AMA suggests five reforms to NVP regulations

Aug.26.2022
AMA suggests five reforms to NVP regulations
The Australian Medical Association identified serious issues with nicotine vaping product regulations in a letter to the health minister.

This week, the Australian Medical Association sent a letter to Health and Aged Care Minister Mark Butler highlighting serious issues with current regulations for nicotine vaping products (NVP).


Professor Robinson summarized the health risks associated with vaping in his letter. The use of electronic cigarettes is becoming more prevalent among adolescents and young adults, creating a pathway to smoking. Smoking can also have harmful effects, such as seizures, nicotine poisoning, and lung damage related to e-cigarettes.


Professor Robinson stated that the long-term health effects are still unclear and emphasized the need for stronger legislation, which was introduced on October 1st last year.


The legislation means that NVP can only be purchased with a prescription at the federal level, closing a loophole that allowed Australians to buy NVP from overseas without a prescription. However, Professor Robberson wrote in a letter to the minister that the legislation is "surprisingly weak" on crucial issues.


Professor Robinson suggests that in order to address these issues, the AMA proposes that the government implement the following five reforms:


1. The concentration limit for therapeutic nicotine products allowed has been reduced from 100mg/ml to 20mg/ml, and restrictions have been placed on the flavors and quantities of nicotine that can be prescribed or ordered. 2. The import of NVP through personal import programs is prohibited. 3. Collaboration with state and regional governments will see NVP included in real-time prescription monitoring programs to reduce the risk of doctor shopping. 4. The MBS remote smoking cessation program will be modified so that only a patient's regular physician can prescribe NVP as a smoking cessation tool. 5. Collaboration with state and regional governments will lead to a more consistent and strategic approach to the issue, including better enforcement of e-cigarette laws to prevent the illegal sale of these products, particularly to young people.


Statement


This article is compiled from third-party information and is intended for industry exchange and learning purposes only.


This article does not represent the views of 2FIRSTS, and 2FIRSTS cannot confirm the veracity or accuracy of the content. The translation of this article is solely for the purpose of industry exchange and research.


Due to the limitations of our translation capabilities, the translated article may differ slightly from the original. Please refer to the original text for accuracy.


In matters pertaining to domestic, Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan, and foreign affairs, 2FIRSTS aligns fully with the Chinese government.


The copyright for the compiled information belongs to the original media and the author. If there is any infringement, please contact us for removal.



Disclaimer

This article is provided solely for professional research, industry discussion, and informational purposes. Any references to brands, companies, products, technologies, or policies are made for factual reporting and analytical purposes only, and do not constitute endorsement, recommendation, promotion, or advertising by 2Firsts.

Nicotine-containing products, including but not limited to cigarettes, e-cigarettes, heated tobacco products, and nicotine pouches, carry significant health risks. Readers are responsible for complying with all applicable laws and regulations in their respective jurisdictions, including age restrictions and access limitations.

The information contained in this article should not be regarded as investment, legal, medical, regulatory, or commercial advice. While 2Firsts strives to ensure the accuracy and reliability of its content, it does not assume liability for any direct or indirect loss arising from errors, omissions, inaccuracies, or reliance on the information contained herein.

This article is not intended for individuals below the legal age for accessing tobacco or nicotine-related information in their jurisdiction.

 

Copyright Notice

This article is either original content produced by 2Firsts or content reproduced, translated, summarized, or adapted from third-party sources with attribution where applicable. The intellectual property rights of the original content remain with 2Firsts or the respective original rights holders.

No individual or organization may copy, reproduce, distribute, republish, modify, translate, or otherwise use this content without prior authorization. Any unauthorized use may result in legal action.

For copyright-related inquiries, corrections, or removal requests, please contact: info@2firsts.com.

 

AI-Assisted Translation and Editing Notice

Portions of this article may have been translated, edited, or reviewed with the assistance of artificial intelligence tools to improve efficiency and readability. Due to the limitations of AI-assisted translation and editing, discrepancies, omissions, or inaccuracies may exist when compared with the original source.

Where applicable, readers are advised to refer to the original source for the most complete and accurate information. If you identify any errors or believe that any content infringes upon your rights, please contact us at info@2firsts.com, and we will review and address the matter promptly.

Special Report | Altria Subsidiaries Sue FDA to Vacate 2021 PMTA Rule as Agency Moves to Speed Reviews
Special Report | Altria Subsidiaries Sue FDA to Vacate 2021 PMTA Rule as Agency Moves to Speed Reviews
2Firsts reviewed the original federal court complaint filed by Altria subsidiaries Helix Innovations and NJOY on Sept. 2 challenging FDA’s 2021 PMTA rule. The lawsuit questions whether FDA’s review process complies with the Tobacco Control Act’s 180-day timeline, even as the agency moves to accelerate PMTA reviews and issues more marketing orders. Drawing on the complaint, FDA records, government audits and recent court rulings, 2Firsts examines the legal arguments, supporting evidence and potential implications for the U.S. tobacco review system.
Regulations
Sep.03
Malaysia Police Seize RM12.7 Million in Illegal Vapes and Cigarettes as Probe Points to Sea Shipments From China
Malaysia Police Seize RM12.7 Million in Illegal Vapes and Cigarettes as Probe Points to Sea Shipments From China
Police in Malaysia’s Selangor state seized illegal vape products and contraband cigarettes worth about RM12.7 million (approximately $3 million) in two enforcement operations. According to New Straits Times and The Star, the vape-related operation uncovered 131,036 boxes of vape products, 4,900 bottles of e-liquid and 25,510 vape devices, valued at about RM9.4 million. Police said preliminary investigations indicated that some illegal vape products entered Malaysia through sea shipments from China before moving through storage and distribution networks.
Aug.10
Product | PMI Launches Airport-Exclusive IQOS Skylens Limited Edition, Expanding From Japan’s Narita to Travel Retail Markets in 13 Countries Summary
Product | PMI Launches Airport-Exclusive IQOS Skylens Limited Edition, Expanding From Japan’s Narita to Travel Retail Markets in 13 Countries Summary
Philip Morris International (PMI) has introduced the airport-exclusive limited-edition IQOS ILUMA i PRIME Skylens, the company’s first device created specifically for airport travel retail. Inspired by the world of flight and finished in metallic blue, Skylens debuted at Narita International Airport in Japan before expanding into selected airport duty-free and travel-retail channels across 13 countries in Europe, Asia, the Middle East and Africa. The product retains the existing IQOS ILUMA i PRIME platform, with differentiation centered on airport exclusivity, design and travel-retail execution rather than a new heating architecture.
PMI
Aug.19
Elf Bar Vape Explosion and Amputation Claim Spurs Coverage Suit, U.S. Insurer MUSIC Seeks Ruling It Owes No Duty to Defend or Indemnify Distributor i5
Elf Bar Vape Explosion and Amputation Claim Spurs Coverage Suit, U.S. Insurer MUSIC Seeks Ruling It Owes No Duty to Defend or Indemnify Distributor i5
Mesa Underwriters Specialty Insurance Company has asked a federal court in Washington to declare that it has no duty to defend or indemnify vape distributor i5 Distribution in a product liability case involving an Elf Bar BC5000. The plaintiff alleges that the disposable vape caught fire and exploded in his pocket, causing severe burns and ultimately requiring an above-the-knee amputation of his left leg. MUSIC is relying on a tobacco, nicotine or nicotine replacement products exclusion and a premises limitation endorsement. The court has not ruled on the coverage dispute.
News
Sep.10
Indonesia’s BNN Pushes Total Vape Ban as Health Ministry Tightens Tobacco Packaging Rules, Putting $40 Billion Industry at Risk
Indonesia’s BNN Pushes Total Vape Ban as Health Ministry Tightens Tobacco Packaging Rules, Putting $40 Billion Industry at Risk
Indonesia is entering a new phase of debate over vape and tobacco regulation. The National Narcotics Agency (BNN) has proposed a total vape ban, with some lawmakers supporting stronger restrictions. At the same time, the Health Ministry is advancing tobacco and nicotine regulations under Government Regulation No. 28/2024, including measures such as plain packaging and product controls. Tobacco and vape industries have warned that tighter rules could affect a sector worth around $40 billion, supporting about 6 million jobs and contributing significant tax revenue.
Jul.27
U.S. Fifth Circuit Vacates NicQuid Vape MDO, Says FDA Comparative-Efficacy Standard Violated APA Procedures
U.S. Fifth Circuit Vacates NicQuid Vape MDO, Says FDA Comparative-Efficacy Standard Violated APA Procedures
According to VitalLaw on August 27, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit vacated an FDA marketing denial order (MDO) against NicQuid LLC, ruling that the agency’s comparative-efficacy standard for electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) applications had become a substantive rule requiring notice-and-comment rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). The court did not reject FDA’s authority to compare the public health benefits and risks of flavored vapes, but held that the agency could not establish a broadly binding standard through informal adjudications. The case was remanded to FDA for further proceedings.
Aug.28