At the end of January the first release of 4 million internal documents from JUUL were made public on the UCSF Industry Documents Library. The disclosure of these documents was a condition of the 2021 settlement between the State of North Carolina. The documents date from 2015 to 2019.
Among the 280,000 documents contained in this release are some which show that JUUL felt its products were not only acceptable to regulators, but were initially welcomed by them.
CANADA
Vaping products were legalized in Canada in May 2018. A few weeks later (August 13, 2018) JUUL officials met with representatives of Health Canada. Their notes of this meeting suggest some mutual enthusiasm for the sale of JUUL products in Canada: "We had a very positive meeting with Health Canada this morning.... The main takeaway was that they are excited to have new entrants into the market for nicotine-containing e-cigarettes that are compliant with the regulatory framework that they have put in place."
The JUUL meeting report says that government officials suggested that the company work reports that it was suggested to them that they "work with credible academics in Canada to generate research on safety and health impact of our products."
Health Canada's report of the meeting is somewhat different. (The department makes public notes from its meeting with tobacco and vaping companies). On the question of the the government's receptiveness to the launch of JUUL, their notes record "JUUL asked if HC had any concerns with its upcoming market entry. HC responded that JUUL would need to ensure compliance with the Tobacco and Vaping Products Act and the Canada Consumer Product Safety Act."
UNITED KINGDOM
During the previous summer (June 2017) JUUL went out for "an excellent dinner" with the tobacco control program lead at Public Health England (Martin Dockrell) and the chief executive of ASH UK (Deborah Arnott).
This was a year before JUUL was launched in the UK , and the company was trying to figure out its regulatory approach. The meeting notes show that two avenues were considered -- one where the device would be licensed by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) - a process that JUUL was cautioned could take a year or two.
Their meeting notes report that the Public Health England representative suggested an alternative and faster route. If they marketed JUUL as a "novel tobacco product", there was no need to seek pre-approval. "We hadn't considered this pathway till Martin suggested it," the notes record. The memo concludes in bold that "This previously unconsidered approach has the potential to be very attractive."
A record of this meeting prepared by Public Health England has not been located.
