FDA rules announced

[admin]

Packaging and advertising for all newly deemed products other than cigars must display an addictiveness warning that states: "WARNING: This product contains nicotine. Nicotine is an addictive chemical."
Packaging and advertising for cigars must display either the addictiveness warning, or one of five others specified in the rule. The final rule requires the warnings to appear on at least 30 percent of the two principal display panels of the package, and at least 20 percent of the area of advertisements.

 

[plugugly]

Kevin, what he FDA says there IS encouraging. Leavening only the question,

"can we trust them"?
Plugugly

 

[lordofthepiperings]

The link only shows the first 3 pages on the iPhone, guess I'll have to wait till I get home on one of those archaic desktops to get to page 284.

 

[admin]

Page 115 makes me think that online retailers will have to implement an age verification system.
It looks like they'll require health warnings on packaging and advertisements.
I'm still not clear if advertising will be allowed to continue.

 

[lordofthepiperings]

An age verification online seems pointless. Teens have been circumventing them for nearly two decades now to get the porn fix online.
They should require health warnings on junk food before pipe tobacco.
If this means no more Molto Dolce commercials on the show I'm gonna go all medieval on the FDA!

 

[ssjones]

"No Free Samples"??

http://www.fda.gov/TobaccoProducts/Labeling/ProductsIngredientsComponents/ucm482580.htm
http://www.fda.gov/downloads/TobaccoProducts/Labeling/ProductsIngredientsComponents/UCM499171.pdf

 

[perdurabo]

Well, guys and gals, Pipesmagazine doesn't condone political discussion. Sometimes we fly under the radar and get stuff in. Everyone seems polite, most of the time. But discussions like , this tread, cant but help conjure political commentary. Liberty hasn't been more at stake, and we still sit on our hands. Nobody is hurt here, unless you own a business that will be crippled because of this decision. The FDA is making law that hasn't surfaced in congress, it's a Bureaucracy. I never sent a Representative to congress to make these decisions. Neither did you. The mob complains about jobs, how many jobs will this kill? What a shame. And still the public will vote for more nanny state.

 

[jackswilling]

Nanny liberals may get thwarted to a degree, as Republicans want to move the effective date to the date the new rules are adopted.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/sallysatel/2016/04/11/congress-save-e-cigarettes-from-the-fda/#169edcab6d14

 

[prairiedruid]

About the No Free Samples rule: pretty easy to circumvent. Just post a sign saying samples cost a penny and leave a an open roll of pennies on your table. Big Brother is appeased! Might even get by with a $1 tobacco sampling cover charge when you attend a pipe show.

 

[tslex]

. . . just when I thought my loathing for the federal government had reached its zenith. . . .

 

[datascalabash]

I can already see the "conflation" going on...
Dear Fellow Pipefans:
datascalabash here after a long while away - and whenever I see text like (and note the bold type):
..."[the] FDA indicated that pipe tobacco smokers have a risk of tobacco-related disease similar to the risk of those who inhale cigar smoke or smoke pollute themselves with cigarettes"...
...that's when the term "CONFLATION" comes up in my mind.
As Merriam-Webster's online site defines it, "conflation" means "(a) blend, fusion; especially : a composite reading or text"...and the whole deal that the FDA seems to be going with is in IGNORING the obvious differences between pipe mixtures and the petroleum toxin-laced "butt-stuffins" that even got one Thomas A. Edison...yes, the great inventor and occasional cigar enthusiast (he enjoyed those as a measure of his commercial success from his inventions a century-plus ago)...to literally fire ANY of his employees that he spotted lighting up one of those "damn butts" at any time, as he DID know about those differences, unlike the FDA, with its "blinders" on, as is so often the case.
I've already heard about HOW the FDA was trying to treat "all tobacco products the same", and that is a completely INCORRECT and mistaken concept and premise, with the agency engaging in conflation. I'm not at all certain IF this could be the initial move towards a "breakout" of the long-feared sixteen-fold increase — sometimes termed the "tobacco-pocalypse" at our forum, if I remember correctly — of the Feds' likely intended pipe tobacco excise tax increase (from just under $3.00/lb to about $48.00/lb), but the likelihood of getting at least a FEW of the 600+ Federally or state-recognized Native American tribal groups steamed at the FDA over this and similar issues that could potentially impact any possible "cultural and ethnic identity links" concerning tobacco, should they exist for the involved tribe(s) in question, COULD be closer than anyone thinks...
...If the FDA "thinks" it can potentially follow in the path of such historically KNOWN abusers of native rights within the Federal Government in its history, as Andrew Jackson (7th US president) and others have been known to be in American history, websites like the Native American Rights Fund could be where we see the "pushback" against FDA over-regulation of pipe tobacco start to show up.
Thank you and Yours Sincerely,
Data's Calabash

 

[admin]

FDA does not intend for section 1140.14(b)(3) to prohibit the sale of tobacco products via the Internet, but the sale of covered tobacco products via any medium, including the Internet, must only be to persons 18 years of age or older. Therefore, any sale of covered tobacco products over the Internet must comply with the minimum age and identification requirements in this rule.

 

[deathmetal]

Keeping it above-18 is good by me.

Bans e-cigs for anyone under 18 and brings cigars and pipe tobacco under the deeming process.

However, they're going to use RYO as an excuse to tax cigars/pipes the same as cigarettes.
Parasites (in this case, government) are always the same. Give an inch, take a mile.

 

[lordofthepiperings]

Nanny liberals may get thwarted to a degree, as Republicans want to move the effective date to the date the new rules are adopted

Republicans can be very nannying as well. Trying to shut down Planned Parenthood and telling people which restroom they can use is quite the "We know what's best for you", attitude.

 

[deathmetal]

I don't want to get into political posts, but it seems to me all the publicly-approved parties are variations of the same theme.
However, very few people understand the NC law. It was "you can go into the restroom indicated by the gender on your birth certificate," which is something most TG people change as part of the transition process. It's actually a pro-transgender law, but widespread ignorance of the English language in the media has confused this.

 

[jackswilling]

^^^Logic is not the strong suit of the left. We are talking about tobacco. This thread has nothing to do with perversion. I just hope, at minimum, the effective date is changed as proposed by congress.

 

[phil67]

Concerning the health warning label I have several boxes of cigars that have had the Surgeon General Warning on them for years already.
As for the new 21 year age limit I have no issue with that whatsoever.
Here is an article on the subject that I received today from Cigar Aficionado.

 

[deathmetal]

Logic is not the strong suit of [humans in groups].

I added to (not contradicted) your comment to show the breadth of the problem we face.
Let life be fun again. "Be excellent to each other," as Bill 'n' Ted said. That includes delicious tobacco, beer, fast cars, giant shotguns, space travel, etc.

 

[jackswilling]

^^^ I understood it as such. Great quote.

 

[deathmetal]

I see you see more than is immediately evident. Good point, one that deserves respect.
In the meantime:

Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) have been all the rage lately, as many claim they are healthier than traditional tobacco cigarettes. Since they are so relatively new to the market, the government hasn't been able to effectively study them and determine whether or not they should be regulated like traditional cigarettes and smokeless tobacco -- until now. The FDA has released their final rule Thursday, broadening the definition of tobacco products to include e-cigarettes, hookahs, pipe tobacco, premium cigars, little cigars and other products.
https://news.slashdot.org/story/16/05/05/2010254/fda-to-regulate-e-cigarettes-like-tobacco

I don't want to call for armed revolution and the overthrow of democracy or anything, so I'll just say "that's interesting."