Menu
Cart 0

FDA should ‘butt out’ of vaping regulations, says Steve Forbes

Posted by Matt Rowland on

Billionaire Steve Forbes, Editor-in-Chief of Forbes Magazine, is making news today with his scathing rebuke of the controversial FDA deeming regulations.  Often provocative and always outspoken, the two-time candidate for the Republican presidential nomination did not mince words.  Forbes is aggressively calling on the Trump Administration to quit stalling and take action for an immediate repeal.

In his first month in office, President Trump has already been very busy signing numerous executive orders overturning other Obama-enacted federal regulations.  He killed a rule that previously restricted coal companies from dumping hazardous mining debris into our nation’s water system.  He’s reversed a previous ruling that placed a stay on further development of the Dakota Access pipeline.  And he’s implemented an immigration ban that was swiftly overturned by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals  in less than a week.   

Clearly, Trump is not afraid to make waves.  And neither is Steve Forbes.  So, what’s the holdup on repealing the FDA deeming regulations?

Forbes blasts ‘FDA’s anti-vaping Jihadists’

Steve Forbes’ blistering editorial starts off with a bang.  Entitled, “President Trump's Deregulators Should Tell the FDA's Anti-Vaping Jihadists to Butt Out,” the article calls FDA officials like Mitch Zeller and Jack Henningfield “anti-vaping Jihadists” with a “perverse mindset” that is “fanatical” and “capricious.” 

(Related Article:  MITCH ZELLER AND JACK HENNINGFIELD: THE BIG PHARMA CONSPIRACY BEHIND THE FDA E-CIG REGULATIONS)

He makes fun of the FDA’s constant claims “with no credible justification” that vaping is a gateway to smoking.  He questions the predicate date of the FDA deeming regulations that is retroactively placed way back to February of 2007, some 10 years ago.  And he reprimands the FDA for trying to convince the American People that vaping and smoking are essentially one-in-the-same.

“One area of rampant regulatory abuse the Trump Administration should attack is the war against e-cigarettes. ‘Vaping’ has been a godsend for people who are trying to quit smoking. It gives users the kick from nicotine without inhaling all the tars and other substances that make smoking cigarettes so lethal. Yet a perverse mind-set reigns among health regulators and fanatical antismoking crusaders: Against all honest scientific evidence, they equate vaping with lighting up actual cigarettes. They claim, with no credible justification, that e-cigarettes are a gateway to the real thing.”

But Forbes is just getting starting.  He also demands that Donald Trump and his team of “rule-liberators” also abolish two additional FDA regulations that have nothing to do whatsoever with vaping.

The billionaire editor renounces a regulation that requires manufacturers of boutique cigars to undergo a “wholly unnecessary approval process for new blends.”  He also blasts another FDA restriction placed on pipe shops that mix together two different blends of pipe tobacco when each has already been individually pre-approved by the FDA.

(Related Article:  FORBES ACCUSES FDA OF ASSIGNING ‘ZERO VALUE’ TO SMOKE-RELATED DEATHS)


Share this post


The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author's and do not necessarily represent the viewpoints, policy or company position of Vapes.com, the rest of our staff, and/or any/all contributors to this site.



← Older Post Newer Post →


  • Hello, for an english class I am taking I am required to share a brief summary of some of the research I am working on for our final research paper. I have chosen to write about the FDA deeming regulations against the E-cigarette industry and why they should cease these regulations, or severely revise them.

    The FDA deeming regulations against the e-cigarette industry could effectively create a industry wide shut down in the America market place due to the high price of acquiring a Pre-market Tobacco Application (PMTA) for products that were created after 2007 (fda.gov). This application fee is estimated by the FDA at close to $500,000 depending on the product. While their reasoning for this is due to the unknown hazards of e-cigarettes to the public, many studies published by organizations such as Health New Zealand and the Royal College of Physicians in London show that based off their in depth and quantitative research studies, E-cigarettes up to 1000 times safer that traditional cigarettes (Nicotine Without Smoke). With almost 11,000 e-cigarette retailers in the United States registered on Yelp alone, this ban on e-cigarettes could cost thousands of jobs and shut down thousands of businesses nationwide (Groskopf, Christopher). Not only could these regulations cost people jobs, and deny smokers of a healthier alternative, but the shut down of the e-cigarette industry could also be dangerous to nonsmokers. Every year, over 3,000 nonsmokers die from lung cancer caused by secondhand smoke from traditional cigarettes (Secondhand Smoke and Cancer). In a study conducted by T. R. McAuley, secondhand vapor from an e-cigarette poses no danger to people exposed to it (851). This is more reason to allow the e-cigarette industry to maintain it’s status. Smokers, nonsmokers, and business owners all might suffer if the FDA deeming regulations are not changed or ceased.

    Sources:
    “Commonly Asked Questions: About the Center for Tobacco Products” fad.gov. January 2017. Web. March 5 2017 <https://www.fda.gov/TobaccoProducts/AboutCTP/ucm378205.htm#1>

    Groskopf, Christopher. “What Yelp data reveal about the sudden rise of vape shops in America”. qz.com. February 2016. Web. 28 February 2017. <https://qz.com/608469/what-yelp-data-tells-us-about-vaping/>

    McAuley, T. R. “Comparison of the Effects of E-Cigarette Vapor and Cigarette Smoke on Indoor Air Quality.” Inhalation Toxicology, vol. 24, no. 12, Oct. 2012, pp. 850-857. Academic Search Premier. Web. March 5 2017. <http://search.ebscohost.com.ccco.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=82144667&site=ehost-live>

    “Nicotine Without Smoke”. Royal College of Physicians. April 2016. Web. March 5 2017. <file:///Users/eeega34/Downloads/Nicotine%20without%20smoke_0%20(1).pdf>

    “Secondhand Smoke and Cancer” cancer.gov. National Cancer Institute, January 2011. Web. 28 February 2017. <https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/tobacco/second-hand-smoke-fact-sheet>

    Eric on

Leave a comment

Please note, comments must be approved before they are published.