MHRA statement after TPD vote supports amendment 170

[Matt Gluggles]

.

The MHRA have issued a statement after the EU vote which went against their plan for medicinal e-cigs.

They say that they are still in support of medicinal regulation for e-cigs and are asking companies to "voluntarily" seek a licence for their products.

www.mhra.gov.uk/NewsCentre/CON322753


.

[chykensa]

Oh well, that's bound to catch on, isn't it!!!!?

[barrynorton]

It might. Those products funded by Big Tobacco. Then they'll make a big fuss about it and lobby to get the rest off the market again.

For now though: good. That very much looks like dropping the argument.

[kibbster]

I hope Big Tobacco have to lie in the bed of their own making.
They want med regs, they've got them and everyone else can be free to sell stuff that people actually want to use.

[barrynorton]

Water off a duck's back to them sadly. Especially compared to the advertising budgets they're already burning through.

[GunJack]

mhra = muppets.... if they were that concerned about public health they would change their stance totally

[womble]

Presumably if a company gets a medicinal licence, they will be able to get them prescribed by the NHS. So it still might be worth one of these big companies doing it.

[vereybowring]

Well if anybody can get a device through MHRA hoops it will be considered for use in the NHS, its not a direct shoe in.
NICE has to then evaluate them and make the decision on whether they are allowed to be prescribed or not.

Red tape, upon red tape.

[markm]

A true medical version is caught by the catch 22.
If it delivers a dose in the proscribed manner it becomes inaffective.

[womble]

Oct 10, 2013 9:29:54 GMT markm said:

A true medical version is caught by the catch 22.
If it delivers a dose in the proscribed manner it becomes inaffective.

When has that ever stopped a company making money from it's products being prescribed by the NHS

[barrynorton]

Oct 10, 2013 9:29:54 GMT markm said:

If it delivers a dose in the proscribed manner it becomes inaffective.

Why?

[Bluefish]

Addiction, so not a very good medicine, but good for profits.

[inigomontoya]

Oct 10, 2013 10:20:22 GMT barrynorton said:

Oct 10, 2013 9:29:54 GMT markm said:

If it delivers a dose in the proscribed manner it becomes inaffective.

Why?

Because proposed nicotine content is at about 4mg/ml - which won't do anything for anyone who actually needs to quit!

[dnglos]

Oct 10, 2013 9:13:38 GMT womble said:

Presumably if a company gets a medicinal licence, they will be able to get them prescribed by the NHS. So it still might be worth one of these big companies doing it.

So, will doctors be able to prescribe "licensed" e-cigs to school kids (in the same way they currently prescribe NRT)?

[barrynorton]

Oct 10, 2013 14:58:35 GMT inigomontoya said:

Because proposed nicotine content is at about 4mg/ml - which won't do anything for anyone who actually needs to quit!

Sorry, I must be getting confused. Proposed by whom?

The amended EU directive places no constraint on medically-authorised devices (though the poisons legislation puts a cap of 7.5% on it).

British American Tobacco's Vype product has the following characteristics:

Vype Red contains 18.6mg, Vype Blue contains 12.5mg and Vype Green contains 12.6mg of nicotine.

They could, and very well might, seek medical authorisation for this.

Where does the 4mg come into this?

(I must have just lost the thread)