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.

GAO Audit Finds Nearly 132,000 FDA Tobacco Applications Waiting an Average 1,266 Days as Nicotine Pouch Pilot Practices Move Into Vape PMTA Reviews
GAO Audit Finds Nearly 132,000 FDA Tobacco Applications Waiting an Average 1,266 Days as Nicotine Pouch Pilot Practices Move Into Vape PMTA Reviews
A U.S. Government Accountability Office audit found that 131,915 tobacco product applications submitted to the FDA since 2018 remained without a final review as of December 31, 2025, with pending applications waiting an average of 1,266 days. GAO also found FDA lacks the data needed to systematically determine whether scientific reviews meet applicable timelines. HHS agreed to upgrade the agency's tracking systems. At the same time, FDA has begun applying lessons from its nicotine pouch PMTA pilot to e-cigarette reviews, while changes to enforcement policy and electronic submissions are making the specific stage of a PMTA increasingly relevant to market access.
FDA
Oct.03
Imperial Brands Plans Thousands of Job Cuts Across U.S. and Europe in Cost Restructuring
Imperial Brands Plans Thousands of Job Cuts Across U.S. and Europe in Cost Restructuring
According to Reuters, citing Bloomberg News, British tobacco company Imperial Brands PLC plans to cut thousands of jobs across the United States and Europe as part of a cost reduction and organizational restructuring effort. The announcement drew market attention to the company’s shares. The move comes as global tobacco companies continue adjusting their operations amid slower cigarette market growth, changing consumer preferences and the transition toward next-generation nicotine products.
Aug.11
Product | FOGER Introduces Switch Pro 30K Nixodine Pod in U.S. Retail, Bringing 6-MN Related Formulation to High-Capacity Pod Platform
Product | FOGER Introduces Switch Pro 30K Nixodine Pod in U.S. Retail, Bringing 6-MN Related Formulation to High-Capacity Pod Platform
FOGER has introduced the Switch Pro 30K Nixodine Pod in U.S. retail channels, bringing a 6-methylnicotine (6-MN)-related formulation into its reusable Switch Pro 30K pod ecosystem. The product retains the existing reusable dock and magnetic replacement pod architecture, featuring a 19ml prefilled pod, dual-mesh heating and Normal/Boost modes. The Nixodine version is labeled nicotine-free in terms of conventional nicotine but uses a 5% Nixodine-related formulation. The product has appeared in U.S. retail and wholesale channels, with some listings indicating Kentucky-only availability.
Aug.28
As JUUL2 Wins FDA Authorization, Harm Reduction Journal Highlights the Role of Real-World Evidence in Nicotine Product Regulation
As JUUL2 Wins FDA Authorization, Harm Reduction Journal Highlights the Role of Real-World Evidence in Nicotine Product Regulation
A commentary published in the international open-access, peer-reviewed Harm Reduction Journal argues that randomized controlled trials remain central to evaluating smoking cessation efficacy but cannot alone capture real-world uptake, complete switching, longer-term use and population impact of non-combustible nicotine products such as e-cigarettes, heated tobacco and nicotine pouches. The authors frame impact as “reach × efficacy” and call for real-world evidence to complement RCTs. Three days after publication, the FDA authorized three JUUL2 products and highlighted complete switching among adult smokers in explaining its decision, providing a timely regulatory backdrop to the debate.
Sep.08
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
UK Vape Tax Countdown: Retailer Vape HQ Estimates 100ml E-liquid Prices Could Rise From £12.99 to £39.39, While Pod Kits Increase Less Than 10%
UK Vape Tax Countdown: Retailer Vape HQ Estimates 100ml E-liquid Prices Could Rise From £12.99 to £39.39, While Pod Kits Increase Less Than 10%
The UK’s Vaping Products Duty (VPD), scheduled to take effect in October 2026, is prompting retailers to assess how different vape categories may be affected. UK retailer Vape HQ has estimated potential price changes under the new volume-based tax system, showing that 100ml shortfill e-liquids could see prices rise from around £12.99 to £39.39, a 203% increase, while 2ml prefilled pod vape kits could rise from £5.99 to £6.52, an increase of about 9%. The estimates highlight how a volume-based tax structure creates uneven cost impacts across product categories.
Aug.19