The U.S. Senate last week confirmed President Trump’s nominee to lead the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Scott Gottlieb, M.D., a physician and venture capitalist investor. As with all things Trump, the choice of Gottlieb was controversial. Democrats were not happy about Gottlieb’s financial ties to dozens of pharmaceutical and medical device companies that the FDA is charged with overseeing.

But within the vaping industry, Gottlieb’s confirmation has been perceived as something of a hopeful sign. The FDA is currently developing regulations for e-cigarettes and other such products. And many companies are deeply worried that the FDA will bend to the will of anti-smoking advocates who want vaping regulated out of existence.

It is true that overall Gottlieb is a pretty vape-friendly guy to be running the FDA. He’s was a high-profile investor in the vaping company Kure. He held a resident fellowship at a conservative think tank where he developed a close relationship with Dr. Sally Satel, a leading advocate for the idea that vaping could save lives by curbing the public’s appetite for traditional cigarette smoking.

Gottlieb has also posted a number of tweets over the years (a few of which credit Dr. Satel as the source) that would seem to indicate a pro-vaping mindset:

Gallup Poll Shows Smoking Rate Collapsing As E-Cigarette Use Soars

Vape bans have little do with public health (OPINION)

Misinformation about e-cigarettes and vaping presents a growing threat to public health in India

Gottlieb is clearly against an outright ban on vaping, and he does not seem inclined to use the FDA rule-making process to crush vaping into oblivion. However, that does not mean he will necessarily be a friend to the average vaping consumer or small business that develops vaping products. Gottlieb is a close ally of big business and will likely act in the interest of large corporations rather than the little guy.

In 2013, Gottlieb wrote a column for Forbes that chastised anti-smoking advocates for trying to destroy the tobacco industry entirely. He argued that all parties should work together to find a regulatory compromise so that tobacco companies could transition to making less harmful products than traditional cigarettes, such as vaping devices. And that is indeed vape-friendly point of view. However, despite the fact that Gottlieb wants to see more vaping in the world, his column is almost entirely focused on a solution in which the e-cigarettes are manufactured by large corporations.

There doesn’t seem to be much room in Gottlieb’s venture capital worldview for small businesses. All indications point to the new FDA commissioner being on board with the tobacco industry’s plan to crush smaller vaping companies with regulations so that the big boys can take over their entire market share. And perhaps that shouldn’t be too surprising.

President Trump appointed Gottlieb and his boss, Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price, to do one thing: dismantle Obamacare. Gottlieb’s views on vaping were probably not a factor in his appointment. What’s more, Gottlieb and Price have both had a big role in health policy over the years while actively investing in medical companies. Price has even gotten in hot water for buying stock in a company, then introducing a deregulation bill the following day to benefit his new investment. Gottlieb has never been accused of anything quite that shady, but his clear love of making money suggests that he may also be for sale to the highest bidder. And if there’s one thing Big Tobacco has a lot of, it’s money.

Nevertheless, Gottlieb does have one core belief that could benefit smaller vaping manufacturers, and that’s that the FDA should speed up its drug approval process. He’s a free marketer. In his many columns and blog posts, Gottlieb has made it very clear that he feels like the drug prices are being artificially inflated by a burdensome bureaucracy that does little to safeguard public health. Apply that same logic to vaping, and maybe Gottlieb would be open to reducing the hoops that a vaping company would have to jump through to get approval for a new product.  

The current fear among small vaping companies is that the FDA will really go through with its million-dollar approval process for each new vaping product, meaning only the Phillip Morrises of the world could afford to legally manufacture e-cigarettes and e-juices. If Gottlieb is a true believer in the free market, then it’s possible he would want to make it as easy as possible to safely produce new vaping products. But then again, some guys who claim to believe in the power of the free market are really just profiteering assholes. Gottlieb has a chance to prove or disprove if he is one of them.

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo last week issued his annual budget plan, which includes a proposal to tax vaping in the state for the first time. Specifically, the budget (were it to become law) would impose a tax of 10 cents per millimeter on the liquid or gel used inside any kind of device. That means vape and e-cigs purchased in Brooklyn are about to get more expensive.

Not that much more expensive though. A Bedford Slim cartridge, which has 1.2 mL in e-liquid, would each go up by barely 10 cents. It's not exactly going to break anybody's bank. Even the someone who uses pretty heavily will only go through about 2mL per day. That means you're paying an another $1.40 every week. That adds up to an extra $73 annually. Money is money, but most people who can afford to vape can afford that.

The problem is more the precedent. Once a fee exists in a government budget, it will always be increased every year the budget is renewed.That's just a fact of life.

If the new fee is enacted, which seems likely, it won't actually start impacting prices until the fall. It's scheduled to take effect 180 days after the start of the fiscal year, which happens to be April 1. That means the vaping would get a little more expensive in Brooklyn and throughout New York State beginning September 28, 2017.

So why is this happening? The official reason is that it's for public safety. New York State is taking the same stance as pretty much every other level of government, that vaping is as bad for you as cigarettes and should be subject to the exact same level of regulatory restriction.

But perhaps the real reason is that cigarettes sales are on the decline and, as a result, tax revenue from cigarette taxes is going down as well. The state was relying on the money from cigarette taxes. And while I'm sure officials are somewhat glad that fewer people are smoking, they also must find somewhere else to make up that tax revenue. A tax on vaping was most likely just an easy way to fill the hole. The proposed fee is mindless, but not particularly surprising.  

The question is how far this will go. Will the taxes on vaping eventually increase enough to the point that it makes e-cigs significantly more expensive? It certainly seems probable. Lawmakers always find it easier to ratchet up fees than to do meaningful tax reform. Vapers don't have much in the way of political clout. If someone needs to get taxed, it's just as likely to be them as anyone else.

It's the latest in a string of bad news when it comes to vaping in Brooklyn. Earlier in January, a state appeals court struck down a challenge to New York City’s indoor vaping ban. Vaping advocates had attempted to make the argument that vaping should not be regulated the same way as smoking because it's entirely different kind of combustible. But to no avail. For all the talk recently about how the government is starting to come around to the benefits of vaping lately, there's still a long way to go.

This editorial is part of an ongoing series on electronic cigarettes and vaping. The views expressed are purely the opinion of the author, and do not represent those of Bedford Slims in any way.

Andrew Hall, a 30-year-old car salesman from Pocatello, Idaho, was severely injured this week when his vaping rig exploded in his mouth. According to a series of posts on Hall's Facebook page, he was standing in his bathroom getting ready for work when it happened. The explosion blasted out both ends of the vape, blowing the corner his sink counter off and gruesomely ripping searing his cheek and lips. Hall lost seven teeth and sustained second-degree burns on his face.

Hall's posts about his injury started to go viral, and the story got picked up by the press. Of course, journalism about viral Facebook posts isn't always the most thorough or informative. The Fox News write-up, for example, calls Hall an "Iowa man" in the headline before correctly stating that he's from Idaho in the first sentence of the story. Generally the online stories sensationalized his misfortune, emphasizing the graphic photos he had shared of his injuries.

Hall comes across as an earnest, well-meaning guy in his Facebook posts. He says that he's sharing the photos as a cautionary tale that he hopes will help keep other people from also getting hurt. But because this is the internet, an endless stream of negative comments were directed at Hall in comment sections, vaping forums and on the Facebook posts themselves. Whether people were pro- or anti-vaping, they basically all thought him an idiot who almost got himself killed.

But details in Hall's posts give a little more insight into what happened. He initially said that his rig was an RDA twisted onto LG HG2s batteries that he had the vape shop assemble for him. But then about 12 hours later, he edited the post with a cryptic clarification: "I did revise this to state clearly that the laws changed yes, it was easier for me to have them build my coils. I did it after the laws changed and did everything myself. I never had any issues with over heating or concerns until the unfortunate [sic] happened." 

So what "law change" could Hall be talking about? A look at recent news stories reveals that Idaho state legislators are currently considering new regulations on vaping, though they haven't passed or taken effect. The county did pass a vaping law, but that was over two years ago. It may actually have had something to do with the hostility of the local Pocatello Police Department, which has a history of cracking down on the city's vape shops by doing random checks and running stings. Additionally, this past summer an area 16-year-old happen to have a vaping rig explode across his foot. After that incident, a local vape shop owner told the Idaho State Journal that "her store does not modify any vaping devices and she recommends against it."

Now I'm just speculating here (because I don't want to make phone calls to some random people in Idaho) but here's what I think happened...

It seems likely to me that the cops in Pocatello, a small college town, have taken the view that vaping is a stupid, dangerous thing that teenagers have started doing in recent years. So they keep a close eye on all the city's vape shops. After the 16-year-old was maimed, Hall's usual vape store stopped assembling vape for him to avoid getting in trouble. Hall, not realizing that his unregulated mod was unsafe, ended up in a worst case scenario. He put it together himself, overcharged it, and well...you know the rest.

Hall's story can be seen as a lesson about personal responsibility, but it's also very much about the unintended consequences of heavy-handed policing. Obviously the fine people of Pocatello deserve to be free from the fear of being injured in a vape explosion, but that's not what the government has actually achieved. Instead they prevented the local experts at the vape shops from helping Hall assemble his mod rig safely. I'm not saying it's the cops' fault he got hurt. At the same time, it is their job to keep the community safe, and the only way they could seem to do that was to hassle small businesses they didn't like.

It would better if the police had made an effort to educate the citizens of Pocatello instead. I mean how many people could live in that town? Fifty thousand? Just put up some signs that say "MOD RIGS NOT FOR NUBES." Not everything's about writing a ticket.

This editorial is part of an ongoing series on electronic cigarettes and vaping. The views expressed are purely the opinion of the author, and do not represent those of Bedford Slims in any way. Feedback is welcome. 

The National Parks Service this month proposed a ban on vaping and e-cigarette use in National Parks. It's not really anything new. NPS is just making permanent an earlier order clarifying that vaping is not allowed in all areas designated non-smoking.

Ken Burns' documentary on National Parks referred to them as "America's Best Idea." And if that's true, then the NPS vaping ban might be the country's stupidest. I can't believe I actually have to point this out because it seems so gobsmackingly obvious, but the reason that smoking is banned in National Parks is 1) it creates litter and 2) it can start forest fires and VAPING 100% DOES NOT HAVE EITHER OF THOSE PROBLEMS.

Like maybe someone might occasionally leave an e-cigarette cartridge behind, but that's nothing compared to the butts people throw everywhere when they are smoking on a hike. And poorly designed vapes can sometimes explode, which could maybe cause a forest fire. But again, that pales in comparison to the danger posed by smoking cigarettes in a dry area.

By proposing a permanent version of the vaping ban, NPS proves that they completely have their heads up their asses on this. It would be one thing if they issued the original order without much thought because they needed something to tell rangers who were asking if they should tell people to stop vaping. But this proposal is evidence that NPS actually sat down and thought about it for a second, and came up with the most stunningly stupid decision possible.

Regardless of how you feel about the public health impacts of vaping, it's just simply a fact that e-cigarettes are better for the environment than smoking. How many times have you been in a park and come across a disgusting pile of cigarettes butts that were not properly disposed of? If you're like me, it's happened to you a lot. And how many time have you been outdoors and noticed that someone had been vaping there? Zero. Because there's no way to tell.

It's clear that NPS is operating under the same assumption many government agencies do, which is that nicotine use is fading and will soon be completely gone. But that worldview does not in my opinion extend sufficient respect to adults who should be allowed to make their own choices. Not to sound like a libertarian (because, to be clear, I'm not one), but I just don't think it should be the job of every government entity to police citizens' behavior in that way. Lots of people are addicted to caffeine, or alcohol for that matter, and the government just accepts those addictions as a part of life. But vaping has been particularly vilified because of its association with traditional cigarette smoking, so officials can't think straight when it comes to regulating it. NPS should focus on making our National Parks safer and more enjoyable for everyone who wants to visit them. By banning vaping and failing to acknowledge its ecological benefits, they have done the exact opposite.

TV and movies are always slow to adapt to new technology. When it came to cell phones in particular, movie plots for years basically tried to pretend like nothing was changing in people's habits and the way they communicate. But with other stuff too, screenwriters seem to be on a several year tape delay when it comes to incorporating new devices into their stories.

Vaping is no different. Hollywood hasn't quite figured out what to do with vaping yet. Most movies currently treat smoking as something that people did in the past. Or if it's a modern character smoking, it's treated more as a telling character trait than as an incidental habit. Smoking is meant to be a cue about the character. It says that they're particularly stressed, or choosing to live in the moment, or just exceptionally badass. And that's the mold that TV and movies has now adopted to portray vaping as well. Vaping is often a character's evil tick, affectation, sign of pompousness, etc. It's not shown as an ordinary activity that is just part of people's lives.

That's why I think Neighbors was one of the first movies to take a step toward normalizing vaping's image. It's a 2014 movie starring Seth Rogan and Zac Efron. It's pretty funny actually, and I recommend you see it if you haven't. But all you need to know for this is that Efron plays a fraternity president, Teddy, who's pretty cool if a little too much of party boy for his own good. 

There's really only one shot of Teddy vaping, when he's sulking in a wheelchair thinking about how he's not ready to graduate from college. It's very in-character for him. We see Teddy smoking and drinking various intoxicants in random scenes throughout the movie. So even though another character says when he's vaping that it looks like Teddy is "villianing out," it's not necessarily about what he's puffing on. Vaping is just another sin in the mix. The shot of him with a vape rig is no different than ones of him smoking an enormous bowl that looks like a Gandalf pipe or drinking whiskey out of a tea cup on his porch.

Of course, it's not made explicitly clear that Teddy's pulling on a nicotine vape in that scene. It's possible that his vape is supposed to be a weed vaporizer. But honestly the fact that they don't bother to explain it makes it feel all the more normal.

And is it just me, or is it a little odd how Efron wants so badly to be a comedy actor? His world class handsomeness always ends up hovering over him when he's doing schtick. And the comedies he's in often act like the funniest thing Efron can do is take off his shirt. Anyway, just a random thought.  I really did mean it when I wrote that Neighbors is good and you should check it out. And you'll get a little taste of vaping cinematic history.