Category: This Issue

A Survivor’s Story

Nathan (Nate) Coccimiglio
An entrepreneur is using his business acumen to reinvent the convenience store experience.
By Norm Bour
The one thing we can all agree on is that the vape industry has been in a constant flux, peppered with an occasional crisis. The once “easy to operate,” unregulated business from a decade ago has morphed into a highly regulated (with more to come) struggle to stay ahead of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and maintain their competitive position in a very crowded, ever-evolving market.
“I think it’s easy to see where the market is going,” claimed Nathan (Nate) Coccimiglio, who has been in the business world for almost 15 years. “But besides having the vision, you need the guts to make a change and the capital to implement [that change].”
Coccimiglio hasn’t always had the complete package, but as he just crested the age of 40, he has had his share of victories along with the inevitable defeats along the way. However, now, he feels as prepared to go forward as he’s ever been. He’s been a mainstay in the Salt Lake City business community and had a journey through nutritional supplements, enhancement pills and even owned a storage facility for precious metal and bullion.
“I saw an opportunity in that space, so I took it and grew it into a multimillion-dollar company. I did the same thing with vapes when I ventured into that in 2012,” he said. “In 2007, my life took a serious detour when I got hit on my motorcycle on the interstate doing 80 mph. I was running an electrical contracting business and suddenly that all went out the window. I wasn’t able to do certain hard labor like I used to, and suddenly, I had to reinvent myself,” he shared. “That forced me into starting my own business.”
ALT21
Coccimiglio began with vitamin supplements and enhancement-type pills, which he started selling from his home and later expanded into a second location in Tucson, Arizona. That location got burglarized, and the entire inventory was stolen. Once again, he had to backtrack and dig in at his home office.
Even after adversity, in less than two years, Coccimiglio generated over $5 million in annual sales, and he sold that business just a few years later.
“I look back and wish I had kept that one,” Coccimiglio confided. “I was in my mid-twenties and didn’t know then what I know now. It taught me lots of lessons about what to sell, how to sell and what to stay away from.”
The cash from the sale, along with his passion for metals and the business experience, gave him confidence to start a private vault company. He started storing and warehousing bullion in 2012. The company stored platinum, ore and worked with several mines in Utah storing hundreds of millions in metals.
However, Coccimiglio was still intrigued with supplements and accessories and decided to open an e-liquid company called Tronic Vape. He also created a few other lesser known brands.
“E-liquid was easy back then,” he laughed. “Just a simple 10 mL bottle filled with liquid, which we made with no restrictions or regulations at all. We also imported little e-cigs from overseas that I thought were the hottest things. Even though there was minimal regulation, we implemented our own and insured our products with Lloyds of London and had full liability coverage.”
Coccimiglio continued to manufacture his e-liquids until 2018. Over the years, he private labeled for other companies as well. That was when he opened his first vape shop: Draper Vaper, in Draper, Utah.
I visited that shop and can verify that it was over-the-top beautiful and a true testament to the possibilities of a high-end vape shop. He also opened a second location and phased out of private labeling to focus on his retail locations and to grow his wholesaling opportunities.
Coccimiglio also offered his experience and knowledge with other shops in the area along with taking an ownership interest with a few that he believed could be successful. He also got involved with many of the vaping advocacy associations to help support the industry. He even served a stint as president of the Utah Smoke-Free Alternatives Trade Association.
Coccimiglio has been challenged with many of his fellow vape entrepreneurs, who he says have closed minds and unwillingness to change.
“When they say they are vape only and will stay that way, I just roll my eyes and walk away,” he said. “If there is one thing I have learned from entrepreneurship, [it] is that you either adapt or die. I started saying that almost 10 years ago when I saw smoke shops carrying vape shop products.”
He sees standalone vape shops as being a “thing of the past” and instead all-around “vice shops” will carry any and everything that people want.
“We’re all playing in Big Tobacco’s sandbox,” he lamented. “It’s inevitable that they will control the vape industry over time. If every single one of our vape businesses banded together, we’d still be outmanned, outgunned and out financed.”
Over the years, Coccimiglio has almost divested out of his vape businesses and is now evolving into his version of where the future is going.
The key word is “almost” since he still has one shop left, which has added CBD, alternative products and adult novelties. He went back in time with his version of a “build-your-own” flavor station and offers flavors for his customers to create their own e-liquids.
Coccimiglio believes that flavoring for e-liquids will universally be stopped through regulation. However, his new shop, Alt21, located in Murray, Utah, may be on to something. It also offers clothing, glass, kratom, e-juice and pretty much anything anyone would want.
Coccimiglio also sees convenience stores taking over a larger share of these types of products. “For years, they’ve been looked down upon,” he said, “but c-store owners are pretty smart. They look down the road and many times band together to totally change the market.”
Coccimiglio currently manufactures a product for them, Kush Kubes (a brand of Delta-9 and CBD-enhanced gummies) and sells them domestically as well as overseas.
“We’re a manufacturer/distributor right now, and rather than taking new products to old markets, we’re trying to lay new ground and create new markets for our stuff. We see gas pumps coming out of the ground and c-stores looking totally different in the future. They have so much exposure and visibility right now; it’s up to us to find things for them to sell.
“We want to sell less SKUs to more markets rather than load everyone up with a surplus of things they can’t sell. If you can’t recognize opportunity, then you’ll always miss it,” he said. “I don’t think I have a magic eye; it’s just a matter of who has the bigger pockets and how can we do business with them.”
That is how a survivor thinks.
Norm Bour is the founder of VapeMentors and works with vape businesses worldwide. He can be reached at norm@VapeMentors.com.

August 21, 2022
Trouble the Water

Aquios Labs introduces the industry’s first e-liquids with a water concentration of more than 3 percent.
By Timothy S. Donahue
Jack Sanders has been in the vapor industry for only six years. He has been in China for the last nine years, and for the last year, he’s been researching a revolutionary idea. When the pandemic forced him to stay in Shenzhen, the capital of e-cigarette production that accounts for about 90 percent of the global vaping market’s manufacturing output, it turned out to be a life-changing happenstance. The situation gave Sanders the motivation he needed to potentially disrupt an already disruptive industry.
The vaping industry has always embraced innovation. From its beginning, it set out to take customers away from the combustible cigarette sector by offering less risky alternatives for consuming nicotine. Except for maybe synthetic nicotine and nicotine salts, the major innovations in e-cigarettes have been in hardware. Now, Sanders and his new company are introducing a new e-liquid system that its founder says is going to transform the industry.
It all started with a conversation, almost a joke, among close friends that set Sanders on a journey to take water-based vaping seriously. “We can do this,” he said at the time. Aquios Labs in April launched its new AQ30 disposable vaping system in the United Kingdom. The water-based e-liquids could be troubling for the competition. Sanders, co-founder and CEO of Aquios Labs, says the first generation of this new technology, which requires a specialized atomizer, can support e-liquids with up to a 30 percent water concentration. Water allows for the usage of less PG and/or VG as a base for the nicotine and flavoring.
“We noticed that there was really nothing new in terms of e-liquids and technology breakthroughs. There’s not been much in terms of e-liquid innovation since nicotine salts came out, so we thought we’d give this idea we had a go,” explains Sanders. “The technology just basically evolved through numerous tests and numerous hours spent in R&D. We managed to make a [coil] technology that matched the liquid with a higher water content. It was never just the e-liquid itself that we were developing.”
Sanders and his team began to delve deeper into research on water-based liquids, and they found that no one had gotten above 3 percent. As the team got closer to its objectives, through researching and testing, they began to discover that water-based e-liquids brought ancillary benefits as well. Nicotine, for example, can be delivered into the body faster with the addition of water into the liquid. The system can also be used with nicotine salts and synthetic nicotine.
“You can reduce the temperature of the boiling point. So, PG and VG, their boiling point is about 188 degrees Celsius [370 degrees Fahrenheit] and 290 degrees Celsius [540 degrees Fahrenheit], respectively,” explains Sanders. “So obviously, being able to bring the temperatures down makes the liquid’s chemical stability better. Lower temps also enhance flavor profiles in the e-liquids.”
Aquios Labs is positioning itself as a technology company rather than a consumer-facing brand, hoping to integrate water-based vaping into existing product portfolios. The first generation of its technology, dubbed AQ30, can support up to 30 percent water content using a combination of specially formulated e-liquid and hardware design. The first commercially available water-based vaping devices came to market in mid-May. Aquios says it is already developing the capability to support even higher levels of water content.
“We’re aiming to get the majority of the liquid to be water. It’s in the R&D process. I can’t put out a date on when that would be released, but it’s definitely in the process, and we are more than capable of reaching these points,” explains Sanders. “Currently, the [Aquios] technology is only available in disposable devices because it’s the most stable. But we are working on refillable tanks and to be able to sell separate juices and separate coils for refillable or open systems.”
Sanders says it’s all very intricate research. One change in the water content and the coil technology needs to change as well. “The technology and the core elements of the devices that we’re producing, they have to be matched. It must be the AQ30 liquids matched with the AQ30 coil. Any kind of deviation, like any less water, we need to change the tech. Any more water, we need to change the tech,” says Sanders.
The tricky part of the equation in water-based vaping has always been getting enough vapor production because the addition of water reduces vapor production significantly. It is also challenging to ensure the liquid has the proper flavor and doesn’t leak or create dry hits. Everything has to be just right. Sanders says that it entailed a lot of R&D, but with the help of Innokin’s engineers, the problem was solved. However, he can’t give that secret away yet. How the nicotine remains soluble in water is proprietary.
Sanders says that several devices have been stored for months, and there has been no detectable drop in performance. He just can’t discuss the technology behind the Aquios system because the products are just starting to enter the global market, and no secret is safe in the competitive vaping industry.
“I just can’t talk about it,” Sanders says. “How the technology must change for varying amounts of water … the technology changes. How that works exactly, I just can’t say. This is as far as I can delve into this right now. I don’t expect it will be long, however, before someone tries to figure out exactly what we are doing. And if they do that, then fantastic. It means that I know that there’s a lot of interest in the product. But we’re working on the next stage of development already, so it would just become a game of catch-up for other companies. We also have the best manufacturing partner that is highly skilled.”
What sets Aquios Labs apart from other device manufacturers, beyond its high amount of water usage in its liquids, is the dedication and expertise of the company’s manufacturing partner, China-based hardware manufacturer Innokin, says Sanders. Innokin has been in the vaping industry for more than a decade and has a market presence in more than 80 countries. Innokin’s long history includes pioneering variable wattage capability and, more recently, the success of its Zenith tank, which has won numerous awards for being one of the best mouth-to-lung tanks on the market due to its exceptional flavor delivery.
“We utilized Innokin’s innovation expertise on our hardware. Without the partnership, we would not be able to release a water-based disposable right now,” Sanders says. “Hardware innovation is not as simple as it looks. We needed to balance power, airflow, wicking, the heating element, internal structure, etc. If someone opens it and sees what we are doing, that’s not enough for reverse-engineering. Just think about Zenith tanks; any factory can get the samples, but no one had made something on the same level yet.”
Several brands are already using the Aquios system. In the U.S., it’s used in Esco Bars. Additionally, Innokin says that it was “already placing a significant bet” on the future of water-based vaping. The company went beyond just manufacturing the hardware and also partnered with Aquios in launching Innokin’s own lineup of vaporizers using the Aquios system in April under the Lota brand.
“Innokin has always believed that new technology has the power to eliminate the need for combustible tobacco. When we were introduced to Aquios, our product development team was immediately sold on the unique advantages of water-based vaping,” George Xia, a co-founder of Innokin, said. “Water-based technology and e-liquids result in a vaping experience that no other device can replicate, with no leakage, enhanced flavor clarity and faster nicotine satisfaction.”
Lota’s initial launch included a portfolio of three water-based devices, each with their own position for specific global markets and consumer needs. The Lota Enviro is a disposable device with a clear mission to reduce the carbon footprint of typical disposable vapes. Enviro achieves this with a unique paper shell design using recyclable materials and user-recyclable components. After the Enviro has been fully depleted, the device can be disassembled by the end user, and every component aside from the e-liquid reservoir can be fully recycled. The Enviro launched with 10 flavors and provides a 600-puff lifespan with 2 mL e-liquid capacity for TPD-regulated markets.
The Lota F600 is the brand’s flagship disposable vaporizer, which is also targeted toward TPD markets. The F600 features a 600-puff lifespan and delivers a constant 3.6 V output, which means consistent performance from the first puff to the last, according to Innokin.
The third product in the launch is the Lota Prefilled Pod. The Lota Prefilled Pod Kit integrates revolutionary Aquios water-based vaping technology into a closed pod system with a rechargeable battery. Each 2 mL pod is designed to last for 600 puffs, and the battery provides constant 3.6 V output for a consistent vaping experience throughout each charge cycle.
The Aquios devices are also more environmentally friendly than most current vaping products. Sanders says that the disposable products that use the Aquios system can be easily broken down by the consumer and recycled through traditional means. “The outer shell, which makes up most of the device, is made from reinforced cardboard. This can be recycled in any standard recycling bin,” he says. “The lithium-ion battery has been designed to easily detach from the atomizer and can be recycled at any battery disposal point.”
Aquios products have been well received by consumers. Sanders says reviews online have shown that people were skeptical at first because the technology is new. However, after vaping Aquios and comparing it to their old device, consumers realize there is a big difference between the two systems.
“The Aquios vape is a lot smoother. Lowering the PG and VG allows for a lot of advantages, especially in reducing irritation. I know that I’m personally a little bit allergic to PG, so any high-PG ratio liquids for me are not good. It just doesn’t agree with me,” he explains. “Also, with the reduction of the VG, liquids aren’t oversweetened by the VG. The flavoring is amplified. By reducing the amount of VG, you get a much cleaner, natural taste as well.”
Moving forward, Sanders says he hopes Aquios can collaborate with multiple different companies in producing a range of coils for multiple different tanks. Those coils would be paired with Aquios liquids with varying water amounts, such as 30 percent, 40 percent or even as high as 50 percent water. Currently, the company is based in the U.K. and is developing its European market. It’s a natural place to start because it’s the largest market that has fully embraced vaping as a harm reduction tool. Aquios has its sights set on the global market, however.
“Moving into additional markets is something that I do think is in the pipeline right now,” says Sanders. “We’re focusing on getting through the intial launch, but there are numerous markets we are looking at in terms of growth and opportunity. The general feeling of this liquid and the tech behind it is that together the system produces a much smoother and more pleasurable vape. I think it’s a product that can be successful in every market.”
“That’s the end result,” he says. “You don’t have as much of the dry mouth. You don’t have as much irritation in your throat from continuous vaping or higher nicotine levels. It’s going to be something cool. And I think it’s going to be something that—once it has a larger market presence and more people have the opportunity to test it out—consumers are going to realize that it’s something worth having. This is the product they will want to vape. It’s a game changer.”

July 16, 2022
The Taking of Taxes

Credit: Pavlo Fox
South Africa’s National Treasury expects new taxation rules for e-cigarettes to be in place by the beginning of 2023.
By Timothy S. Donahue
The comedian Chris Rock once said, “You don’t pay taxes—they take taxes.” This can be especially true in heavily taxed countries like South Africa, where imposts include income tax (on both a personal and corporate level), value-added tax (VAT), dividends tax, capital gains tax and a wealth tax like estate duty. Now, it seems South African vapers should prepare to pay an additional tax if government officials have their way.
South Africa’s National Treasury manages national economic policy, prepares the South African government’s annual budget and manages the government’s finances. The agency says it will publish the draft Taxation Laws Amendment Bill 2022 containing the provisions on electronic nicotine-delivery systems (ENDS) and electronic non-nicotine-delivery systems (ENNDS) sometime in June or July.
Industry stakeholders will then have an opportunity to provide written comments on the draft legislation. Additionally, the country’s standing committee on finance will also have its own consultation process on the draft bill. The draft legislation will be formally brought forward for consideration at the medium-term budget policy statement expected sometime in October.
The government has proposed to introduce a specific excise tax on both the non-nicotine and nicotine liquid solutions used in e-cigarettes. Users could pay excise duty ranging from zar33.60 to zar346.00 ($2.08 to $21.38) per product, depending on the nicotine content and size of that product. The average excise rate for e-cigarettes is proposed at zar2.91 per mL.
Essentially, users could pay zar2.03 per mL of e-cigarette solution containing nicotine and zar0.87 per mL of e-liquid solutions that contain no nicotine if the draft proposals are accepted and become legislation in the current form. Products with a higher nicotine content, it is proposed, will attract a higher rate of duty compared with lower nicotine products.
“Unlike conventional tobacco products, these products are mostly unregulated in South Africa, hence the Department of Health has also started a process of amending the current tobacco control legislation to include these products in the regulatory framework,” the draft states. “Similarly, other governments around the world have started a process of regulating the consumption and use of ENDS through tax and nontax measures.”
Wesley Grimm, a senior associate, and Rudi Katzke, a partner, at Webber Wentzel, a law firm headquartered in Johannesburg, South Africa, say that the South African government is proposing to introduce a specific excise tax on vaping products using existing policy guidelines applicable to other excisable products, like tobacco products. They say that much like other excisable products, the demand for vaping products is largely inelastic and that short-term consumer resistance to the tax will likely dissipate.
A close up view of one and two hundred rand notes folded over in a young womens hand
“National Treasury omitted to deal with this occurrence in detail in a recent workshop with industry stakeholders. In our view, it will be interesting to see if National Treasury’s proposal to tax vaping products with a higher nicotine content at a higher rate than those products with a lower nicotine content will have any impact on consumer buying patterns,” says Grimm.
During the National Treasury’s Taxation of ENDS and ENNDS Workshop, the agency reiterated its position that the health risks associated with vaping remain “largely unknown,” according to Grimm. However, one of its stated objectives is to curb (and potentially end) the use of vaping products, including severely limiting access to the products by younger users.
“National Treasury insists that there is a health imperative to regulate and tax the vaping industry within its existing anti-tobacco framework. In our view, the proposal to tax vaping products does not necessarily support [the] government’s stated policy intention of reducing the consumption of tobacco products,” according to Grimm and Katzke. “More specifically, there is insufficient data to speculate on whether National Treasury’s proposed tax on vaping products will prevent youth use.”
The taxing of vaping products could have tragic unintentional consequences. Grimm and Katzke say that lawmakers should consider what happened in the traditional tobacco sector from March 2020 to August 2020, when South Africa banned all retail sales of traditional tobacco products, ostensibly to help stem the spread of Covid-19. By cutting off the supply of what it deemed “nonessential items,” the government hoped to prevent virus transmissions from people sharing cigarettes and thus prevent the health sector from being overwhelmed by sick cigarette smokers, according to government statements at the time.
The tobacco industry challenged that decision in court, claiming that the measure was disproportional and counterproductive. In December 2020, South Africa’s High Court agreed and declared the measure unconstitutional. However, significant damage had already been done to the lawful tobacco industry, according to Grimm and Katzke.
Credit: Enter Line Design
“Taxing vaping products will most likely stimulate the illicit trade in these products as has happened in the combustible tobacco sector,” they add. “Many commentators from the industry raised this point at the workshop, and National Treasury did not address the proliferation of the illicit cigarette and tobacco trade, or the likelihood that taxing the vaping industry will likely stimulate the illicit trade in these products.”
Already accounting for a third of the market in South Africa before the country’s Covid-19 lockdowns, the illicit tobacco trade soared to unprecedented heights during the tobacco ban. A recent study, conducted by the University of Cape Town’s Research Unit on the Economics of Excisable Products, found that an estimated 93 percent of smokers were able to purchase cigarettes on the illicit market during South Africa’s sales ban. Shortly after the ban was lifted, South African Revenue Service Commissioner Edward Kieswetter predicted it would take years to investigate and prosecute the corruption and illegal activities that had taken root in those four months.
A 2021 study, commissioned by the Vapour Products Association of South Africa (VPASA), analyzed the economic impact that the vaping industry has in South Africa. The study concluded that the industry’s total gross value-added contribution to GDP is zar2.49 billion, with an estimated zar710 million in resulting tax payments (mainly income tax and VAT) made in 2019. The VPASA report found that more than 350,000 South Africans use vaping products, that vaping product sales in 2019 amounted to zar1.25 billion and that the vaping industry generated 3,800 jobs.
The South African government plans to implement its proposed vaping tax on Jan. 1, 2023. The proposals must still go through the normal legislative cycle before being promulgated into law. The draft discussion document will consider comments from vape consumers, manufacturers and importers, which could have an impact on the commencement date of the proposed tax and on its final form. The draft bill, which is anticipated as early as June 2022, is expected to shed further light on the precise nature of the proposed vaping tax.
Grimm and Katzke say the government should carefully consider what it hopes to achieve by taxing vaping products. In their view, the goals of limiting youth usage and improving the health of South Africans “will not, necessarily, or directly,” be achieved by merely taxing vaping products. Instead, more understanding of the safety and efficacy of e-cigarettes and the impact that a vaping tax would have on consumers is needed.
“We suggest that government should help fund additional research into these aspects and continue to engage with industry in shaping its new tax policy,” say Grimm and Katzke. “Government should also take meaningful and decisive steps in combating the illicit cigarette and tobacco trade, publicize any successes on that front, and ensure that the lawful tobacco industry is better protected from illicit competitors.”

July 16, 2022
Wordly Advice

Credit: Alswart
Headlines in news stories about vaping and tobacco products are often inaccurate.
By George Gay
Many years ago, at one of my family’s sporadic gatherings, a then late-middle-aged family member told a story about a distant relative who, on returning from the Boer War discovered that his young son had developed a stammer. The father’s reaction, so the story went, was to take the boy up to the second floor of his house, hold him by his ankles out of the window, and tell him he would get the same treatment the next time he stammered, only with the added benefit that he would be allowed to free fall.
The boy never stammered again, according to the storyteller, who related this incident, I think, as an example of how, sometimes, even cruel means were justified by successful outcomes. His audience, made up mostly of younger people, were clearly not of the same opinion. They stood, in open-mouthed shock, until one of them said something like: “Of course he never stammered again, the poor chap probably never spoke again.” Whether this suggestion was true, I don’t know, but it seems to me that it cannot be ruled out.
Why did I relate the above story? Well, I was reminded of it when I saw online the following headline from a Healthline Health News story: “Low-Intensity Electric Impulses May Help Struggling Smokers Quit.” I could see a similar conversation being played out:
Researcher at conference: “Yes, the results were amazing. We just hung these smokers out of the window on live electric wires, and they quit immediately.”
Audience member: “And are they still tobacco-free?”
Researcher, now somewhat cagily: “Yes … they stopped inhaling completely.”
Audience member: “Do you mean they’re dead?”
Researcher: “Well, yes, though we’re unsure whether the cause of death was due to the electric shock or the shock of being suspended out of the window. More research is needed.”
I have a passion for headlines, and I am also very taken by the word “struggling” in the one above. It seems to try to suggest a certain empathy with smokers, but I’m not sure this isn’t misleading. On the other hand, struggling is a good word here because it seems to illustrate the breakdance you perform when you accidentally grab a live wire, and I can imagine the young boy struggling as his father grabbed him by the ankles—though not as he was being held out of the window.
Credit: Vadosloginov
Struggling is the justification, I guess, for experimenting with applying “low-intensity electric impulses” to these smokers, who have been convinced that they are victims no longer in charge of their own destinies. They have been convinced that they are addicted to smoking and that it is all but impossible to give up without the intervention of people willing to do stuff to them.
OK, I don’t want to be unfair. I’m sure the people applying the electrodes are well meaning. The story said a new study had found that smokers receiving noninvasive low-intensity electric or magnetic impulses, also described as noninvasive brain stimulations (NIBS), were twice as likely to go without cigarettes for three months to six months as were those receiving a placebo treatment. The story added that NIBS had emerged as “a new therapeutic option for several conditions, including pain management, weight reduction, alcohol use disorder and/or depressive disorder.”
The point here, however, is that while the management of pain and depression involves complex matters that have mostly defied the best efforts of researchers to come up with effective remedies that don’t do more harm than good, smoking is a fairly simple matter for which, in recent times, at least one effective—and, joy of joys, noninvasive—remedy has been developed.
Individuals, companies, organizations and some governments have spent a lot of effort and time developing and improving vaping devices—and other low-risk tobacco and nicotine products—that can wean smokers off cigarettes. And with encouragement, or at least a lack of discouragement, these devices would, I’m sure, be continually improved both in their efficacy and, importantly, in respect of their environmental credentials.
But these efforts have been hugely undermined to the point where, by the end of this year, the three most populous countries, China, India and the U.S., will have either banned vaping devices or significantly reduced their appeal. Vaping’s detractors constantly moan that one of its problems is that nobody knows what long-term effects it will have.
However, a story can be published under a health news heading supportive of a little-tested proposed quitting method that works if at all by affecting the brain, without a hint of any concern about our not knowing what the long-term effects of such brain stimulations might be.
The situation is bizarre.
But now I want to digress because I always like to spend time with my most recent favorite heading, and that isn’t the one featured above. My most recent favorite heading has to be this one from the Manila Bulletin: “Thailand ready to legalize smoke-free products like the Philippines.”
Vaping concept word cloud background
In part, I like this heading because it speaks to a debate that crops up every time a new minister is appointed to head the U.K.’s education department: English grammar. What usually happens with a new right-leaning education minister is that she comes into her post with a demand that the English language curriculum be changed so that pupils are drilled in the (soon-to-be-forgotten) minutiae of complex grammatical rules that are, in reality, of interest only to academics and the otherwise friendless.
On the other hand, a new left-leaning education minister will demand the curriculum be changed so that pupils are encouraged to be creative rather than necessarily grammatically correct, resulting, in extremis, in their producing highly creative but unreadable twaddle.
What tends to get forgotten in this debate, and in most others, is that there is a middle way in which basic grammar is taught to everyone, but the more esoteric grammar is pursued only by those with a love of such things.
To my way of thinking, the most important thing to keep in mind when writing in English is word order. But it is one of the most overlooked. Take any daily English newspaper and you are likely to see a sentence that says something like, “Joe Bloggs was yesterday sentenced to five years imprisonment in the Central Criminal Court.” Of course, this is not true. There is overcrowding in English prisons, but I don’t think anybody has put forward as a solution the idea that convicts should serve their time within the country’s courts.
The sentence should read something like, “Joe Bloggs was yesterday sentenced in the Central Criminal Court to five years’ imprisonment.”
And if we in England cannot get such basics right, it is unfair for me to poke fun at a heading in a publication whose journalists and editors are working in their second language. But, in my defense, the heading is funny because, to use one of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s favorite words, it “deems” the Philippines, a country of about 112 million people, to be a smoke-free product.
All that is needed to make sense of the heading is to change the word order to something like, “Thailand, like the Philippines, ready to legalize smoke-free products.”Or if the subs cannot take the commas, then it can be rendered as, “Thailand to follow the Philippines and legalize smoke-free products.”
But now I would like to digress again because, mainly, I’m more interested on this occasion in looking not at my most recent favorite heading but at my most recent least favorite heading, which appeared in Yle News: “One in three teens buys snus on social media, study finds.”
Wow, even though the story refers to Finland, which bans sales of snus but might be thought of as being within one of the world’s major spheres of snus interest, 33.3 percent is a huge percentage of the teenage population to be buying snus on social media, especially when you consider that, despite the ban, some teenagers must be obtaining snus in other ways, and yet others must be indulging in different types of tobacco products.
But, of course, the heading shouts out a message that is not true. When you read the body of the story, it becomes clear the heading should read, “One in three teenage snus users buys snus on social media, study finds,” which puts a different complexion on things. On this basis, there might be only three teenage snus users in Finland, one of whom buys her products on social media.
Of course, the sub-editors wouldn’t like my suggested revisions because a couple of words have been added to the heading, which now, horror of horrors, contains the word snus twice. But in the interests of accuracy, surely it would be worthwhile running what would admittedly be a clumsy heading, or at least it would be worthwhile spending a couple of minutes getting around the problem caused by a misleading heading.
It would be easy to get around the number-of-words problem by dropping the superfluous “study finds.” And you could cut out the snus repetition by replacing the second usage with the word “products.” Or if you wanted to go for a harder-hitting headline, you could run it as, “One in three teenage users buys snus on social media.”
Truth matters, and unfortunately, many casual readers, I’m sure, will have taken the heading to mean what it says. And they will have gone on to have conversations with friends and family, who will have passed the story to others … no doubt in exaggerated form. To me, the heading is likely in this way to nurture a moral panic, and, in so doing, undermine a product people can use to move away from smoking and toward a far less risky future.
The story, which was based on a School Health Promotion study, seemed to look at students widely, though the only groups specifically identified were those in grades 10–12 and vocational students. And one serious problem with the story, to my way of thinking, is that it indulges in the usual blurring of lines when it comes to references to young people, with the use, in a story of fewer than 300 words, of “children” (three mentions), “young people,” “students” (two mentions), “teens” (including in the heading, three mentions), “youths” (two mentions), “youngsters” and of course the panic-inducing “kids.”
And to add to the moral panic, the Institute of Health and Welfare (IHW) is quoted as calling for parents to keep an eye on their children’s social media activity, adding that online platforms were making it easier for young people to buy tobacco products. It could have added, but it didn’t, that it might have been a good idea to keep an eye on what was being delivered to the family’s home.
You have to ask yourself what exactly the problem is here. Well, according to the story, the study found that up to [my emphasis] 43 percent of students in grades 10–12 and 67 percent of vocational school students used a tobacco product at least once last year, “with snus becoming increasingly popular.” Here we have our old friend “up to,” which could mean that no grade 10–12 students used a tobacco product at least once last year.
Of course, it seems ludicrous, too, to base a study on whether students used a tobacco product once in a year. These people are students, not saints. I bet some of them skipped class at least once last year, drank alcohol and told fibs about the reindeer eating their homework.
And look at the tired piece about snus, ostensibly the subject of the story but simply tagged on to the end of the sentence as an unsupported afterthought: “with snus becoming increasingly popular.”
But I think the crowning glory of the story is that, after warning specifically about young people obtaining snus on social media, it comes up with the following: “However, the most common way kids are introduced to tobacco products is through friends, the study found.”
Of course, there was no quoting the IHW as warning parents to keep an eye on the direct interactions of young people. Perhaps that was regarded as a step too far. Having stoked moral panics over tobacco products and social media, it was thought to be unhelpful to start a moral panic over friends.

July 16, 2022
International Connections

The old format of gathering thousands of people together at a vape convention is changing.
By Norm Bour
For 18 months while Covid-19 was shutting down borders, the vape industry event space was a ghost town. Between not wanting to travel and the inconvenience, everyone was hunkering down and waiting for the pandemic to end. Even though the pandemic has not ended in any official capacity, the events industry has roared back with a vengeance.
Nevertheless, it looks different than before.
There are few, if any, large vape conventions in vapor-filled convention halls, and it’s rare to find “vape only” meetings since all the different components—vape, CBD, hemp and alternatives—have all melded together.
Alongside traditional large-scale trade shows, there has also been a movement toward more intimate events, and along with SSE and smoke shop events comes the Counter Culture Convention (C3), which recently held two shows in Cancun, Mexico.
The founder of C3, Michael Wittenberg, is no stranger to the events space since he has been doing them for nearly two decades, nor is he new to vaping. In years past, he ran National Vape Expos (NVE) at locations throughout the eastern U.S. But doing international vape events is new to him even though there have been typical booth shows in Colombia, Mexico and throughout Europe.
However, that’s just one of the differentiators.
The other is that this new version is not a booth show but instead it’s formatted as a one-on-one meeting behind closed doors, designed for networking, intimacy and fun.
“After running NVE for many years, and then being shut down by Covid, I knew I wanted to do something different than before,” Wittenberg said. “I loved the one-on-one meetings format, so we launched that model in Cancun, Mexico, earlier this year. That proved to be a great success, so we duplicated it again in April and [will] have the next one in the Dominican Republic.”
The C3 website bills its events as “everything you love about conventions or trade shows;” however, the “hustle and bustle” of the show floor is removed. The VIP events instead highlight and amplify the personalized introductions.
“Our attendees represent the most influential thought leaders, innovators and trendsetters that Counter Culture has to offer, from cannabis and vape leaders all the way to the cutting-edge products and trends of the future,” the site states. “Our mission is to create an environment in which the only thing on our buyers’ minds is how they can find more value for their businesses. These buyers represent the cream of the crop—the leaders in the counterculture space who help facilitate and drive the various industries [that] are helping define our popular culture.”
The events likely won’t be held in the U.S., according to Wittenberg. He says that finding all-inclusive resorts is not that easy in the U.S., and they’re expensive. “When you go to exotic locations in Mexico, the [Dominican Republic] or other Caribbean countries, the all-inclusive-style resorts are everywhere,” Wittenberg explains. “Plus, the advantage of having everything on-site keeps our gathering intimate; there is no need to go anywhere. We even have our own in-house travel agent with decades of experience and connections, so we do our homework.
“When we launched our first NVE in 2015, we intentionally did not want to have it at a boring convention center or hotel. Instead, we picked Foxwoods Resort Casino in Connecticut, which was near to us, and later, we moved the event to the Mohegan Casino and Resort. After that, we duplicated the event in Alabama, and the results were terrific.”
Credit: Vepar5
Wittenberg said that he also rented the largest suites at his convention show, not because of vanity but because it encouraged networking.
“I always invited the attendees up to our room, which they [accepted] and many times brought their customers or vendors with them. That worked well until the end of 2019,” he said.
Until Covid-19 came along, which changed everything.
“Everything is different now, and vape, CBD, hemp and alternative[s] all run together. Before, you’d have just a vape show or just a hemp show, but now we have vape and smoke shops that carry a variety of crossover products,” he says. “[There’s] something for everyone.”
The terms “counterculture” or “alternative” are more mainstream than ever, which makes sense since hemp has become legal in many jurisdictions. Medical cannabis is legal in two-thirds of states, and recreational use is legal in almost half the U.S. Legal or not, the negative stigma cannabis once carried is mostly in the past.
While cannabis is gaining acceptance, vaping faces increasing pressure. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s premarket tobacco product application process has proven to be a significant, costly hurdle to many vapor businesses. It’s almost ironic that CBD and marijuana face less pressure than nicotine vapes.
The industry continues to accommodate regulations along with the needs of the public and the vaping space.
“In our industry, we’ve learned to be resilient, which makes sense since so many of us are radicals and rule breakers,” Wittenberg said. “In other [industries] under such attack, most entrepreneurs would have quit a long time ago. But so many of our peers have fought demons worse than government intervention, so they tend to stick it out regardless of the pressure. Plus, a lot of our people don’t really have anything else. They put all their efforts into vape and don’t have a Plan B.”
C3 brings together 30 buyers and 30 vendors and has them rotate through 30-minute meetings. If that time is too short, they can meet over a meal or drinks at night. They check in on Monday, leave on Friday, and the costs to run the event are borne by the vendors; the buyers’ costs are paid. And they do their best to screen the buyers to make sure they are who they say they are, and they now have a waiting list of candidates that wish to attend. Wittenberg calls his concept “luxury business networking.”
When specifically asked about any challenges C3 had doing events like this in Mexico, which has a long, sorted history and relationship with drug culture, the answer was somewhat complicated. Cannabis is technically illegal without a permit in the country, but you can be sure that attendees brought their own products into the country.
“They pretty much turned a blind eye,” Wittenberg said. “Our people kept things on the down-low. After Covid, the hospitality market had a long dry spell, and they were looking for (paying) bodies more than they normally would need to. That worked in our favor.” Times change. People change. Vape lounges, cloud comps, events with 20,000 attendees—they are all memories of the past. Now it seems like the right time to reinvent the industry. C3 is stepping up to help make those changes in an industry that always seems to be changing.
Norm Bour is the founder of VapeMentors and works with vape businesses worldwide. He can be reached at norm@VapeMentors.com.

July 13, 2022
Market Watch: Middle East

Credit: Adrian Ilie825
A relatively new market for legal vapor products, the Middle East is beginning to embrace tobacco harm reduction.
By Timothy S. Donahue
According to World Bank estimates, the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) market has seen a steady decline in tobacco consumption since 2000, with 23.3 percent of adults using the products in 2000, 20.8 percent in 2010, and 19.2 percent in 2020. Many industry experts attribute this decline to the region’s growing acceptance of vapor products.
E-cigarettes were banned in Qatar in 2012 and then three years later in Oman but legalized in Bahrain and Kuwait in 2016; however, neither country immediately adopted manufacturing standards or a taxation structure. Then, in April 2019, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) Authority for Standardization and Metrology (ESMA) approved standards for the nicotine-based e-cigarettes. It was the first country to develop standards for the products in the region.
Before 2019, e-cigarettes were illegal in the UAE, and use of the products was growing rapidly in an unregulated market. This worried UAE regulators who wanted to curb combustible tobacco use, limit youth initiation and check a thriving vapor market.
The goal of e-cigarette regulations in the UAE was to offer nicotine consumers less risky alternatives to combustible products. The standards set by ESMA were designed to regulate all nicotine components used in vaping products, including technical specifications, ingredients, imports, packaging and labeling requirements in the UAE as well as a corresponding fiscal and tax structure.
After the success of the World Vape Show (WVS) Dubai in 2021, the first e-cigarette trade show in the region, the number of companies legally producing vapor products in the UAE has grown tremendously. During their 2022 conference, held June 16–18, WVS representatives said that they welcomed 50 percent more visitors than in 2021.
During a seminar session that focused on the growth of the Middle East markets, several speakers said that the UAE and its regulatory outlook has become a blueprint for other Middle East markets such as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordan and Egypt. In 2021, Saudi Arabia announced new regulations for e-cigarettes similar to the UAE (which in turn are similar to Europe’s Tobacco Products Directive).
In April of this year, Relx International, a major China-based vaping manufacturer, commended Egyptian authorities for their decision to allow the legal import and commercialization of vaping products in the country. Like Saudi Arabia, Egypt’s proposed regulations for vaping products are nearly identical to the UAE’s.
Rebecca Haining, head of external affairs for BAT’s Middle East, South Asia and North Africa markets, said that the UAE should be applauded for being the first Middle Eastern country to enact regulations. She noted that in 2019, the UAE had approximately 15,000 vapers. In 2020, that number had grown to 60,000 vapers. Today, that number is an estimated 70,000.
“They paved the way for the regulations in Saudi Arabia … I think what [the UAE] has done in this area is very important … getting the industry together to talk about what are the possible solutions. The UAE moved very quickly to institute a range of regulations and standards that now give the manufacturers certainty and give consumers some certainty around the safety and the quality of the products,” said Haining. “That’s very important, and I think it’s a job very well done.”
By lifting the ban on e-cigarette products, UAE authorities have allowed for the growth of new businesses and investment opportunities in the region. Experts say the move will bolster existing businesses that sell such products and will attract entrepreneurs. According to Arabian Business, the vaping and e-cigarette market in the MENA region is expected to grow by 9.74 percent annually to reach $485 million by 2025, up from $267.9 million in 2018, the year before UAE regulations were enacted. By comparison, the U.S. vaping market is expected to grow to $40.25 billion by 2028.
Omar Abdellatif, general manager for Philip Morris Management Services Middle East Limited, told WVS attendees that the increase of exhibitors at this year’s show, compared to 2021, reflects how many new businesses are serving the UAE market. He said the show is also an example of how the market has changed as innovation has flourished since legalization.
“Look at the evolution that has happened here in the UAE in just over one year. I think the last time you were probably sitting here [at WVS 2021] … it was a lot more about the tanks and closed pod systems; a lot more about the traditional side of vaping,” he said. “But you’ve seen what’s come up very quickly. Disposables, once they became legalized, have taken the market by a storm. And I think this is what we continue to expect. We’ll start to see these innovations.”
Some studies suggest that e-cigarettes may be gradually replacing the use of shisha products. In a joint investigation with the American University of Beirut, the Tobacco Free Initiative found that an estimated 40 percent of young adults in Lebanon are now using vaping devices instead of hookah tobacco. One speaker during the WVS said that the opportunity for e-cigarettes to replace cigarette use, and to a lesser extent hookah, “represents a considerable shift in the culture of tobacco consumption in the Middle East.”
Fadi Maaytah, CEO of Alternative Nicotine Delivery Solutions, said during the WVS that to continue the trend of moving combustible tobacco users toward less risky alternatives in the MENA region will require innovation. He said that innovation, however, should not attract new consumers but instead protect consumers looking to stop traditional smoking by bringing high-quality products to market.
“It’s not for ex-smokers. It’s not for nonsmokers. It is for smokers trying to quit. Today, the development and the flow of product that’s coming to the market, it’s coming with a lot of innovation, but the risk point here is that it might attract the wrong audiences, and this is what we see more often happening,” said Maaytah. “This is why [the industry] needs more of a collaboration between the industry and the regulators to work together and push the industry in the right direction.”
From a manufacturing perspective, positive industry innovation can only be achieved through product standards that are abided by all participants in the market, according to Haining. She said that standards are not only important for the safety and quality of products for consumers but also—if products comply with the standards—they’re less likely to have youth appeal.
“That’s part of the reason we have the standards. Secondly, from a manufacturer perspective, it’s around marketing freedoms and marketing regulations … making sure that all players in the market are marketing responsibly and not targeting youth and [are] discouraging youth uptake of these products,” she said. “If I look at an ideal situation, from a regulatory perspective, it would be regulation and excise frameworks, in general, that are proportionate to the risk [of e-cigarettes compared to combustible] cigarettes. There needs to be a wider berth between cigarettes and potentially reduced-risk products when it comes to regulations, standards, marketing freedoms and excise frameworks.”

July 12, 2022
Counting Our Losses

Matt Holman, Clive Bates and Marc Sils
The E-Cig Summit 2022 in Washington, D.C., confirms that vaping has lost in the court of mass media.
By Monica Schick
The E-Cig Summit operates under the premise of bringing stakeholders and public health science together with regulators to discuss strategies, as demonstrated by its mission statement: “The E-Cigarette Summit has a single aim of facilitating respectful dialogue and thoughtful analysis of the latest evidence and an opportunity to explore how this should be interpreted to deliver the most effective public health and regulatory strategies.”
The E-Cig Summit 2022 was focused on current use patterns, youth usage, regulatory control and the available science. Public health representatives and stakeholders had an opportunity to air grievances and discuss solutions in panel discussions. Two major themes that emerged during the summit from both stakeholders and public health representatives alike were the deafening silence of the regulators and the miscommunication being presented to the public.
Monica Schick
In the past two years, we have seen the window closing for flavored vapor products in the U.S., with an even larger global concern voiced by the World Health Organization. With marketing denial orders issued by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration shutting down over 75 percent of the industry, the burden of the Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking (PACT) Act and now the Omnibus Bill placing regulatory control over synthetic nicotine under the FDA, there is little to no legal market left for flavored vapor products.
Marc Sils, owner of 906 Vapor in Michigan, shared his perspective from the view of the vapor shop owner. He reiterated that vaping products were designed to help the current adult smoker quit combustibles. He expressed his frustration with the overreach of FDA regulators and the millions of smokers that will be left behind if the FDA continues its warpath of overregulation.
Jeff Lynch, facilitator of prevention and intervention education at CHOICES Prevention programs, which aim to keep kids from vaping, posed a scenario of explaining harm reduction to adolescents: “What do you do if [your] parent is a smoker; is it better for them to vape or [to] smoke combustible cigarettes?” The answer to his question was to just reiterate the message that “for the parent, I would probably recommend they go look at data.”
The problem with his response is that it only leads to the slew of misinformation available online. “What data is out there?” a parent may ask. “The only data I see is vaping is harmful.” If you Google “adult vaping,” you get a plenty of campaigns stating the harm of vaping and only a few statements on the “potential benefits” from regulators.
This bates the question, what data is being presented to the public that the public can review and trust? Lynch also speaks on his funding and how the money provided to him through a grant qualifies him to speak only about youth usage. It is not surprising to hear these types of responses coming from public health officials. He is essentially bound by his funding to comment only on one side of the narrative—the prevention of youth usage and not the benefits to current adult smokers.
Nancy Rigotti, director of the Tobacco Research and Treatment Center at Harvard Medical School, brought a clinician’s perspective on harm reduction, stating her disclosures not from the tobacco or vapor industries but from a pharmaceutical company to investigate a smoking cessation medication. In her speech, she discusses a study, “Communication Between U.S. Physicians and Patients,” regarding e-cigarettes and that only 22 percent of physicians had ever recommended an e-cigarette and most likely only to older, heavier smokers.
In that study, the data also showed that “approximately one in four physicians communicated that e-cigarettes were harmful and [the physicians] discouraged use; this communication was significantly more likely with the younger, light[er] smoker than the older, heavier smoker.” Rigotti’s commentary further demonstrated how even the medical community is falling victim to the prolific amount of misinformed media messaging regarding vaping.
With the current messaging that nicotine is detrimental to growing brains, as brought up by opponents of vapor products, it was interesting to hear Peter Hajek, professor of clinical psychology at the Wolfson Institute of Population Health at Queen Mary University, speak on the effects of nicotine usage on the brain. In his presentation, he detailed current studies that showed that the age of initial consumption of nicotine does not make much of a difference in dependency and seems to show no effect on IQ.
If this is the case, why is the public being shown worms buried under the skin and numerous other images that are grotesque and are a completely inappropriate representation of the risks of vaping? Clive Bates from The Counterfactual did not hold back when confonting this type of messaging in his presentation during the E-Cig Summit 2022.
Matthew Holman, director of the FDA’s Center for Tobacco Products’ Office of Science, discussed the premarket tobacco product application (PMTA) process and explained that out of the 8,094,108 PMTAs received, 21 have been granted a marketing order. All those products contain only tobacco flavors and are manufactured by larger tobacco companies.
During the Q&A session, Holman was asked about the miscommunication by the FDA. Holman held his ground, saying that the FDA is doing its best to communicate the message but that it is very nuanced. He responded that with more engagement with stakeholders, hopefully both parties can agree on messaging because the public is confused.
The most jarring session was one where Bates, Holman and Sils were brought together for an open conversation. During this session, Holman noted that people would not believe him if he told them that vaping is less harmful than smoking. Given Holman’s professional position, this is a shocking and foreboding statement that shows just how far the negative narrative has gone and the extent of the struggle it would take to change the public’s perception of vaping.
Sils commented that the regulatory overreach was killing the vapor space, to which Holman replied that he was not responsible for the government decision to regulate vaping. “Go down the hill here to the Capitol because they wrote the law,” Holman said. “We have jurisdiction over the product[s] that Congress gave us jurisdiction over, [and] we just got jurisdiction over synthetic nicotine. We didn’t choose that. Congress wrote a law, and now we’re responsible for implementing it.”
In response to Holman’s comment, Bates said the FDA did have choices on how to regulate and therefore was still responsible for the overreach. Obviously, this is not an issue that can be solved at the E-Cig Summit; it has been unsolvable for the better part of a decade.
The current reality is that vaping has lost in the court of mass media. The public health advocates that showed up to the E-Cig Summit and joined the conversation seemed optimistic about the possibility that vaping can be a less harmful alternative to smoking, but it is also painfully clear that, for many in the public health community, the risk that a child might at some point start vaping—even if that vaping would be in place of smoking—will continue to weigh more heavily than the chance that an adult smoker will give up his deadly addiction to traditional cigarettes through vaping.
“Is it ever right to exaggerate risks to get the behavior change you want?” Bates asked. “Is it OK to imply, by omission or commission, that vaping is as harmful as smoking just because you want to deter young people from using these products? [What are] the ethics of doing that—misleading people to get behavior change?”
Until public health can put the needs of current smokers and the importance of options for adults at the forefront of the conversation, we will continue to see a war on vaping with a bleak outlook for the current smokers who desperately want to quit and would benefit the most from these products being available on the market.
Monica Schick is secretary of the board at the Smoke-Free Alternatives Trade Association.
July 12, 2022
Unnatural Response

Credit: Alexl MX
All nontobacco nicotine is now subject to the same regulations as tobacco-sourced nicotine in the U.S.
By Timothy S. Donahue
It was both expected and unexpected. Everyone in the vaping industry knew that at some point the U.S. Congress and the Food and Drug Administration were going to decide on how to handle synthetic and nontobacco nicotine. It was generally believed that regulation would appear in an appropriations bill in September, meaning vaping advocates thought they had time to fundraise and prepare for a battle.
They did not. Instead, the language for changing the definition of the Tobacco Control Act (TCA) to include all nicotine products was buried on page 1,861 of the 2,741-page omnibus spending bill that was signed by President Joe Biden in March. How the rider found its way into the omnibus has caught the ire of many in the industry who say major tobacco companies are seizing the vaping industry away from the small business owners who got it started.
Senator Richard Burr was allegedly approached by R.J. Reynolds and Juul Labs representatives about getting the synthetic nicotine rider in the omnibus that at the time was winding its way through Congress. Burr joined forces with fellow senators Dick Durbin and Patty Murray and Representative Frank Pallone to get the nontobacco nicotine language into the omnibus, according to two Senate sources familiar with the discussions, as reported by Bloomberg Law.
Azim Chowdhury
Azim Chowdhury, a partner with the law firm Keller and Heckman, said he interprets the rule to mean that all synthetic products already on the market or newly marketed within 30 days after the enactment date can continue to be marketed during the 60-day period following the enactment date. The law became effective on April 14, and manufacturers will have until May 14, 2022, to either submit a premarket tobacco product application (PMTA) to the FDA for each vaping product that contains synthetic nicotine or pull their products from the market.
Manufacturers that submit PMTAs to the agency by the May 14 deadline can continue marketing their products until July 13, 2022. Beyond that date, all products must be removed from retail stores unless the FDA has issued a marketing authorization, according to Chowdhury.
“We do not anticipate FDA authorizing any synthetic nicotine products by the end of the 90-day period, though they may take another Fatal Flaw (the term Fatal Flaw was used by the FDA for PMTA submissions that didn’t have specific studies and were subsequently denied) approach to quickly deny applications,” said Chowdhury. “Significantly, the rider in its current form indicates that a synthetic nicotine version of a product that already went through the PMTA process and is subject to a refuse-to-accept, refuse-to-file, marketing denial order (MDO) or withdrawal of a marketing order would have to come off the market as of the effective date—i.e., after 30 days of the law’s enactment.
“In simpler terms, for products that were previously formulated with tobacco-derived nicotine—and the only change was a switch to synthetic nicotine—and whose PMTAs have already been refused or denied, those products will effectively be banned on the effective date—30 days after enactment—with no opportunity to submit a new PMTA. This is Congress’ way of punishing companies whose PMTAs were denied and then, in their view, sought to circumvent the law by switching to synthetic nicotine.”
MIchelle Minton / Credit: Competitive Enterprise Institute
Michelle Minton, writing for the Competitive Enterprise Institute, states that given the FDA’s sluggish track record, many of the applications may not even be reviewed, let alone approved, in that time, which would make the bill a de facto prohibition on those products. “FDA has made it painfully clear that there is no way for those companies to earn its approval,” Minton said. “All it will do is guarantee that companies and consumers are pushed in ever-greater numbers toward a growing illicit market where there are no consumer protections and no age restrictions—or back to smoking.”
Stately response
Beyond the PMTA conditions, if a marketing order is granted, manufacturers of synthetic nicotine products are also subject to all the regulations for tobacco products. Keller and Heckman interpret this to include all additional TCA requirements, including tobacco product establishment registration and product listing; ingredient listing; ensuring that labeling is compliant, including required warning statements; and health document submissions, among others.
Many states had already started to ban synthetic nicotine unless a product gets marketing approval from the FDA. Legislation has been introduced in four state capitals and enacted in one state, Alabama, that effectively bans all products containing synthetic nicotine. Patrick Gleason, vice president of state affairs at Americans for Tax Reform, said Alabama, then Mississippi, Maryland and Georgia, were the first states to introduce legislation effectively banning synthetic nicotine products. However, he says there will be no need for more state legislation to ban synthetic nicotine now that the federal government has added it to the TCA.
Yaël Ossowski
Yael Ossowski, deputy director of the Consumer Choice Center, said that making companies ask permission to sell harm reduction products in the 21st century is “asinine.” Using “sleight of hand” during an emergency government funding bill to “castigate millions of vapers and the entrepreneurs who make and sell the products they rely on,” he noted, is the definition of active harm.
“Only the largest and most powerful vaping and tobacco companies can afford the lawyers and the time necessary to complete the paperwork necessary to pass the FDA’s process, meaning thousands of hardworking American business owners will now be forced to close, depriving millions of adult consumers of harm-reducing options. Many will be forced back to cigarettes,” said Ossowski. “Synthetic nicotine is an innovative method of providing nicotine independent of tobacco, and millions of American adults now use these products as a less harmful method of consuming nicotine. A backdoor bureaucratic power move like this represents a sledgehammer to the men and women of our country who have sought out vaping devices to kick their cigarette habit.”
There is no sell-through period for retailers of synthetic nicotine products if the manufacturer does not file a PMTA with the FDA by May 14. While some manufacturers plan to end sales of their synthetic products by the deadline, as Ossowski suggests, others plan on submitting robust and timely applications. Patrick Mulcahy, CEO and co-founder of Streamline Group, parent to the Streamline Vape Co., wrote in an email that his company has been working toward a solution to navigate the regulatory landscape for newly deemed synthetic nicotine products.
“We have recently contracted with Accorto Regulatory Solutions to manage, submit and deliver a complete set of premarket tobacco [product] applications. To date, their track record of applications submitted have received zero MDOs. Their commitment to submitting a complete and robust PMTA is the level of service Streamline aims to provide the market with our current and future line of products,” he said.
“Streamline’s goal during this process is a commitment to provide full transparency, informational updates and other news related to these regulatory requirements as we progress through the various phases of the PMTA,” Mulcahy stated, adding that market confidence is a top priority for Streamline Group, which was submitting PMTAs for its Juice Head brand e-liquids, disposables and nicotine pouches along with its NIIN brand e-liquid and pouches.
Organized approach
April Meyers, SFATA
April Meyers, owner of Connecticut-based Northeast Vapor Supplies and CEO of the Smoke-Free Alternatives Trade Association (SFATA), told Vapor Voice that her organization believed the industry would have more time to hold discussions with legislators on the Clarifying Authority Over Nicotine Act of 2021 (HR 6286) introduced by Representative Mikie Sherrill in December of last year. SFATA members were aware of the mounting pressure on the subject of synthetic nicotine and had been developing strategies to counter the pressure.
Given the inclusion of vapor in the Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking (PACT) Act in the 2021 omnibus, the nonprofit vapor industry advocacy group was not completely surprised to learn that HR 6286’s language had been included in the 2022 omnibus bill, according to Meyers.
“We went immediately to work educating our members on the issue, executing a call to action and making a volley of calls to sources at the Capitol, including our contacts at the freedom caucus,” said Meyers. “Those sources confirmed that a handful of large vapor companies and several Big Tobacco companies were in support of the measure. We were also informed that the House and Senate votes would move quickly and that there was little opportunity to get the provision removed. This was discouraging, to say the least, but did not dissuade us from acting. This industry has learned to mobilize quickly and has achieved several victories under similar circumstances.”
Meyers said that while the sponsors of the synthetic nicotine rider claimed the intent was to close a loophole on synthetic nicotine-derived products from large companies now popular among youth, the rule, and others like it, are very unlikely to have that intended effect. Instead, she said, consumers using these products as a harm reduction option will suffer alongside all the small businesses that have always operated in full compliance with federal, state and local laws.
“The FDA created a problem by overregulating a product used by millions of adults who find vaping a safer alternative to smoking. When a market in high demand is overregulated, gray and black markets emerge where there are no regulations requiring safe products or ID checks. The vapor industry is incredibly resourceful,” Meyers said. “SFATA believes our government should have learned its lesson from the 1920s that prohibitionist policies never work. In this country, and particularly, this industry, where there is a will, there is a way. Despite the attempt to bring the vapor industry to heel, adults have been vaping flavored products in the U.S. for [nearly 15 years]. It is delusional to think that will be snuffed out with the signing of a law. Our fear is that this will pave the way to a growing illicit trade market while simultaneously increasing smoking rates across the country as studies have already demonstrated in localities with flavor bans.”
Tony Abboud, VTA
Tony Abboud, president of the Vapor Technology Association (VTA), said that everyone who understands anything about PMTAs knows that an application cannot be filed within the 90-day time frame, particularly because the FDA requires at least six months of scientific data for such an application. He said the new rule could become a de facto ban on synthetic nicotine that would have some unintended consequences.
The VTA hired economic research firm John Dunham & Associates to evaluate the negative economic impacts that a synthetic nicotine ban would have in the U.S., according to Abboud. The results included 16,100 lost jobs, over $800 million in lost wages and $2.5 billion in lost economic output. It would also cost the U.S. more than $500 million in yearly taxes.
Amanda Wheeler
Amanda Wheeler, owner of Jvapes and president of American Vapor Manufacturers, said during the 103rd annual meeting of Vapor Voice’s parent company, TMA, that she hopes the FDA offers “some kind of enforcement discretion” to small businesses, especially those manufacturers that are trying to follow the rules.
“I can only plead with the FDA at this point not to repeat the mistakes of 2020 and 2021, finding an arbitrary reason to toss all of those applications out on their ear. The consequences this time are even more dire,” said Wheeler. “We have this serious handicap on our hands as far as the time frame … I think we need to treat businesses equitably and recognize that there is only so much that people can do in 60 days. And enforcement discretion would be the thing that’s most helpful to prevent companies from having to look for an alternative solution.”

May 11, 2022
Growing Competition

Credit: Parilov
While there are three bills in Congress competing to legalize marijuana, there are also many obstacles.
By Timothy S. Donahue
For the second time, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement (MORE) Act (HR 3617), a bill that would end the federal prohibition on cannabis by removing it from the list of banned controlled substances. The MORE bill that passed the House with 220 “yea” votes to 204 “nay” votes would end the federal ban but leave legalization up to the states. The last time the House passed the MORE Act, the Senate did not take it up for a vote.
The current MORE bill is also expected to face strong headwinds in the Senate. This is partly because there are currently three bills floating through Congress competing to legalize marijuana on the federal level. The second bill, the States Reform Act (SRA), was introduced last year by Representative Nancy Mace. The SRA is the first comprehensive Republican version of legislation to end cannabis prohibition. It’s expected to have its own hearing in April (but had not at press time). Mace voted no on the MORE Act.
Mace’s legalization bill is primarily aimed at having the federal government treat marijuana in a similar manner to alcohol, and cannabis would be removed from the Controlled Substances Act, with retroactive effects for people previously punished. Prior federal cannabis convictions would need to be expunged within one year.
The third marijuana legalization bill is out of the Senate. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden and Senator Cory Booker introduced the Cannabis Administration and Opportunity Act in 2019. It was read twice and has been in committee ever since. The main features of the legislation largely align with what advocates and stakeholders expected. The bill (S. 1552) would federally deschedule cannabis, expunge prior convictions, allow people to petition for resentencing and maintain the authority of states to set their own marijuana policies.
While all the action marijuana legalization bills are receiving lately is exciting, it doesn’t mean that the U.S. is close to decriminalizing delta-9 THC. Rod Kight, founder and principal of Kight Law Office and a prominent global expert in marijuana law and legislation, said that he doesn’t expect any of the legalization bills to pass this year. Currently, cannabis is legal for adult use in 19 states and for medical use in 36 states. The legal marijuana industry generated $25 billion in sales last year, a 43 percent increase over 2020, and is expected to hit $65 billion in 2030, according to Forbes.
In an interview with Vapor Voice, Kight shared his insights into the various bills.
Vapor Voice: Do you think the MORE Act has a chance to get passed in the Senate?
Rod Kight
Kight: I think it has almost no chance whatsoever in the Senate for a couple of reasons. One is that there are competing bills. I think we may have some political showmanship as to which bill can get passed. Additionally, the Senate doesn’t get a whole lot done to begin with. It’s become an “obstructionist” legislative body, but that’s a topic for another day. So, with respect to the MORE Act, I would call this a symbolic vote by the House that, disappointingly, is almost certainly not going to pass in the Senate or even come close.

If you thought one bill had a best chance to pass, which one would you choose?
If a decent bill came from the Senate to the House, then it may have a good chance. In that scenario there, a bill is much more likely to pass than one coming from the House to the Senate. I think the hurdles the Schumer/Booker bill are going to face are that it’s competing with a Republican bill in [the] House. Additionally, it’s also just still competing with old-school prohibitionists. This is important since it will need 60 votes. I’m not sure that Schumer even has the full Democratic caucus, much less Republicans, who would either presumably say no and vote against it to continue prohibitionist policies or to vote for the Republican bill sponsored by Mace.
We talked about two of the bills; what is your opinion of Mace’s legislation?
She says she has bipartisan support. This would again have to come out of the House, though, and go into the Senate. As I said earlier, that’s a more difficult route given the way our legislative system works. That being said, it’s really hard to predict how the Mace bill will do because on the one hand, a lot of Democrats want to pass cannabis reform at almost any cost, including by voting for a Republican-sponsored bill. And so, here’s a bill sponsored by Republicans that may actually be able to get through because of presumptive Republican support and some Democratic members of Congress who will vote for it in order to legalize marijuana. All of this is to say that the Mace bill could have some traction simply because it’s sponsored by a Republican.
On the other hand, it’s not as comprehensive or thorough of a bill and doesn’t address a lot of issues that Democrats want. And then also, it’s sort of … a pride issue … for the Republicans to sponsor and pass a cannabis bill, which forever has always been a Democratic issue. I think that would be a pretty hard pill for the Democrats to swallow.
If we really look at the Mace and the Schumer/Booker Senate bills, the more that the MORE Act seems DOA [dead on arrival]. The Schumer/Booker bill is probably unlikely to pass as it stands as well. It will probably get blocked by Senate Republicans.
If you were writing the legislation, what would Rod Kight’s bill look like?
Credit: Poylock19
The most straightforward thing to do would be to just, literally, have a very, very short bill that simply removed all forms of cannabis from the Controlled Substances Act altogether. Done deal, and then it’s up to the states to regulate it, which is de facto happening now anyway. Under that scenario, it would be regulated in a similar manner to other products, such as alcohol, tobacco, kratom, etc., that are typically regulated by the states. And then the FDA [U.S. Food and Drug Administration] and other federal agencies would regulate to the extent that the various products that flow from cannabis fall within their respective jurisdictions.
That being said, and as simple as that may sound, it’s unlikely to happen. “Cannabis” comes loaded with meaning these days, from financial gain to personal liberty to health to tax benefits to social and racial equity, etc. So any cannabis law will ultimately incorporate some, and perhaps all, of these cannabis-related issues and more. So there is ultimately an opportunity for each of the different parties and many interest groups to get something that they want. Democrats want social equity, they want racial equity, they want expungement, all of which are really important and speak to a bigger set of values related to cannabis so that when it is finally legalized, we’re not just allowing big corporate interest to come in and scoop this whole thing up after prosecuting people for almost 100 years, primarily people of color. This is a major concern in a controversial medical marijuana bill in my home state of North Carolina.
On the other hand, the Republicans tend to focus more on making this thing really work for business.
For my part, and given both the history and the current state of affairs with cannabis, I favor a bill that fully removes it from the Controlled Substances Act and also addresses social and racial equity while creating a place for small businesses to thrive.
If you had a crystal ball, will a federal legalization bill pass this year? Next year?
I don’t see any advancement this year. I think the best we can hope for is some banking and potentially some tax reform as those things relate to marijuana. I don’t see any kind of legalization at the federal level. As far as when we can expect to see it, I think, at the very best, it would be next year. However, I’m starting to kind of get my head around the fact that the best opportunity is probably in a post-Biden administration setting. Biden is simply not a supporter. I think without strong support and even leadership from the executive side, [it’s] ultimately difficult to get anything through of this magnitude.
What kind of social and economic benefits would legalization bring, such as taxes, fewer people in prison, etc.? Could more money go to treating the addiction of harder drugs?
I don’t have any specific numbers, but I will say that this reform is not only good for the physical and mental health of American citizens but also for the fiscal health of the country. Taxing the products and using those taxes to fund socially beneficial programs, including expungement of marijuana convictions, while also lowering the prison population will be huge. Of course, adding an entire new industry to the market will have a huge financial impact. Finally, liberating cannabis for use by people instead of medicating with pharmaceuticals will also help. With respect to addiction and mental health opportunities, I think cannabis can play an enormous role. I think that it could help reestablish the U.S. as a leader in the world economy as well. We’re seeing Latin America beginning to legalize; we’re seeing Germany and Spain making moves to legalize. And so, if the United States gets out ahead of that slightly, then I think the U.S. retains control of what promises to be a huge sector of the economy, whereas if we allow Europe to take the lead on this, then it will be impossible for the U.S. to recover. I don’t think the U.S. could ever really gain it back.
What about on a state level—is legalization becoming more active?
Credit: Adobe
As it stands, the states continue to be the place where all the action is happening. It’s really fundamentally important to pay attention to all the various bills regarding cannabis across the board. You know, recreational marijuana, medical marijuana, hemp, hemp derivatives, all those types of things. Watch what’s happening at the state level. I think that’s really where we’re seeing some essential changes.
Will we eventually see all 50 states with legal marijuana?
I think it is unlikely but possible that we could have some form of legal marijuana in all 50 states while it is still illegal at the federal level. This would be unprecedented. In fact, it’s probably unprecedented where we are at right now. What other issue in the history of the U.S. has been like this, where you have more than a majority, maybe even a supermajority of states that have legalized something that the feds deem to be illegal or vice versa?
Just to take things to another perspective, consider that now with respect to hemp derivatives—you have THC that’s being lawfully marketed throughout the country, and in most states, it’s legal. At what point do we even really—from a policy level, not necessarily a statutory definitional level—just consider that cannabis is, in fact, lawful throughout most of the U.S. in the sense that there are all of the active compounds in marijuana, including THC, being marketed throughout the country legally through hemp. At what point do we just say cannabis is legal in this country, either de facto or otherwise?
Times are changing. You had marijuana, which was considered the “THC world.” And then you had hemp, which was considered to be the “CBD world.” Those worlds have blended. You have interesting things that the states are doing. Ultimately, what’s happening is [that] the overall tide of cannabis legalization is continuing to move forward. We may see a situation where almost every state has legalization of marijuana. Yet, marijuana is still, quote, unquote, illegal at the federal level. That’ll be a very strange state of events, but that’s how it could play out.
Last question: Is there unity between the hemp and marijuana producers? Unlike other industries, are the segments banding together to fight potential regulations?
No, I think there’s unfortunately a lot of dissension. I think there’s dissension between the marijuana industry and the hemp industry and within each of those sectors of the industry. Then I think at the level of the farmers, the farmers are the front lines, and they’re the ones that really are often not heard. They’re the ones that struggle with massive price fluctuations and the bottom dropping out and then the mass demands. Then they ramp up for demand, and then it goes away. The farmers may be the most important factor in this equation.

May 11, 2022
Logistical Nightmare

Credit: Markus Spiske
Postal regulations and shipping bans create major roadblocks for smokers trying to quit combustibles.
By Maria Verven
As the saying goes: When the going gets tough, the tough get going.
Thanks to the Preventing Online Sales of E-Cigarettes to Children Act that passed last year, retailers have had to hustle to deliver vapor products to their customers.
All the major shipping vendors, from the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) to the leading nongovernmental carriers—UPS, FedEx, DHL—have stopped shipping vaping products containing nicotine or cannabis to avoid violating the 2007 Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking (PACT) Act.
Although some alternative logistic solutions have emerged and the USPS has made some exceptions for business-to-business shipments, delivering vapor products to consumers remains a huge challenge—especially for customers who live outside of major metropolitan areas.
Some smaller retailers simply called it quits.
“We stopped shipping when the USPS ban went into effect,” said Char Owen, CEO of Cloud 9 Vapor Shop. Cloud 9’s two shops in Seguin, Texas, and Kenedy, Texas, are 40 miles and 60 miles, respectively, from San Antonio. She said the software to track shipments was too expensive, adding that some quotes were as high as $100,000. Even quotes that were closer to $20,000 put this option out of reach.
“And if we didn’t use software, we would have to hire a person to keep up with it, and that wasn’t within our reach either,” she said. “We are two small stores, and we’re not big shippers, but our stores are in areas where customers might have to travel over an hour to get to us. With current gas prices, it would absolutely be cheaper to ship; however, we can’t afford that option anymore.”
While Owen said her stores haven’t taken a big hit, the PACT Act had a huge impact on the customers they used to send shipments to. “It’s the remote vaper that got hurt in this case,” she said.
Exceptions to the rule
Credit: Hakinmhan
It’s rare, but business and regulatory exemptions to the PACT Act have been made.
Pure Labs, parent company for Halo vaping products, sought and obtained approval by the USPS to ship e-liquid and other vaping products to other compliant businesses. The approval allows Syndicate Global Distribution and Halo Wholesale Direct to ship Halo electronic nicotine-delivery system (ENDS) products directly to their brick-and-mortar retail customers—a huge win for Halo.
“Halo’s tobacco and menthol vape products are in demand by adult consumers throughout the country, and we are excited to have USPS solidify the supply chain,” said Kevin Dietz, director of Halo brand sales, adding that several of Halo’s ENDS products are in the final stages of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s premarket tobacco product authorization process.
Unique challenges
Filling the shipping void are companies such as X Delivery, which promises to satisfy all PACT Act requirements, including verifying the purchaser’s age and obtaining a signature from an adult aged 21-plus upon delivery. Other restrictions—such as the maximum weight requirement (no more than 10 pounds), requisite stickers indicating that the package contains a “tobacco” product and a notice that the recipient is required to pay taxes on the purchase—must be met.
“All shipping has unique challenges. The fact that the national carriers opted out of shipping vape products shows us that they’re only interested in the drop-and-run delivery model,” said Paul Vinuelas, chief logistics officer for X Delivery. “We are dedicated to ensuring compliance and protecting youth from obtaining these products. While it may take a bit more effort to perform our deliveries and audit them for PACT Act compliance, we think it’s worth it.”
While they only began shipping vapor products in late 2020, X Delivery worked closely with vape companies to build a fully compliant service. An application programming interface helps streamline the shipping process and sync data in real-time across various platforms. They’ve also connected empty warehouses, local delivery services and other supply chain assets to their sophisticated system in an effort to speed and simplify the flow of information.
When Vinuelas spoke to Vapor Voice (“Stand and Deliver,” Issue 2, 2021) last May, he said X Delivery could ship products to consumers in about 90 percent of the U.S. He was cautiously optimistic that the company could eventually increase coverage to include the entire country.
“Our long-term goal is to be the No. 1 shipping carrier for D2C e-commerce brands,” Vinuelas said. “We understand the relevant laws in detail and are determined to be a good partner to vape and e-cigarette merchants.”
A misguided law
Credit: blr60
Shipping vapor products with X Delivery comes at a cost, which is why smaller retailers, such as Cloud 9, decided to restrict sales to its brick-and-mortar locations. Other retailers, including Five Pawns, had to reengineer the way they handle all shipping.
“The problems started as soon as the PACT Act was enacted,” said Jay Oku, head of business development for Five Pawns. Oku said Five Pawns reengineered their shipping logistics to comply with the “misguided law introduced by our out-of-touch 88-year-old California career politician, Diane Feinstein.
“When we were prohibited from shipping via USPS, UPS and FedEx, we were forced to use a third-party logistics service,” Oku said. But even with this service, he said that delivery to all areas—even areas in Five Pawns’ own California backyard—remain problematic.
“The fact that each shipment requires a signature from an adult on the premises has caused frustration with many customers. Our customers are forced to make arrangements to have someone of age at home midday for several days so [that] they don’t miss their shipments,” he said, adding that some shipments are taking 15 days or more.
“These companies don’t have effective tracking data, so customers have no idea when their order will arrive,” Oku explained. “Many [customers] reported shipments being delivered in an unmarked van as late as 9:30 p.m. We have elderly customers completely inconvenienced, frightened of strangers coming to their door at night and ultimately fearful they may no longer be able to get their e-liquid.”
Regardless of the workaround shipping solutions devised by vape companies, challenges will continue to mount as anti-vaping legislation continues to be popular with misinformed politicians.
“While we understand and agree with the need for reasonable and responsible regulation, our concern is that these overarching regulations and restrictions will push vapers back to deadly combustible tobacco products,” said Maggie Gowen,vice president of retail marketing and communications for AMV Holdings. AMV Holdings is the largest operator of specialty brick-and-mortar vape stores in the U.S., with over 120 retail locations, as well as the parent company for numerous major e-liquid brands, including Alohma, Kure, MadVapes and MAXX.
“We have a lot of customers in rural areas and other areas with shipping restrictions who are very upset that they can’t purchase their vapor products like before,” Gowen said. “Excessive shipping costs due to the PACT Act requirements just added to their frustration. At what point will these vapers simply give up and revert back to combustible tobacco because they cannot access vapor products? That is our biggest fear.”
AMV Holdings conducted a large behavioral study and found that nearly 90 percent of its customers were former smokers with an average age of 37 years; roughly half had been smoking for 10 years or longer before they started vaping. A third of them had tried traditional nicotine-replacement therapies to quit, and over half had tried to quit cold turkey.
“Our data tells the story of a group of adults—not minors—desperate to quit smoking, who ultimately found vaping and were able to successfully kick the cigarette habit using ENDS products,” Gowen said.
Vapers are the victims
Credit: Nasibli
Public health and the smokers trying to quit ultimately carry the burden of limited shipping options and all-out bans for mailing vapor products. “What we’ve seen unfold over the last year cannot accurately be characterized as ‘unintended consequences,’” said Gregory Conley, president of the American Vaping Association, a nonprofit advocacy group.
“No member of Congress who pushed for this law took the time to understand its implications for small businesses. From conversations on the Hill, it was painfully clear that the sponsors were ready and willing to see the industry and its adult consumers take some pain.
“In the era of TikTok and Snapchat, and despite dealers who don’t hold business licenses or collect excise taxes, very few teenagers have been stopped from accessing vaping products by this law,” Conley said. “Like with most anti-vaping policies, the primary victims are adult smokers and ex-smokers just trying to live in peace.”
The story isn’t over, however. Business owners are searching for solutions. “For years, we have had to fight tooth and nail for the rights of our consumers,” said Schell Hammel, president of The Vapor Bar, a Dallas area retail store chain, and director of Chapter Relations for the Smoke-Free Alternatives Trade Association. “This stand by the shipping companies is just one other way to make it harder to get these products to those who need them to stay successful.
“We will always find a way,” Hammel continued. “We are a resourceful bunch, and no matter what, we will continue to fight for our consumers’ rights and those who are able to keep their doors open to serve them.”
The original “Vaping Vamp,” Maria Verven owns Verve Communications, a PR and marketing firm specializing in the vapor industry.

May 10, 2022