Last year ended with Europe wallowing in its Euro-crisis, the United States (US) Congress wrangling over its budget (eventually unresolved, leading to a legislative ‘sequestration’), the promise of a Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Committee (PRAC) within the European Medicines Agency (EMA), a European initiative towards publication of clinical trials data, and an unremarkable number of truly new product approvals on both sides of the Atlantic [1]. Much of that carried on this year, while the economic situation continues to stagger and stutter. As mentioned last year, 2013 has seen the PRAC getting into its stride at the EMA [2]. The PRAC advises the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP), the Co-ordination Group for Mutual Recognition and Decentralised Procedures-Human (CMDh), the EMA secretariat and the European Commission on all aspects of pharmacovigilance and risk management. The PRAC is comprised of: a Chairperson, a member (or alternate) from every member state, six members ex officio and technically qualified from the European Commission (EC), and another two EC members (with alternates) for public calls of interest for healthcare professionals and patients. They all have 3 year terms, renewed easily the first time, and after competition thereafter. The PRAC aims to review all Product Licence Applications (PLAs) from the point of view of proposed pharmacovigilance and risk management activities. These are all Module 1 components of the electronic Clinical Trials Dossier (eCTD), and thus are restricted to the European marketplaces. In addition, the PRAC will be reviewing Periodic Safety Update Reports (PSURs; these now require formal risk-benefit assessments), Post-Assessment Safety Studies (PASS), as well as doing general signal detection and making ‘for cause’ pharmacovigilance inspection decisions. For licensed products, these responsibilities differ little between centralised process and other approvals. Lastly, the PRAC is empowered to take urgent action on its own initiative in cases of serious threats to the public health. Flexing its muscles, in January 2013 PRAC recommended the withdrawal of three products from the entire EU, and most recently (September 2013) is recommending against short-acting beta-agonists in pregnancy [3]. A slang has developed in the United Kingdom: purity, efficacy and safety come first, and then the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has become known as a ‘fourth hurdle’. The PRAC might yet become known as the fifth hurdle. A new distraction this year is that the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) doesn’t quite know whether it can regulate ‘electronic cigarettes’ [4]. In ordinary parlance, these breath-actuated inhalational devices deliver vaporized nicotine, and are shaped like a cigarette. The amusing angle of this regulatory uncertainty is that the FDA is, however, now attempting to regulate tobacco itself. The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (2009) gave the FDA the authority to regulate products containing tobacco. A regulatory pathway for tobacco products has been contrived, based upon the notion of ‘‘substantial equivalence’’. On this basis, there have been two new product approvals and at least four rejections [5]. The two approvals so far (‘‘Newport Non-menthol Gold Box 100s’’ and ‘‘Newport Non-menthol Gold Box’’) had A. W. Fox is the Consulting Editor for Pharmaceutical Medicine.