> The move is somewhat of a headscratcher. Surely, the FDA’s case remains exceedingly weak, and one must ask why the FDA wishes to spend valuable resources in this pursuit when cigars make up a small fraction of total tobacco products in the United States, and premium cigars only comprise a small subsegment.
Is it possible the FDA is not so much trying to win its case than show to the Democrat administration that it’s trying its best to reduce tobacco usage (and more broadly nicotine usage)? Isn’t a large segment of the 1990’s anti-smoking movement (which I assume heavily leans D) still bitter towards tobacco companies and is eager to fight them?
I would put this case in the same category as the proposed menthol ban and proposed limits on nicotine content in cigarettes. I don’t think the first is supported by strong scientific evidence, and the latter probably exceeds the FDA’s authority.
I agree. As a whole - the FDA's entire approach to tobacco and nicotine has been dreadful. I am in the process of creating a more thorough and complete piece examining what has gone wrong and articulating the peculiar crossroads the country finds itself at: stuck between politics vs. following the science. Anti-smoking zealotry has been conflated with anti-nicotine, and largely ignores the ideas that 1. Adults can (and should) make their own (ideally, informed) opinions. 2. Some part of the population will always gravitate toward and enjoy these products.
Thank you for updating us on previous posts!
> The move is somewhat of a headscratcher. Surely, the FDA’s case remains exceedingly weak, and one must ask why the FDA wishes to spend valuable resources in this pursuit when cigars make up a small fraction of total tobacco products in the United States, and premium cigars only comprise a small subsegment.
Is it possible the FDA is not so much trying to win its case than show to the Democrat administration that it’s trying its best to reduce tobacco usage (and more broadly nicotine usage)? Isn’t a large segment of the 1990’s anti-smoking movement (which I assume heavily leans D) still bitter towards tobacco companies and is eager to fight them?
I would put this case in the same category as the proposed menthol ban and proposed limits on nicotine content in cigarettes. I don’t think the first is supported by strong scientific evidence, and the latter probably exceeds the FDA’s authority.
I agree. As a whole - the FDA's entire approach to tobacco and nicotine has been dreadful. I am in the process of creating a more thorough and complete piece examining what has gone wrong and articulating the peculiar crossroads the country finds itself at: stuck between politics vs. following the science. Anti-smoking zealotry has been conflated with anti-nicotine, and largely ignores the ideas that 1. Adults can (and should) make their own (ideally, informed) opinions. 2. Some part of the population will always gravitate toward and enjoy these products.