Image: JUUL

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has shared a press release to report that it has denied authorization to market JUUL products, issuing marketing denial orders (MDOs) that require the removal of all of the company’s electronic cigarette products from the U.S. market. JUUL may no longer sell and distribute its JUUL device and four types of JUULpods, including Virginia tobacco flavored pods at nicotine concentrations of 5.0% and 3.0%, and all products that are currently on the market should be removed by retailers who would prefer not to face enforcement action. The FDA’s decision against JUUL stems from various worries, such as the potential for “harmful chemicals leaching from the company’s proprietary e-liquid pods.” JUUL was founded in 2015 and became one of the most popular companies to offer alternatives to traditional cigarettes.

“Today’s action is further progress on the FDA’s commitment to ensuring that all e-cigarette and electronic nicotine delivery system products currently being marketed to consumers meet our public health standards,” said FDA Commissioner Robert M. Califf, M.D. “The agency has dedicated significant resources to review products from the companies that account for most of the U.S. market. We recognize these make up a significant part of the available products and many have played a disproportionate role in the rise in youth vaping.”

“The FDA is tasked with ensuring that tobacco products sold in this country meet the standard set by the law, but the responsibility to demonstrate that a product meets those standards ultimately falls on the shoulders of the company,” said Michele Mital, acting director of the FDA’s Center for Tobacco Products. “As with all manufacturers, JUUL had the opportunity to provide evidence demonstrating that the marketing of their products meets these standards. However, the company did not provide that evidence and instead left us with significant questions. Without the data needed to determine relevant health risks, the FDA is issuing these marketing denial orders.”

To date, the FDA has not received clinical information to suggest an immediate hazard associated with the use of the JUUL device or JUULpods. However, the MDOs issued today reflect FDA’s determination that there is insufficient evidence to assess the potential toxicological risks of using the JUUL products. There is also no way to know the potential harms from using other authorized or unauthorized third-party e-liquid pods with the JUUL device or using JUULpods with a non-JUUL device. The FDA recommends against modifying or adding substances to tobacco products. JUUL users are encouraged to report any unexpected health problems or product problems to the FDA through the Safety Reporting Portal and to seek medical attention as necessary.

Source: FDA

Go to thread

Don’t Miss Out on More FPS Review Content!

Our weekly newsletter includes a recap of our reviews and a run down of the most popular tech news that we published.

22 comments

  1. Ok, I don't smoke, and generally think vaping is nasty to be around (I would rather cigarette smoke than some candy flavored hookah crap)

    But I think this is a bit of an overstep. I don't think anyone buys Juul thinking it's going to be good for them, or has health benefits, or even is harmless to you.

    Make them go to the lengths Australian tobacco has to go to, sure, but pulling them off the market and all those folks buying that are just going to go buy something else instead.
  2. I'm not quite sure why this is tech news, but sure, I have opinions :p

    Ok, I don't smoke, and generally think vaping is nasty to be around (I would rather cigarette smoke than some candy flavored hookah crap)

    But I think this is a bit of an overstep. I don't think anyone buys Juul thinking it's going to be good for them, or has health benefits, or even is harmless to you.

    Make them go to the lengths Australian tobacco has to go to, sure, but pulling them off the market and all those folks buying that are just going to go buy something else instead.

    The theory here is that these sweet flavored products are what get kids and adolescents hooked, most of them for life.

    The theory is that by removing the flavored products, fewer kids will start using tobacco derived products in the first place.

    Also, it is a perception thing. Right now to kids (and even some adults I have spoken to) there is this perception that vaping is safe, or at least less harmful than traditional cigarettes, but the truth is a lot more nuanced. By taking strong action, FDA can try to disavow people of that dangerous (to their own health) notion.
  3. The theory here is that these sweet flavored products are what get kids and adolescents hooked, most of them for life.
    They had already banned Juul flavored stuff back in 2019. People still get it from
    some other brands tho
    • Most e-cigarettes deliver nicotine, which is highly addictive and can harm the developing brains of teens, kids and fetuses in women who vape while pregnant. Some types expose users to even more nicotine than traditional cigarettes.

    • In addition to nicotine, e-cigarette vapor includes potentially harmful substances such as diacetyl (a chemical linked to a serious lung disease), cancer-causing chemicals, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and heavy metals such as nickel, tin, and lead. Users breathe in these toxic contaminants, and non-users nearby risk secondhand exposure.

    • The liquid used in e-cigarettes can be dangerous, even apart from its intended use. Children and adults have been poisoned by swallowing, breathing or absorbing the liquid through their skin or eyes.

    • E-cigarettes have been linked to thousands of cases of serious lung injury, some resulting in death. While the exact cause is still not confirmed, the CDC recommends that people not use e-cigarettes.

    I love the scary b.s. they try to perpetuate.

    Nicotine, by itself, is not all that dangerous in moderation. There are plenty of studies to back this up.

    e-liquid does not contain diacetyl, that's just more b.s. from the anti-vaping crowd. Nor are there "cancer causing chemicals" or "volatile organic compounds" or "heavy metals" in it. Jesus....I should be dead by now I guess. 12 years of vaping, wonder why all those chemicals never show up on my blood work I have done every 6 months. In fact I just had a full heart exam, stress test and lung scope done last year. My lungs have completely cleared up from 20 years of smoking, heart is in excellent condition as well.

    Yeah, the liquid "can" be dangerous. If you're an idiot. So can acetone and bleach if you drink it or get it in your eyes.

    "linked to serious lung injury" then they say "exact cause is still not confirmed"....they how TF is it linked?


    Spooky scary words only to be believed by the weak minded easily influenced.
  4. The theory is that by removing the flavored products, fewer kids will start using tobacco derived products in the first place.
    Right, because that stopped previous generations from picking up the habit.
  5. Ok, I don't smoke, and generally think vaping is nasty to be around (I would rather cigarette smoke than some candy flavored hookah crap)
    I agree, vaping is disgusting, like some industrial chimney spitting out clouds of pungent rotten fruit flavored odors.
    I'd rather be in a smoking restaurant from the eighties than near one person doing this crap.
  6. Live with a smoker, when she went to E, I much prefer that over the real McCoy that stained anything in the house with yellow goo and utterly obnoxious in smell. Now we don't want kids to have E cigarettes, they can have real cigarettes or better yet marijuana for that brain effect so positive for learning - not.
  7. Live with a smoker, when she went to E, I much prefer that over the real McCoy that stained anything in the house with yellow goo and utterly obnoxious in smell. Now we don't want kids to have E cigarettes, they can have real cigarettes or better yet marijuana for that brain effect so positive for learning - not.

    Was just thinking that. Ban e-cigs, but legalize weed. Makes perfect sense.
  8. Live with a smoker, when she went to E, I much prefer that over the real McCoy that stained anything in the house with yellow goo and utterly obnoxious in smell.

    Eww, I smoked at one point in my life, but I quit like 14 years ago. I've also known many people who have smoked, and still do.

    Myself, and every last one of them, to a T, always smoked outside to avoid this problem. Yes, even in -20°F temperatures.

    Indoor smoking is just one of the grossest things ever. Even as a smoker I believed this.
  9. They had already banned Juul flavored stuff back in 2019. People still get it from
    some other brands tho
    For sure. They have to make an example of somebody though. Juul just happens to be the lucky target.

    On the otherhand, you mentioned:
    I don't think anyone buys Juul thinking it's going to be good for them, or has health benefits, or even is harmless to you.
    I'm continuously shocked how many people that I've either seen in interviews where that gets asked or those I've known and asked that do believe it's less harmful.

    Right, because that stopped previous generations from picking up the habit.
    I agree. All animals have their vices. All we can do is try to mitigate them somehow. I can't say that I'm aware of any country having the best all-around approach to it though.
  10. I'm continuously shocked how many people that I've either seen in interviews where that gets asked or those I've known and asked that do believe it's less harmful.
    At some point you just gotta let Darwinism play out, I think.
  11. I'm continuously shocked how many people that I've either seen in interviews where that gets asked or those I've known and asked that do believe it's less harmful
    It is less harmful than analog cigarettes. This has been proven over and over. If you choose to believe the b.s. about it then that's on you.
  12. It is less harmful than analog cigarettes. This has been proven over and over. If you choose to believe the b.s. about it then that's on you.
    From what I've noticed of the food, cigarette, and alcohol industries over the decades is that they have a habit of reporting on the benefits of select aspects of products but manage to legally omit certain details when they pertain to other ingredients that people may not be aware of. It usually takes lawsuits and deaths before those other details are brought to light.
  13. From what I've noticed of the food, cigarette, and alcohol industries over the decades is that they have a habit of reporting on the benefits of select aspects of products but manage to legally omit certain details when they pertain to other ingredients that people may not be aware of. It usually takes lawsuits and deaths before those other details are brought to light.

    Even the CDC cannot link deaths directly to vaping.

    What I find amusing that the health systems and governments in **** near every other country have contradicting studies and evidence to what the U.S. government and agencies say about vaping. Pretty much every EU country, Australia, New Zealand, all did their own studies on it.

    What also is odd is that in the U.S. there is a huge anti-vaping campaign by our government. But virtually zero anti-smoking campaign. They seem to be wanting to outright ban vaping, but not so with tobacco products. Could it be that the tobacco industry is financing the government in their war on vaping? My tin foil hat says yes. Those other countries aren't beholden to the tobacco industry since they are importers from the U.S.

Leave a comment

Please log in to your forum account to comment