MHRA Announcement, A long winded reply/comment on it

[MrKraken]

I was originally going to put this into one of the MHRA announcement threads, but as it has grown slightly larger than I thought it initially might, i has been to structuring it innit!

Preface:
As a recreational nicotine user of over 3 years, I have watched an explosion in the market and general populace using personal vapourisers and ecigs (I only really class ciga-likes as ecigs because they are an electronic look-a-like) and have always had an eye on the news etc. now as I prepare to go into a new venture the move of the MHRA has royally pished me off...OR HAS IT? :

All nicotine-containing products (NCPs), such as electronic cigarettes, are to be regulated as medicines in a move to make these products safer and more effective to reduce the harms of smoking.
The UK Government has decided that the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) will regulate all NCPs as medicines so that people using these products have the confidence that they are safe, are of the right quality and work.

So, ANY nicotine containing product, as they themselves have stated are to be regulated as medicine? That's funny, last time I looked, cigarettes were a nicotine containing product... does this mean that I would need to pop to the chemist for 20 malboro or even my vegetables(see http://www.livestrong.com/article/293186-list-of-foods-that-contain-nicotine/)? No, therefore with the opening statement of the press release there is already a ridiculous pile of manure.

Smoking is the biggest single cause of avoidable death - killing 80,000 people in England each year. Making safe and effective products available for people who smoke can help them cut down or quit.

A bluster statement that has no real purpose here, moving on.

Ahhh Mr Mean

"Reducing the harms of smoking to smokers and those around them is a key Government health priority. Our research has shown that existing electronic cigarettes and other nicotine containing products on the market are not good enough to meet this public health priority.“Some NCPs are already licensed and the Government's decision to work towards medicines licensing for all these products is designed to deliver quality products that will support smokers to cut down and to quit.
“The decision announced today provides a framework that will enable good quality products to be widely available. It’s not about banning products that some people find useful, it’s about making sure that smokers have an effective alternative that they can rely on to meet their needs."

Waaaaait a second, how does the existence of PV's & Ecigs detract from the public health priority of reducing harm to smokers and those around them? This again, is a total bluster statement and keyword whore remark.
NCP is the new keyword acronym for NRT it would seem, except..you're not replacing your nicotine with ecigs, you are still getting your nicotine at a reasonable level comparable to x per day habit of smoking. The only thing you are replacing is burning dried plant with pharma-grade carriers.
If someone wants to market their ecigs as a method to cut down or quit NICOTINE then roll on a proper, medicinal license for that. HOWEVER if someone wants a method to get rid of the vile habit of smoking tobacco to obtain their nicotine fix, why in the seven hells should they be made to have a medicinal license? Answer: They Should Not.
The decision announced today provides a framework that will enable good and quality products is something that I agree is necessary, but then it rolls onto making sure that smokers have an effective alternative that they can rely on to meet their needs...what like the reliability we have now?, it's cut it for me and hundreds of thousands (neigh millions) of others since 2007 me old chum!

Today’s announcement follows a public consultation on how to regulate these products which demonstrated widespread support for medicines regulation from the public health community. Scientific and market research into their safety and quality, including how they are used, has underpinned this decision.

Ahhh the public health community were the ones consulted, well that's alright then, they have no impartial views at all do they? The scientific and market research information that the MHRA have released is...oh wait. *cough*

People should use licensed NCPs – gums, patches, mouth sprays etc – to reduce the harms of smoking.

No, people should use licensed NCP/NRT to quite their nicotine addiction. To reduce the harms of smoking they should have a comparable alternative in so far as receiving the regular amount of nicotine their body is accustomed to

Recent public health guidance published by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) supports the use of licensed nicotine products in helping people to cut down or stop smoking.

Again, a pointless statement to include as we KNOW that NICE support people quitting smoking using current NRT, they seem to avoid the line between NICOTINE and SMOKING quite frequently in this, i'm spotting a pattern

The quality of NCPs can vary considerably which is why licensing them as medicines will allow people to have the confidence that they are safe, are of the right quality and work.

Yes, my green tomatoes are vastly different to my RSST with Celtic Vapours Olympian Red E-Liquid...as I would expect

The UK Government will press for EU law to create a Europe-wide legal position on NCPs as medicines through the revision of the Tobacco Products Directive. The European Commission has said it expects the new legislation to be adopted in 2014 and for it to come into effect in the UK from 2016. From that point, all NCPs will require a medicine licence. This will allow time for manufacturers to ensure that their products meet the safety, quality and efficacy requirements of a medicine. Until that law is in place, the MHRA would encourage those manufacturers with unlicensed products currently on the market to apply for a medicine licence.

Hooooooold up, grey area begins! So manufacturers need to apply for a medicines licence? OK, so where do vendors come into it? Ofcourse I understand that if a vendor imports liquid nicotine into the country that they then become held accountable as "The Manufacturer" but say for example, nicotine made in the UK by a company that has sought a licence then sells to a vendor, it is not the vendor who should be held accountable.

CMO prof. Dame Sally Davies

“Smokers are harmed by the deadly tar and toxins in tobacco smoke, not the nicotine.

Right on Sally!

“While it’s best to quit completely, I realise that not every smoker can and it is much better to get nicotine from safer sources such as nicotine replacement therapy.

Wait...what? Nicotine replacement therapy is to REPLACE nicotine..

“More and more people are using e-cigarettes, so it’s only right these products are properly regulated to be safe and work effectively.”

this is again, a valid point...but shouldn't have been done like this

“ASH strongly supports the MHRA decision to regulate e-cigarettes and other novel nicotine products – we think this is both proportionate and necessary. Regulation will ensure that e-cigarettes meet the same standards for quality, safety and efficacy as medicines while remaining as readily available to smokers as they are today. Crucially it will also ensure marketing of e-cigarettes and other such products is controlled to prevent their promotion to children and non-smokers”

(imagine a theme tune here) ASH! AHAAAAH, THEY TALK A LOAD OF SH-ITE!
Novel products, meh... readily available to smokers as they are today? So this means that vendors can carry on as they do now? Jolly good (aahhh blue skies). I agree that they should not be marketed to children...but wait, how are they? Alright e-shisha is a bit of a daft one but i don't recall seeing anyone specifically trying to get kids to buy, infact every vendor I have seen has always had an 18+ sign somewhere

“Rates of smoking in the poorest in our communities remain high, and as a GP in a deprived area of London I see firsthand the deaths and disease this causes. The RCGP supports MHRA regulation of novel nicotine products such as e-cigarettes as this will ensure that they are of good quality and reliability and are effective in helping smokers who want to use them to cut down and quit.”

WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT!?

In summary then, what a ridiculous paper. It just appears to be a media hyper, and actually provides very little information, just repeating the same lines over and over. I for one, will be stock piling nic just before this legislation comes into play as I'm sure many others will, and as such I'm sure people will help other people in the same way we do already.

As for vendors, loopholes are fantastic. Of course you can continue to sell devices, as long as they are not pre-filled, so it's not all doom and gloom, so therefore a little bit of adaptation is all that is needed. With that said, if this gets thrown out and the process begins again for CORRECT and FAIR regulation of recreational nicotine in liquid form to be vapourised then we'll do this tango again!

I'm now off to sulk in them murky depths!