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.

Kuwait Tightens Tobacco and Nicotine Rules, Bans Under-21 Sales and Extends Public Smoking Restrictions to Vapes and Heated Tobacco
Kuwait Tightens Tobacco and Nicotine Rules, Bans Under-21 Sales and Extends Public Smoking Restrictions to Vapes and Heated Tobacco
Kuwait has issued a comprehensive new regulatory framework covering tobacco, e-cigarettes, heated tobacco and other nicotine products. Ministerial Decision No. 237 of 2026, signed by Health Minister Ahmad Al-Awadhi, will take effect on January 1, 2027. The rules prohibit sales to people under 21 and ban sales through websites, apps, social media and delivery services. E-cigarettes and heated tobacco products will also be treated as smoking in public and enclosed places where smoking is prohibited. Nicotine pouches and other oral nicotine products not registered as medicines are banned.
Regulations
Aug.17 by 2Firsts Perspectives
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
Product | HQD SiSA 80K Enters the U.S. Market With a Hookah-Inspired Approach to the High-Capacity Disposable Segment
Product | HQD SiSA 80K Enters the U.S. Market With a Hookah-Inspired Approach to the High-Capacity Disposable Segment
The HQD SiSA 80K Hookah Disposable Vape has appeared across U.S. and cross-border online retail channels. The device comes prefilled with 28ml of e-liquid, uses a 5% nicotine salt configuration and carries a brand claim of up to 80,000 puffs. Beyond puff count, the product differentiates itself through hookah-inspired features including adjustable airflow, a flowing-water sound effect and flavor options associated with traditional hookah consumption.
Aug.18
China’s Jinhua Tobacco Launches CNY 2.7 Million Procurement for E-Cigarette Violation Lead Monitoring Services
China’s Jinhua Tobacco Launches CNY 2.7 Million Procurement for E-Cigarette Violation Lead Monitoring Services
Jinhua Tobacco, a municipal tobacco company in China’s Zhejiang province, has launched a public tender for e-cigarette-related violation lead monitoring and consulting services. The project is valued at CNY 2.7 million and covers data resource integration and analytical consulting services for 36 months from contract signing. The procurement reflects the use of external data and analysis services to support local tobacco companies’ market oversight activities related to e-cigarettes.
Aug.07
BAT UK Director Tolga Kilic Says Illicit Nicotine Market Squeezes Legal Retailers Amid Rising Compliance Costs
BAT UK Director Tolga Kilic Says Illicit Nicotine Market Squeezes Legal Retailers Amid Rising Compliance Costs
UK retail publication Grocery Trader has published a viewpoint article from Tolga Kilic, Commercial Director for BAT UK & Ireland, discussing the impact of illicit nicotine products on legitimate retail channels. Kilic said illegal vapes and other illicit nicotine products create competitive pressure for compliant retailers and called for stronger market controls and supply-chain oversight. The comments come as the UK advances policies including the disposable vape ban and Vaping Products Duty, creating a more complex operating environment for legal vape retailers.
Jul.28
2Firsts Hosts U.S. Market Mid-Year Briefing: Companies Need to Reassess Product and Market-Access Strategies
2Firsts Hosts U.S. Market Mid-Year Briefing: Companies Need to Reassess Product and Market-Access Strategies
2Firsts held its 2026 U.S. Market Compliance and Development Mid-Year Briefing in Shenzhen, China, on July 28. The discussion examined how state-level requirements, proposed foreign-establishment registration rules and expanding supply-chain responsibilities are changing product and investment decisions in the U.S. tobacco and nicotine market.
Jul.29