No my theory is someone in the FDA wanted to hike the cigarette stocks so they could dump their shares without loosing 20%. I predict (and hope i’m right) the tobacco industry will crumble and fall apart within 5-10 years, just as the phone booths have disappeared to cell phones.
FYI:
The Fed$ and Big Tobacco companie$ don’t care about children$.
Here is a good thread where this prediction of a full ban was discussed. To us vapers here in the USA we have known for a long time it is coming, the question is not if but when…
You can just google “Gottlieb conflict of interest” to see many links about this subject.
Looks like the vaping industry producers like Juul etc…have 60 days according to a interview of the head of the FDA on PBS news hour, to come up with some evidence in order to stop some type of FDA *ban of flavored e cigarettes.
*some additional limitations
I think this is it:
I’m turned off about the subject because no one knows what they are talking about and neither the interviewer or the FDA are making any sense to me.
Very frustrating.
Companies made flavors for food industry long before we start vape, this is the flavors we use in our e-liquids. I remeber my first e-liquids was made by Flavourart flavors back in 2010-2011 (here in EU). Flavourart (for example) is since 2006, vaping start later. IMO they can’t touch DIY, but it could be more difficult to find flavors on local vape shops.
Follow up, we have a folder dont we?
As a matter of fact I do, Nicotine is made with PG and typically PG doesn’t freeze, you remember the arguments about the fact that the PG we use it’s the same as anti-freeze…idiots…
Yes, they tried that one as well…
Dr. Richard Friedman, a clinical trial expert and professor of clinical psychiatry at Weill Cornell Medical College said it was “alarming” to hear Gottlieb’s positions, adding that “it would put the public at serious potential risk, elevating the financial interests of the drug companies (and Big Tobacco) over public health.”
I said it once before and at the risk of repeating myself : I think it will play out like this:
First: .) Using the “kids” as an excuse: FDA promulgates new ‘nicotine’ rules that make it a classified drug in the context of a newly created and highly tailored schedule with very specific regulation to nicotine so that it can tailor the use of the newly classified drug in very specific and ways unheard of previously for other drug classification. This would allow the FDA to, on the fly, take nicotine out of certain uses, out of certain delivery systems, but selectively include it in others.
Second .) This ‘other delivery systems’ will be for sure Big Pharma patches and delivery systems engineered and manufactured, patented, and advertised and sold by Big Pharma which might also be allowed to have as a newly approved delivery system’ certain ’vaping like devices’. Big Pharms would get approvals but of course, Joyetech, or Svoe Mesto, or Geek Vape might not make the approval because they are not meeting the newly promulgated regulation that now requires ‘drug trial like’ testing. The Big Pharma companies could ‘hit the ground running’ with such new regs because they have already existing infrastructure to do this type of compliance testing.
In the meantime Gottlieb financially profits as he has done many time before like this:
1.) New Enterprise Associates, the venture capital firm where Gottlieb is a partner, is currently or has been invested in 188 health care companies.
2.)Gottlieb serves or served on eight boards of directors, according to his LinkedIn profile. The firms include pharmaceutical companies Gradalis and Tolero Pharmaceuticals, which are developing cancer treatments, among other things; and Glytec, which offers glycemic management tools for patients with diabetes.
3.) Eight pharmaceutical companies disclosed payments to Gottlieb in 2015, according to the open payments database: Vertex Pharmaceuticals, GlaxoSmithKline, Daiichi, Valeant, Pfizer, Millennium, SI-BONE and E.R. Squibb & Sons. Payments included travel to Philadelphia, San Francisco and London.
4.) In a memo, Gottlieb wrote that he had a consulting relationship with nine health care companies before his stint as the FDA’s deputy commissioner for medical and scientific affairs during the George W. Bush administration. Those ties disqualified him from dealing with matters concerning those companies for at least a year. The firms included Eli Lilly, Roche and Sanofi-Aventis.
The recusals generated some headlines during the avian flu scare because Gottlieb had to recuse himself from some of the planning efforts around vaccines.
5.) Gottlieb also spent the past seven years as an adviser to drugmaker GlaxoSmithKline’s product investment board, according to his LinkedIn page.
6.) when Gottlieb was 33 when he got the No. 2 job at the FDA in 2005. He had done a short stint at the agency a few years earlier, but was considered a controversial pick because of his ties to Wall Street. He stayed until 2007.
7.) Pharmaceutical companies paid Gottlieb nearly $414,000 from 2013 through 2015, according to federal open payments data, for speeches, consulting, travel and meals. That included $65,780 from a pharmaceutical company to promote a controversial cystic fibrosis drug called Kalydeco. Only one other doctor received more money toward promoting the drug. The drug’s price tag was controversial because the nonprofit Cystic Fibrosis Foundation kicked in $150 million toward finding a cure for the fatal disease and got a rich $3.3 billion payday for selling its rights to royalties for the drug. Vertex Pharmaceuticals priced Kalydeco at more than $300,000 a year.
8.) Gottlieb has contributed nearly $30,000 toward Republican political campaigns and joint fundraising committees from 2005 to 2014. He has donated toward the presidential runs of Mitt Romney and Sen. John McCain. He also donated more than once to Speaker Paul Ryan.
Gottlieb is a money hungry ex-doctor turned bureaucrat / politician.
What the hell is Poloxamer 407. and why do they need sucralose . Google just told me Trometamol is for people to take after heart surgery.
Ah, I get it now, they’re probably adding that stuff preventively to combat the dangerous side effects of flavours 
I thought they was worried about Popcorn Lung
That’s probably what the Poloxamer 407 is for, never say they don’t care about us 
Hydrochloric acid?? What in the f***??
!!!Beware, vape can cut off the bad habit of smoking!!!
Maybe it is not that bad after all. Even making vape ilegal will make it more popular.
I imagine two young boys/girls vape in the bedroom with the new good stuff… strawderry with bavarian cream…
Or it is to bring vaping to the attention of kids by negative adverts so they’ll pick up the habit and the scaremongering about youth vaping will finally be fulfilled.
They will be able to proof their ridiculous claims at last because they made them happen 
If I translate it right only 0.2% of never smokers start vape 2015.
E-cigarette use by adolescents is an important issue for public health. This study analyzed the frequency of e-cigarette use and its association with smoking status among U.S. adolescents.
The National Youth Tobacco Survey 2015 was analyzed in 2017, focusing on frequency of past 30-day e-cigarette use according to smoking status of participants. Smoking status was classified as never smoker, ever/not a past 30-day smoker, and past 30-day smoker. Infrequent and frequent smoking and e-cigarette use was defined as use for <20 and ≥20 of the past 30 days, respectively.
Past 30-day e-cigarette use was reported by 54.5% (95% CI=47.8%, 61.0%) of past 30-day smokers, 26.5% (95% CI=23.2%, 30.1%) of ever/not past 30-day smokers, and 4.6% (95% CI=4.0%, 5.2%) of never smokers ( p <0.001). No past 30-day e-cigarette use was reported by 94.5% and frequent e-cigarette use by 0.3% of never smokers. Past 30-day e-cigarette use was reported by 50.4% (95% CI=43.6%, 57.3%) of infrequent and 64.7% (95% CI=54.4%, 73.8%) of frequent past 30-day smokers ( p <0.001). E-cigarette use frequency correlated with both smoking status and tobacco cigarette consumption (ρ=0.42, p <0.001 and ρ=0.40, p <0.001, respectively). Past 30-day smokers were more likely to report past 30-day e-cigarette use (OR=11.42, 95% CI=9.06, 14.40) compared with adolescents reporting no past 30-day smoking.
E-cigarette use is more prevalent among ever and past 30-day smoking adolescents compared with never smoking adolescents. Frequent e-cigarette use is rare among never smoking adolescents
Source : https://www.ajpmonline.org/article/S0749-3797(18)31626-X/fulltext