Quantcast
Environmental News for a Healthier Planet and Life

Federal Judge to FDA: You Must Start Regulating E-Cigarettes

Health + Wellness
Federal Judge to FDA: You Must Start Regulating E-Cigarettes

6okean / iStock / Getty Images Plus

A federal judge ruled this week that the Food and Drug Administration must begin implementing regulations for the many types of e-cigarettes now on the market in the U.S.


District Judge Paul Grimm of the US District Court for the District of Maryland sided with several public health groups that filed a lawsuit last year alleging that the FDA has ignored its legal responsibilities by postponing review of e-cigarettes' health and safety impacts for years, the Associated Press reported.

The groups behind the lawsuit — including the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), The American Heart Association and the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids — said that without federal oversight, an increase in underage vaping has exposed many young Americans to nicotine when they otherwise wouldn't have been, the Associated Press reported.

CNN reported that last year, more than 3.6 million middle and high schoolers reported using e-cigarettes within a 30-day timeframe, and that vaping had increased by nearly 80 percent among high schoolers between 2017 and 2018.

"With the epidemic of e-cigarette use by teens, it is incumbent on the FDA to act expeditiously to hold manufacturers accountable for products that contain nicotine and harmful chemicals," AAP President Kyle E. Yasuda said in an official statement.

Grimm agreed, writing in his decision that the delay was "an abdication of its statutory responsibilities" and provided "the manufacturers responsible for the public harm a holiday from meeting the obligations of the law," The Hill reported.

The FDA was granted authority over e-cigarettes in 2016, but said that staff and e-cigarette manufacturers needed more time before any official rules were enforced. Former Commissioner Scott Gottlieb shortened the target date for when the agency would begin reviewing e-cigarette products from 2022 to 2021, but stepped down last month. Grimm's ruling suggests this new deadline is not soon enough to satisfy the law, and that the FDA should not have allowed the products to remain on the market without agency authorization, The Hill reported.

An FDA spokesman told the Associated Press that the agency was reviewing the decision and "will continue to tackle the troubling epidemic of e-cigarette use among kids." Grimm said that both sides will have 14 days to either suggest remedial action or respond to the recommendations.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, e-cigarettes heat and emit nicotine aerosols that are inhaled by the user, and researchers are still learning about the health impacts of these devices. The harmful effects of nicotine and other chemicals found in nicotine aerosols on brain development are already well-known, but e-cigarettes produce these chemicals in lesser amounts than burned tobacco, the agency said.

Still, products from popular e-cigarette brand JUUL have been linked with cellular damage and gum tissue damage, while at least one recent study has found a link between e-cigarettes and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

"It is now the FDA's responsibility to take immediate action to protect our kids and require manufacturers to apply to the FDA if they want to keep their products on the market, including products like Juul that have fueled the youth e-cigarette epidemic," the groups behind the suit said in a joint statement.

With restaurants and supermarkets becoming less viable options during the pandemic, there has been a growth in demand and supply of local food. Baker County Tourism Travel Baker County / Flickr

By Robin Scher

Beyond the questions surrounding the availability, effectiveness and safety of a vaccine, the COVID-19 pandemic has led us to question where our food is coming from and whether we will have enough.

Read More Show Less

EcoWatch Daily Newsletter

Tearing through the crowded streets of Philadelphia, an electric car and a gas-powered car sought to win a heated race. One that mimicked how cars are actually used. The cars had to stop at stoplights, wait for pedestrians to cross the street, and swerve in and out of the hundreds of horse-drawn buggies. That's right, horse-drawn buggies. Because this race took place in 1908. It wanted to settle once and for all which car was the superior urban vehicle. Although the gas-powered car was more powerful, the electric car was more versatile. As the cars passed over the finish line, the defeat was stunning. The 1908 Studebaker electric car won by 10 minutes. If in 1908, the electric car was clearly the better form of transportation, why don't we drive them now? Today, I'm going to answer that question by diving into the history of electric cars and what I discovered may surprise you.

Read More Show Less

Trending

A technician inspects a bitcoin mining operation at Bitfarms in Saint Hyacinthe, Quebec on March 19, 2018. LARS HAGBERG / AFP via Getty Images

As bitcoin's fortunes and prominence rise, so do concerns about its environmental impact.

Read More Show Less
OR-93 traveled hundreds of miles from Oregon to California. Austin Smith Jr. / Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs / California Department of Fish and Wildlife

An Oregon-born wolf named OR-93 has sparked conservation hopes with a historic journey into California.

Read More Show Less
A plume of exhaust extends from the Mitchell Power Station, a coal-fired power plant built along the Monongahela River, 20 miles southwest of Pittsburgh, on Sept. 24, 2013 in New Eagle, Pennsylvania. The plant, owned by FirstEnergy, was retired the following month. Jeff Swensen / Getty Images

By David Drake and Jeffrey York

The Research Brief is a short take about interesting academic work.

The Big Idea

People often point to plunging natural gas prices as the reason U.S. coal-fired power plants have been shutting down at a faster pace in recent years. However, new research shows two other forces had a much larger effect: federal regulation and a well-funded activist campaign that launched in 2011 with the goal of ending coal power.

Read More Show Less