FDA Staff Criticizes Tobacco Product Application Review Process

Oct.31.2022
FDA Staff Criticizes Tobacco Product Application Review Process
FDA's Center for Tobacco Products is accused of lacking scientific independence in pre-market tobacco product applications review.

A commentary states that reviewers of Pre-Market Tobacco Product Applications (PMTA) at the CTP Office of Science lack the authority to exercise "best scientific practices" during their evaluation of PMTAs.


According to the commentary, disagreements in science are not fully suppressed, but are punished through various means of retaliation, such as lack of access to tasks, projects, and other opportunities needed for professional development and progression. In some departments, such as non-clinical science departments, employees are forced to adopt a "must accept" mentality by the leadership, which does not support reviewers in fulfilling their basic duty of providing impartial reviews using the best available science.


According to reports, many comments from staff members of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on the performance evaluation of the FDA Center for Tobacco Products (CTP) stated that the regulatory agency is in a state of confusion and is being influenced by external forces rather than scientific research.


In July, the FDA commissioned an independent review of its regulatory practices for food and tobacco, following several months of criticism over its handling of infant formula shortages and e-cigarette reviews. FDA Commissioner Robert Califf selected the non-profit Reagan-Udall Foundation, a non-governmental research group created by Congress to support the FDA's work.


This comment is anonymous and open to the public. Many of the comments depict an incompetent organization whose decisions are swayed by political agenda rather than based on science surrounding the next generation of nicotine products. According to reports, an FDA staff member claims that there is a toxic culture that permeates through the operating system, starting from the leadership team at the FDA.


The commentator wrote, "So-called leaders are not seeking feedback from actual reviewers, but only listening to a few of the loudest voices, who are not experts in any specific field." "Bias and nepotism, unconscious prejudices, racism and sexism, have permeated the entire office and department, and suggestions and feedback from minority groups and women have been ignored, even though they are the ones doing the most work.


Another critique suggests that arbitrary external pressures and politically-driven timelines (such as those imposed by judges) are driving the review process, rather than allowing for a thorough scientific examination. "When errors are found, CTP reviewers are blamed, when in fact there was not enough time allowed for a complete review. Staff are exhausted, constantly told to do more in less time, and blamed for not meeting crazy deadlines," the comment points out. "In cases where the review is completed and a scientific decision is made, they are also overruled by political agendas and forced to change their decision.


Another comment noted that the Tobacco Control Act (TCA) favors combustible tobacco products, allowing new combustible products to enter the market through easier pathways, such as being deemed substantially equivalent (SE) to existing tobacco products.


The CTP has stated that it supports the concept of risk continuum, where combustible products are the most harmful, while non-combustible products may appear safer in name only. However, the CTP has chosen to conduct individual pre-market reviews for new tobacco products," the commentary noted. "Therefore, any innovative products, such as e-cigarettes, will likely have to go through more robust and burdensome market pathways, such as e-cigarette PMTA.


However, it's not all doom and gloom, as some people claim that institution staff are simply overworked. A commentator stated that CTP has been working on impossible deadlines, dealing with a long queue of reviews, something that other FDA-regulated centers don't have to endure.


In comparison, the number of applications and products that it oversees is astronomical, yet we have received no protection, support, or leeway to deal with this burden," the comment stated. "Instead, it seems as though the CTP and OS are being blamed for queuing and not completing tasks on time, without anyone taking a look at how much work is being done to ensure completion as quickly as possible. As for queues and schedules, treating this center like any other is not helpful and only reinforces fatigue.


Another commentator pointed out that the FDA does not have the ability to conduct a "fair and equal" review of all PMTAs, a claim that the agency has denied in court cases surrounding its release of marketing refusals. "There are many layers to ensure that science is meaningful and communicated in a meaningful way. But there is no room for human error or breathing space to apply the system equitably to every application," the commentator noted. "Due to unreasonable deadlines, a lack of protection for personnel outside of CTP, and a shortage of personnel, we are all certainly overworked and stretched thin.


Statement:


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


This article does not represent the views of 2FIRSTS, and 2FIRSTS cannot confirm the truthfulness or accuracy of the content. The translation of this article is solely intended for industry discussion and research purposes.


Due to limitations in the translator's proficiency, the translated article may not fully convey the original meaning. Please refer to the original text for accuracy.


2FIRSTS maintains complete alignment with the Chinese government regarding any domestic, cross-border with Hong Kong, Macao or Taiwan, or international statements and positions.


The copyright of compiled information belongs to the original media and 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.

Product | KIWI Launches Spark 2 and Spark 2 Pro in Germany, Two Hardware Tiers Share Backward-Compatible 2ml Pods
Product | KIWI Launches Spark 2 and Spark 2 Pro in Germany, Two Hardware Tiers Share Backward-Compatible 2ml Pods
KIWI has launched the Spark 2 and Spark 2 Pro refillable pod systems in Germany at official prices of €18 and €29, respectively. Spark 2 uses an 800mAh removable lithium-ion battery in a pen-style body, while Spark 2 Pro features a 1,400mAh removable battery, a box-shaped design and vibration feedback every 20 puffs. Both devices use the same 2ml Spark V2 pods in 0.8Ω and 1.2Ω versions, with AirSync airflow adjustment and a choice between Cotton Tips and conventional Drip Tips. The new pods also remain compatible with the original KIWI Spark.
News
Sep.29 by 2Firsts Perspectives
Product | JNR Launches Shisha Hookah 70K E-Hookah With 60ml E-Liquid and 0.6% Nicotine
Product | JNR Launches Shisha Hookah 70K E-Hookah With 60ml E-Liquid and 0.6% Nicotine
JNR has introduced the Shisha Hookah 70K, a high-capacity rechargeable disposable vape designed around a hookah-inspired experience. The device comes prefilled with 60ml of e-liquid at 6mg/ml (0.6%) nicotine strength, alongside a 1,000mAh rechargeable battery and a 0.38Ω single mesh coil. It also features adjustable airflow and battery and e-liquid level displays. JNR claims the device can deliver up to 70,000 puffs and offers more than 20 flavors. Retail listings for the product have appeared in markets including Tunisia.
Market
Aug.24 by 2Firsts Perspectives
UK HMRC Unveils Red and Yellow Transitional Vape Duty Stamps Ahead of October Tax Launch
UK HMRC Unveils Red and Yellow Transitional Vape Duty Stamps Ahead of October Tax Launch
HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) has released sample images of the UK’s transitional vaping duty stamps, showing red and yellow versions ahead of the new Vaping Products Duty and Vaping Duty Stamps Scheme starting on October 1, 2026. Transitional stamps contain physical security features but no digital scanning function. Approved businesses may purchase them through November 30 and affix them through December 31. HMRC has not stated that the red and yellow samples represent different product categories or tax statuses.
Regulations
Sep.02
Russia Adds Vapes to “Strategic Goods” List, Illegal Cross-Border Trade Faces Up to Five Years in Prison
Russia Adds Vapes to “Strategic Goods” List, Illegal Cross-Border Trade Faces Up to Five Years in Prison
Russia will place e-cigarettes and related nicotine products under its “strategic goods” framework from August 20, 2026. According to TVP World’s report published on August 19, the newly listed items include e-cigarettes, electronic smoking devices, vape liquids and nicotine salts. Individuals who illegally move these products across Russia’s customs border or its state border with other Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) members could face up to five years in prison if shipment values exceed 100,000 rubles (about €1,000), provided all elements of a criminal offence are established.
Aug.20
South Korea Fully Reviews Nicotine-Analog and Nicotine-Free Vape Liquid Imports, With Over 99% From China and Chinese Supply-Chain Documents Under Scrutiny
South Korea Fully Reviews Nicotine-Analog and Nicotine-Free Vape Liquid Imports, With Over 99% From China and Chinese Supply-Chain Documents Under Scrutiny
Korea Customs Service has tightened import controls on nicotine-analog and nicotine-free e-cigarette liquids, placing the products under 100% document review and subjecting all e-cigarette liquid import declarations to pre-clearance ingredient analysis. As of September 20, 2026, South Korea had imported about 15 metric tons of nicotine-analog liquids, 99.99% from China, and about 316 metric tons of nicotine-free liquids, including roughly 315 metric tons, or 99.7%, from China. The measures follow South Korea's April expansion of its tobacco definition to include synthetic nicotine products and include new checks on Chinese manufacturing, transaction and export documentation.
Sep.24
China’s Zhengzhou Tobacco Research Institute develops end-to-end heated tobacco analysis to trace aerosol compound origins
China’s Zhengzhou Tobacco Research Institute develops end-to-end heated tobacco analysis to trace aerosol compound origins
The Zhengzhou Tobacco Research Institute of China National Tobacco Corporation has filed a patent application for an end-to-end method to analyze the migration and transformation of chemical compounds in heated tobacco products. Using GC-Orbitrap/MS non-targeted analysis, the method compares tobacco substrate and aerosol samples to distinguish compounds transferred directly from the substrate from those newly formed during heating, while also calculating transfer rates. In an example involving nine heated tobacco products, the patent identified 17 newly formed thermal decomposition compounds and 38 transferred compounds.
Aug.13