FDA Regulations: New Article Aug 2, 2016 by Tom Wolfe

Log in

SmokingPipes.com Updates

Watch for Updates Twice a Week

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

Drucquers Banner

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

Status
Not open for further replies.

tomwolfe

Lurker
Dec 4, 2015
12
1
To timpiper
Retailers do have a problem with old tobacco stock that does not carry the newly required warning labels. They must be sold before May 2018.
Pipes would also fall under the warning label requirements, but the FDA's required labels "this product conains nicotene" and "this product is made from tobacco" obviously do not apply. This is a great example of where pipes just "fell thru the cracks". They are really clueless when it comes to pipe making. I am still awaiting their reply to question like this.
Yes, they do know about house blends. They just do not care. Retailers that blend their own tobacco are considered pipe tobacco manufacturers under their rules. This is true if all they do is package popular blends, like 1-Q.
As to estate pipes, the FDA makes no mention of secondary markets, so that should not be a problem. (Just do not remind them about it.)
Tom Wolfe

 

edgreen

Lifer
Aug 28, 2013
3,581
17
When MJ was illegal weed pipes had to be called tobacco pipes. Now is time to turn the tables and all pipe makers have to advertise their wares as weed pipes.

 

timpiper

Starting to Get Obsessed
May 31, 2013
101
111
Australia
Thanks Tom Wolfe, I found your article summed things up nicely and I posted a link to it on my Yahoo Australia pipe smokers forum. When referring to vintage tobacco, I was meaning in a secondary market sense similar to estate pipes, but its not usually called estate tobacco.

The product has already been purchased from a retailer, however years later its sold to us hobbyists and collectors of well aged or no longer produced blends.

As you know, consignment stores, vintage dealers and some online tobacconists on sell these tins.

I would have thought the consigned tobacco tin is owned by the original owner and never by the one providing the service to sell it. -Tim

 

hextor

Part of the Furniture Now
Sep 20, 2015
642
6
the pipe makers took time and effort to make a piece of art, and it is so sad to see that some had made a successful business of this, and now they are at risk of loosing it all, this is not right, some of these pipes can last us a life time and pass it on to people we care about.

 

tomwolfe

Lurker
Dec 4, 2015
12
1
To timpiper,
It is hard to say how the FDA would react to a complaint about individual resale of old tobacco. Without a complaint being filed, they would not know. This is what I meant when I suggested "staying under the radar." It would apply to vintage tobacco sales and estate pipes, just as well as it does to artisan pipemakers.
Tom Wolfe

 

tomwolfe

Lurker
Dec 4, 2015
12
1
To edgreen,
If a pipe can be used to smoke tobacco, it is a tobacco product, as far as the FDA is concerned.

 

briarcudgel

Starting to Get Obsessed
May 6, 2016
108
108
It's less than two hours till doomsday, and my thoughts are that if this thing holds up to lawsuits, we are then done as a free people, and pipe smoking will be the least of our worries.

 

perdurabo

Lifer
Jun 3, 2015
3,305
1,581
If you care, Herman Cain is doing an interview with a producer of a movie related to e-cig regulation, right now. 9:50 Monday August 8, 2016

 

perdurabo

Lifer
Jun 3, 2015
3,305
1,581
Interview....,a little bit about nothing, nice to hear someone out side the topic talking about it. A Billion Lives is the name of the movie. Herman Cain brought up the legislation to clip the wings of the FDA. Glad he's at least talking about it, nothing about pipes and cigars in the discussion though.

 

tomwolfe

Lurker
Dec 4, 2015
12
1
Cossackjack,

Waterpipes (hookahs) are specifically covered in the FDA Deeming rules. Other pipes, not so much. Nonetheless, any pipe capable of smoking tobacco is considered a tobacco pipe, regardless of its intended use.

 

tomwolfe

Lurker
Dec 4, 2015
12
1
FDA loses lawsuit over tobacco product labeling.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/unitedpipeclubs/permalink/904759139650866/

 

sablebrush52

The Bard Of Barlings
Jun 15, 2013
20,683
48,836
Southern Oregon
jrs457.wixsite.com
It's an infinitesimal win. The judge supported the illogical argument that changing the size or shape of the container defines the contents as a new tobacco product which will need to undergo one of the deeming processes.
By that line of logic, the judge should step down as he's no longer a judge unless he's wearing the same clothing that he wore when sworn to the bench. If his packaging is different he's not a judge if he's not wearing the same clothes and would be required to requalify for any change of clothing, change of deodorant, hair color, glasses, etc, before being resworn to the bench.
The law is an ass.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.