The FDA's War on Juul Will Kill People
Bureaucrats say they want to save lives. But they're moving to block a tool that is proven to help smokers quit entirely.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/68c83/68c8381ae6eb30fcf8dba0228a675bdb97cb4b70" alt="woman vapes with Juul woman vapes with Juul | Niyi Fote/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom"
There's something terrifying about a government so powerful that it can shut down your business overnight without even bothering to offer substantive arguments. Yet that's what U.S. Food and Drug Administration bureaucrats just did to the e-cigarette company Juul. While Juul got a stay of execution from a court, the company is one of the many victims of the FDA's counterproductive war on nicotine. Most of the other victims will be cigarette smokers.
I have followed the issue for several years and there is no doubt in my mind that Juul is an effective way to transition away from smoking into alternative, safer sources of nicotine. Vaping doesn't end nicotine consumption, but it's still a real step toward a world without cigarettes. In fact, it is now proven that e-cigarettes are more effective than traditional, FDA-approved nicotine-replacement therapies at getting smokers to quit entirely.
In its 125,000-page application to the FDA, Juul reminded the agency of more than 110 studies showing the benefits of e-cigarettes over traditional nicotine consumption. The company has also been a good team player, jumping through all the hoops thrown at it by the anti-vaping brigades. As the Reason Foundation's Guy Bentley reminds us in the New York Daily News, "Juul complied with nearly every request made by critics including pulling its original marketing campaigns in 2016, voluntarily removing all of its non-tobacco and menthol flavors from the market in 2019, and supporting an increase in the tobacco age from 18 to 21."
And yet the FDA has ordered all Juul e-cigarette products off the market even though its own decision features this remarkable admission: "To date, the FDA has not received clinical information to suggest an immediate hazard associated with the use of the JUUL device or JUULpods." In other words, neither Juul's effectiveness in turning smokers away from more dangerous products nor its success at getting some smokers to quit altogether is, for the FDA, sufficient evidence of the product's benefit to public health.
Don't hold your breath waiting for good arguments coming from the FDA. The Competitive Enterprise Institute's Michelle Minton writes that "the FDA's rationale that Juul products lacked sufficient toxicological evidence is confusing, given that the agency has previously approved IQOS heated tobacco products and lower-nicotine content combustible cigarettes, 'both of which obviously have worse [toxicological] profiles than a Juul.'" She adds that "the FDA has granted marketing approval for other e-cigarette brands" despite these products being no safer.
As for concerns over kids' nicotine use, the FDA's decision comes at a time when Juul is no longer the most popular vaping product among young people and when vaping is becoming remarkably less popular among the young. Bentley notes, for instance, that "according to the latest National Youth Tobacco Survey, 89% of [high school age] youth don't vape and 95% don't vape frequently." Meanwhile, in the Centers for Disease Control's latest data, only 7.6 percent of high school and middle school students reported any past-month vaping, down from 27.5 percent in 2019.
Instead of applauding the improvements, the agency has continued to wage a war on nicotine. This war includes, among other measures, rules to ban vapers' favorite flavors and reduce nicotine in cigarettes to trace amounts. However, in the absence of the most popular alternative, Juul, the FDA all but guarantees that smokers will smoke more cigarettes, turn to less-established products or even go to the black market to get their nicotine fixes.
The FDA has forgotten why it entered the battlefield in the first place. Every year in the United States, 480,000 people die due to cigarette smoking. They die of illnesses caused by the repeated inhaling of tar, an especially dangerous product of combustion. And here's the key point: They may be smoking for the buzz of nicotine, but they don't die from nicotine. This simple fact explains why e-cigarettes came to be. The importance of the innovation lays precisely in its ability to deliver nicotine without the combustion and tar.
All wars kill. The FDA's war against nicotine might claim Juul, but it will just as likely claim hundreds of thousands of adults who continue to inhale tar from cigarettes thanks to the agency's refusal to allow safer, but also appealing, alternatives. If these overzealous regulators win their battle against Juul, the only other winners will be tobacco companies, contraband dealers, and health care providers who will have to keep treating captive smokers.
COPYRIGHT 2022 CREATORS.COM.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Thoughts on the effect, if any, on this from West Virginia vs. EPA?
No effect. Congress explicitly delegated to the FDA the right to regulate these as "tobacco products". It was buried in the spending bill passed in March.
It's a stupid policy but Congress clearly delegated this power to the FDA. And that's what makes it unlike the EPA. They tried to exert powers which had not been clearly delegated to them.
I actually have made $30,030 simply in 5 weeks straightforwardly running part-time from my apartment. Immediately whilst I’ve misplaced my ultimate business, I changed into exhausted and fortunately I located this pinnacle on line task & with this I am in (res-55) a function to reap lots immediately thru my home.
Everybody is capable of get this first-rate career & can benefit greater bucks online going this article.
.
>>>> http://payout11.tk
Can Juul elect to make medical claims for their product and submit a 510(k) for it as a medical device? I'm sure they can find predicate devices they can demonstrate substantial equivalence to.
Yeah its called ObamaCare.
Everythings free!
What- you didnt fall for it?
There's a lot of aesthetic arguments in politics. The extended war against vaping feels to me to be more like that that then a health argument.
And related "sends the wrong message" arguments. Vaping looks like smoking, so we must treat it that way. Seems silly, for example, that bars can't allow vaping if they want to. There's no evidence it harms any bystanders and it hardly even smells. But it looks like smoking, so it sends the wrong message.
I actually have made $18,000 within a calendar month via working easy jobs from a laptop. As I had lost my last business, I was so upset and thank God I searched this simple job achieving this I'm ready to achieve thousand of dollars just from my home. All of you can certainly join this best job and could collect extra money
online visiting this interface.... http://oldprofits.blogspot.com
I keep hearing how the D's or R's are a "threat to democracy". At least they get voted into office. The real threat to democracy is the government agencies that have this level of power. The EPA, FDC, CDC, etc. have enormous power to rule our lives and don't answer to voters at all.
It's been said that pure democracy is mob rule. I prefer the ordered liberty of a republic, which the founders gave us, than the nanny state democracy the voting majority has imposed on us today.
That's never not a sacrifice alphabet agencies are willing to make.
Juul should not be prohibited by the FDA or by law.
Having said that, it is logically false to say that prohibiting Juul "will kill people". It's still your free choice whether to smoke or not.
Having said that, it is logically false to say that prohibiting Juul "will kill people".
The ghost of Eric Garner whispers, "I can't breathe!"
As is your choice to not not smoke.
This debate poses little risk of second hand civility.
The Cola Wars were particularly brutal.
Do you think Michael Jackson's hair catching on fire during a Pepsi commercial was an accident? Coke's special operators were behind it.
"No longer with Sprint *or* AT&T." was among David Letterman's Top 10 mafia hit man euphemism.
This war on e-cigs has always baffled me. It's not like there's any real doubt about e-cigs being better than tobacco. And I can't think of any moral reason for hating e-cigs while not banning tobacco cigs. If I were just a tad more cynical, I'd bet the banners were bribed by big tobacco.
Well, I think the vaping devices that are getting approved are owned by big tobacco companies. I bet there are no real bribes, but some kind of "understanding".
There's something terrifying about a government so powerful that it can shut down your business overnight
Imagine if they shut everything down for 2 years!
500k a year. A number that won't budge even after banning second hand smoke and reducing first hand smokers by 60%.
Eat shit CDC.
smokers are gross poor people, someone will call the science bullshit sometime right before pedophilia is legalized.
The FDA wants to kill people. This is news?
Bubble gum cigars and candy cigarettes are the next target in the government's efforts to save us from ourselves*.
*It's for the children.
Candy companies already no longer call them cigatettes or cigars. Also, pipe cleaners in the arts and crafts section are now called "fuzzy sticks."
Those craft bendy sticks were never any good as pipe cleaners anyway. I thought there was another name for them.
Take it to the supreme court, and they'll punt the issue to the states. The red states can mail juul to blue states.
That's now things get done in America.
Seems like a good arrangement to me.
Almost everyone who thinks the government should dictate what we may or may not put in our bodies thinks that the government has no business dictating whether we get an abortion. And vice versa.
Stop arguing individual choices. That's inconsistent with arguing for choice.
Follow the money. Does the government make the same in taxes from Juul as it does from big tobacco to pay the activists to rail against big tobacvo?
We and DC are smoking primo Thai stick. Dont expect mental gymnastics from us.
"The FDA has forgotten why it entered the battlefield in the first place."
At the request of Big Pharma (i.e. J&J/GSK/Pfizer) and their heavily financed foundations/PR/lobbying firms (aka RWJF, CTFK, ACS, AHA, ALA, AAP, AMA, Pinney, university researchers, etc), Obama's FDA appointees illegally banned the import of all e-cigarettes in 2009 (six months before Congress enacted the law authorizing FDA to regulate tobacco, which those same Big Pharma tobacco controllers and Altria lobbied to enact).
Thanks to Judge Richard Leon (and a dozen DC Court of Appeals judges, including Gorsuch and Kavanaugh), the FDA's ban on e-cigarettes was struck down) in 2011, but not before US Customs agents seized nearly 1,000 shipments of e-cigs from US Ports),
From 2004 (when Altria negotiated and agreed to the FSPTCA bill's text with CTFK's Matt Myers and GSK lobbyist Mitch Zeller to protect Big Tobacco's cigarettes and Big Pharma's nicotine gums/lozenges and other drugs from harm reduction market competition from far less harmful smokeless tobacco products) to 2009 (when Dems took over Congress and the White House), I called their FSPTCA the "Marlboro Monopoly Act", and revealed how its enactment would ban all new low risk smokefree tobacco products while grandfathering/protecting deadly cigarettes).
In 2013 FDA hired former GSK lobbyist Mitch Zeller to ban e-cigarettes (by redefining and regulating them as new tobacco products), which I repeatedly pointed out would ban 99% of nicotine vapes and manufacturers already on the US market (or any product/company the FDA wanted to destroy), while creating a new multi billion dollar e-cigarette monopoly/oligopoly controlled by the world's largest cigarette companies.
So of course, the Big Tobacco endorsed Mitch Zeller's proposal to protect their cigarette monopoly, while also giving them a new multibillion dollar monopoly (for vapes and other new smokefree alternatives, whose applications to FDA cost >$50 million).
JUUL could have helped itself by joining with me and others who exposed that CDC and FDA deceitfully classified all the teens who said they vaped THC/marijuana as nicotine/tobacco users in order to falsely claim there was a nicotine vaping epidemic among teens (when CDC surveys from 2016-2019) found that half of teen vapers said they vaped THC).
Unfortunately, CDC and FDA (and Big Pharma/Gates/Bloomberg funded CTFK, etc) blamed JUUL for the increase in US teen vaping from 2016-2019, (half of which was due to THC vaping), and FDA pressured JUUL to stop selling many flavored vapes.
Perhaps the SCOTUS decision yesterday (striking down extreme EPA regulations) will help JUUL prevail in court against FDA, whose decision to ban all JUUL products was purely political (not scientific, as all vapes are 99% less harmful than cigarettes).
Altria stocks have fallen 15% in the past week (as Altria agreed to purchase JUUL for mega billions of dollars).
Since 2009 (when FDA illegally banned e-cigs), CDC, FDA, US SG & all CDC funded state/local health agencies have falsely claimed:
- e-cigs are highly addictive for teens,
- e-cigs are gateways to cigarettes for teens,
- e-cigs may be more harmful than cigarettes,
- e-cigs don't help smokers quit,
But in fact, CDC survey data clearly documents how vaping has dramatically reduced cigarette smoking in US high school students (from 17% in 2009 to just 1.9% in 2021, an 89% decline), while slashing cigarette smoking by young adults (i.e. 18 - 24 years) from 20.1% in 2010 to just 7.4% in 2020, a 63% decline.
Seems like teens and young adults saw through the absurd lies CDC, FDA, US SG, CTFK, ACS, AHA, ALA, AAP, Legacy, etc claimed
(and continue to claim) about e-cigarettes
Stopping smoking one thing and starting to smoke something else is quitting?
We in the Democrat party love people stupid enough to fall for twisted reasoning like that.
You know, like " abortion is reproduction..."
Only a brain dead retard falls for that.
The morons keep voting for us when we pretend taxing them to death is for their own good.
Prohibitionists always cause far, far more suffering than they alleviate. Ending of prohibition brings joy ("Happy days are here again" they sung in 1933 when the same war, focused on innocent people who use alcohol, was ended). With hundreds of thousands of US citizens serving millions of years in US prisons for breaking drug laws, but drugs nevertheless available everywhere in the US, the program to stop Juul will be more of the same: plenty of vaping, several thousand more people in prison, and hundreds of thousands of more people who have learned the police are their enemy, and the enemy of freedom.
What are you smoking, Veronique? Nobody vapes to stop smoking. Guess you never heard of a nicotine patch.
I guess you never heard of a scientific study. Yes people vape to stop smoking and it works better than the patch.
The FDA wonks worst nightmare would be Johnny Depp kickstarting an anti-vaping ad campaign by sporting a nicotine eyepatch in Pirates Of The Caribbean: The Curse Of Havana
Holman Jenkins wrote an excellent op/ed in the WSJ about FDA's and NAAG's outrageous nicotine policies, which have protected cigarette and Big Pharma nicotine monopolies, while destroying smaller manufacturers of low risk smokefree alternatives, threatening the lives of tens of millions of smokers, and lying to Americans about the exponentially lower risks of smokefree alternatives.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-fdas-anti-nicotine-myopia-juul-cigarettes-smoking-cancer-tobacco-industry-11657053368?mod=opinion_featst_pos1
Well, no. People will choose to smoke cigarettes, which are more dangerous, because the FDA removed a demonstrably safer option for getting their nicotine fix.
Sort'a like banning opioids ends up driving people to Fentanyl, which is way more likely to kill them.
If you take it absolutely literally, sure. But it's pretty clear that the FDA isn't actually directly causing anyone's death here. But their actions will predictably lead to more death.
Isn't there some iron law about foreseeable consequences aren't unintended?
Settlement with the tobacco companies precludes this.
Or we could just let people consume what they want?
... for a moment, i thought i was on a Libertarian site, sorry.
We make Liberals.
.We make them stupid.
They vote for us.
Bata-Bing!
Voting machines put me in Office.
Thanks Dominion. Groper Joes in the Big House now!
Cue double blind study of fatalities arising from a century of FDA curtailment of access to the most effective natural anxiolytic yet discovered.
The perpetrators of this lethal cultural intervention are and remain authoritarian enemies of liberty, property and the life of the mind.