> US FDA goes after e-cigs. What's the conspiracy theory version of this? Are old school tobacco companies paying the government to get rid of their competition or something?
E-cig tobacco comes from the same companies as cigarette tobacco. Heck, e-cigs themselves often come from the same companies: Juul is Altria (ex-Phillip-Morris). There is no competition, simply different channels for the same suppliers.
(Also, the FDA is going after some current combustible tobacco products as well some current e-cigs.)
That just makes the behavior even more confusing. Why specifically go after tobacco when we're moving towards legalizing/decriminalizing everything else?
Usually when something dumb like this happens you can follow the money. But I'm open to other hypotheses.
The matter at hand is an outright ban, not merely standards.
Although from the discussion above it's also clear that the standards are nonsensical, resulting in a ban for less dangerous products while more dangerous ones are still legal, albeit with heavier regulation.
Hm, reminds me of gun laws, actually. A bolt-action rifle with a barrel under 16" requires a multi-month federal approval, while a semi-auto with a longer barrel is one instant background check away. It's almost as if people who write those laws don't have any clue, and are just chasing public opinion in their eternal popularity contest.
E-cig tobacco comes from the same companies as cigarette tobacco. Heck, e-cigs themselves often come from the same companies: Juul is Altria (ex-Phillip-Morris). There is no competition, simply different channels for the same suppliers.
(Also, the FDA is going after some current combustible tobacco products as well some current e-cigs.)