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.

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
Malaysia’s Vape Rules Face Review as Health Minister Dzulkefly Ahmad Addresses Dropped Nicotine Appeal
Malaysia’s Vape Rules Face Review as Health Minister Dzulkefly Ahmad Addresses Dropped Nicotine Appeal
According to Free Malaysia Today on August 26, 2026, Malaysia’s Health Minister Dzulkefly Ahmad said the Health Ministry would explain the government’s decision to withdraw its appeal against a High Court ruling involving the exemption of liquid nicotine used in vape products from the Poisons List. The High Court previously ruled that the exemption decision was irrational. Dzulkefly said withdrawing the appeal did not mean the government would stop regulating vaping, and that future regulatory approaches would continue under existing legal frameworks.
Aug.28
Malaysia Liquid Nicotine Returns to Poisons List, Leaving Vape Retail and RM354 Million Tax Collection in Legal Uncertainty
Malaysia Liquid Nicotine Returns to Poisons List, Leaving Vape Retail and RM354 Million Tax Collection in Legal Uncertainty
Malaysia’s withdrawal of its appeal in a landmark liquid-nicotine case has left a High Court ruling that struck down the 2023 nicotine exemption in force, bringing liquid and gel nicotine used in vaping products back under the Poisons Act 1952. At the same time, the Control of Smoking Products for Public Health Act 2024 continues to provide a regulatory framework for vaping products, creating uncertainty over retail sales, taxation and existing inventory. MPs are calling for nicotine vape sales and excise collection to stop, including refunds of more than RM354 million collected since 2023, while industry and consumer groups are asking the government to clarify the current legal position.
Sep.04
South Korea Extends Vape Rules to Unmanned Stores After Bringing Synthetic Nicotine Under Tobacco Law
South Korea Extends Vape Rules to Unmanned Stores After Bringing Synthetic Nicotine Under Tobacco Law
South Korea's Ministry of Gender Equality and Family said on September 14 that it plans to designate unmanned e-cigarette stores as businesses where minors are prohibited from entering or working. Operators would be required to verify customers' ages and display notices restricting access by minors. The proposal is open for public comment through October 6. The move follows an April expansion of South Korea's statutory tobacco definition that brought products made with natural or synthetic nicotine under the Tobacco Business Act. Nicotine-free liquids and products using nicotine analogues such as 6-methylnicotine, however, remain an emerging regulatory issue.
Sep.21
JTI Proposes 25-Cent Irish Cigarette Tax Increase, Says It Could Raise €45 Million
JTI Proposes 25-Cent Irish Cigarette Tax Increase, Says It Could Raise €45 Million
Japan Tobacco International's Irish business has proposed a €0.25 tax increase on a pack of 20 cigarettes in its pre-Budget 2027 submission, below the €0.50-or-more increases typically imposed in recent Irish budgets. JTI says the proposal could generate around €45 million in additional Exchequer revenue while limiting further movement toward illicit and non-Irish-tax-paid tobacco. Revenue's existing estimate for a comparable €0.25 increase, including pro-rata rises on other tobacco products, is about €18 million for a full year.
JTI
Sep.18 by 2Firsts Perspectives
PMI Global R&D Chief Meets Chinese Tobacco Regulator as China Advances Heated Cigarette Standards
PMI Global R&D Chief Meets Chinese Tobacco Regulator as China Advances Heated Cigarette Standards
Philip Morris International’s global R&D chief Michele Cattoni met Liu Sanjiang, deputy director of China’s State Tobacco Monopoly Administration, in Beijing on Aug. 27. The meeting comes as China advances mandatory standards for heated cigarettes and nicotine pouches, laying groundwork for their domestic introduction. Cattoni has held senior roles in PMI’s heated tobacco development, while China’s draft standard covers multiple heating architectures, including systems similar in principle to PMI’s IQOS ILUMA technology.
Aug.27