FDA Wants To Regulate Nicotine Levels

Log in

SmokingPipes.com Updates

Watch for Updates Twice a Week

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

Drucquers Banner

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

Swiss Army Knife

Can't Leave
Jul 12, 2021
North Carolina
Frankly this seems like it would be targeted toward the e-cigarette and e-liquids market more than anything. Almost all of them have standardized nicotine levels that are clearly labeled and would be easy to police.

Trying to quantify the nicotine levels in the thousands upon thousands of actual tobacco products is a much harder task and one I doubt the FDA is actually interested in or even able to tackle.


Dec 29, 2010
Pacific NW
If this statement by the WSJ wasn't so laughably stupid, and were it not against Forum rules to go into the subject, I could quite easily rip it to shreds.

Then write them with your rebuttal. If it's good they'll publish it:

Letters to the Editor​

Editor, The Wall Street Journal
1211 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10036
Last edited:


Part of the Furniture Now
Oct 7, 2021
West of the Twin Cities, MN
Well I guess it didn't stop with menthols. Only a matter of time before they come for us. Cellar up ladies and gentlemen.

Careful, just a simple nudge could make them consider latakia, dark fired, and perique flavored tobacco. Even the sweet casings on nearly all production tobacco could be considered added flavor. Considering that aromatics are 90% of pipe tobacco sales, they go, pipe tobacco will be a thing of the past.
Never expect it to stop escalating.


The Bard Of Barlings
Jun 15, 2013
Southern Oregon
You'll never know until you try!
What makes you think I haven't done this a number of times? When a a media outlet makes a decision to alter the purpose of a segment of their operation into a vehicle for ideologically driven propaganda, they don't publish dissenters. I've read and enjoyed the WSJ for many years, but over the last year the editorial content had gone through quite a change.
Granted, OpEd columns aren't reportage but opinion, and we all know about opinions and how most of them stink.

But with the tobacco vs dope fallacy, it doesn't even take much of a logistician to take a little effort to connect even some of the dots to see that the quote is...tripe. People willing to make up their own minds by doing a bit of research will make up their own minds. People who like to be told what to think and have no interest in doing some research will be happy to believe it.

Politics is forbidden here, and I won't buck that.


Mar 30, 2019
In the semi-rural NorthEastern USA
still think the biggest danger in pipes is lack of interest by the general population. And that said it's really easy to regulate a product that is manufactured more so like cigarettes where the levels are intentionally controlled, then something that just happens to grow a certain way.
  • Like
Reactions: CoffeeAndBourbon
Mar 2, 2021
Alabama USA
The FDA is poised to set a maximum nicotine level in cigarettes and some other tobacco products, looking to make them less addictive and wean smokers away from the habit. Despite an overall trend away from smoking, tobacco use remains the No. 1 cause of preventable deaths in the United States.

"Lowering nicotine levels to minimally addictive or non-addictive levels would decrease the likelihood that future generations of young people become addicted to cigarettes and help more currently addicted smokers to quit," FDA Commissioner Robert M. Califf said as the agency announced its plan.

Outlining the potential benefits, the FDA notes that 480,000 people die each year from disease attributed to smoking. Overall, it says, "tobacco use costs nearly $300 billion a year in direct health care and lost productivity."

The FDA plans to issue its proposed rule in May 2023.

The FDA wants to regulate nicotine for the first time : NPR

Make sense to me. I figure most of the member here are adults and can decide knowing the dangers. Not so much with young folks who might not understand the risks.