s proven to have significant health benefits as a form of smoking cessation, then vaping builds an image similar to that of nicotine gum and patches, which are medicine.
So, FDA, we encourage you to go beyond your currently regulation of e-liquid components, and research and regulate all four components of e-liquid in the state that they are combined. We’re ready to once-and-for-all put an end to this political babble bullshit and move on with a healthier, happier, far less harmful lifestyle.
source:
http://vapeshopsi.blogspot.com/2015/03/politicians-can-tax-sin-but-not-medicine.html
