Questions about the Electronic Cigarette Association

[JohnR]

I'm not donating any money to anyone - not that I hope there won't be some opportunity to support tangible forward movement, but I'm first using the pen, well - and the keyboard. I've sent off letters and emails to the politicians I've helped vote into office and am encouraging public debate and discussion on the issue of e-cigarettes and their use.

But no matter who says what - I own the living proof and have the story to tell as do many others. I smoked for over 40 years and never really quit, ever. In the last year the reality of needing to quit moved from the back of my mind where it lurked for years like a dark secret I didn't want to voice to the front of my thoughts. When I happened across the online add for an e-cig - I jumped. I looked read, read some more and ended up here - I decided on a brand and bought it. That was just over 6 weeks ago.

Tonight, I had a battery burn out, and I'm down to 3 batteries and 2 atomizers and some juice. I'll probably buy some more but I'm past that nervous sweaty gotta-get-out-and-get-some-smokes jones that I let endure for years and years where I always had to have a pack and a back up pack and a pack to back up the backup in case I ran out. I don't smoke anymore and I'm managing to sweat it out through this stage and not feed the same monkey. I know others here that I read are full users of e-cigarettes and I fully support that - vape a lot, a little, or quit altogether - the choices are better than the alternative if it's smoking tobacco cigarettes.

Between the FDA and the Surgeon General and all their expensive concern for my well being I've been able to supply my smoking habit for years without a moment's concern that I might not have another pack ready to go day or night. And now they want to "regulate" cigarettes and "control" the ingredients and watch out for me by putting a ban on e-cigarettes? ... them. I'm more p-o'd at the FDA's response than I have been to anything for a long time. They can all go to hell and take their tax funded research with them.

I'm so glad I found this board, and found the e-cigarettes.

They're wrong. I'm right. All their hypocritical theorizing-maybe-we-can-make-it-better someday b.s. they can sling won't change that. I'm my own proof and that's all I need. Let the jackasses ban everything they see - e-cig's will still endure and ultimately prevail if those who want it keep at it. But either way - I already won and all of their self-righteous posturing and double talk won't change that.

[Zofryer]

Awesome I am right there with ya I just wanna motivate we need to do damage control -- Follow here:

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/for...ers-unite.html

You speak my language. What I have is the oldest accounts on every major nerd/geek/tech and news site out there. If there's a story about e-cigarettes on them, I probably posted it and asked for its approval. I've already gotten three links from the unbiased (and absolutely wonderful) e-cig.org synopsis live. This one:

Electronic Cigarettes by INSTEAD E-Cigarette

[Zofryer]

They're wrong. I'm right. All their hypocritical theorizing-maybe-we-can-make-it-better someday b.s. they can sling won't change that. .

The most important thing is, you have evidence to back it. It's there. beyond politics, beyond rhetoric, you are doing the right thing. Also, good god man, get yourself a USB passthrough. If you are spendy, the puresmoker one is nice. If you are not, the ruyan direct one gets praise. Don't be a slave to batteries.

Edited for links:

Puresmoker passthrough (spendy)

http://www.puresmoker.com/category_s/51.htm


Ruyan Direct Passthrough (gets praise)

http://www.ruyandirect.com/index.php...8&productname=

[Krakkan]

Boge Ingredient Lists -- their lab reports and MSDS reports on my site under Safety Tab if any need

[Zofryer]

Boge Ingredient Lists -- their lab reports and MSDS reports on my site under Safety Tab if any need

This matches what I got from Frances.

[LaceyUnderall]

Zofryer -

It is my understanding that the ECA is releasing a press release today regarding the FDA Announcement. Also, the ECA was quoted in a very good article last night in the NY Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/23/he...icy/23fda.html

I also think I should add that up until the last two weeks, the donations and membership applications have been very minimal at best so launching an attack of magnitude in the size folks would like to see is very near impossible.

As of yesterday, we saw more donations and suppliers say they would sign up then we have in the past few months put together. We are on the right track, but as the association is only a few months old, we are still building steam.

We were naive to think that right out of the gate we would have support from consumers and suppliers. Now that there is greater risk of losing the ecig and for some, their business, people are starting to rethink their attachment to their PV's and their dollars.

EDIT: Also, NYC posted in this thread two more articles where the ECA was mentioned: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/for...s-release.html
post #6.

[nycsublimegirl]

per the FDA press conference yestarday


NY times 7/23 http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/23/he...er=rss&emc=rss


USA today 7/23 FDA considers ways to short-circuit electronic cigarettes - USATODAY.com


Charlotte Observer 7/23 FDA: Electronic cigarettes contain toxic chemicals - CharlotteObserver.com


This will show you The ECA is trying its hardest to get the e smoker voice out there....to get to the media in equal time with the FDA


for the record here is the press release the ECA sent out to news organizations last night...that was used in the above articles...

Electronic Cigarette Association Refutes FDA Statement

Wednesday, July 22, 2009| The Electronic Cigarette Association (ECA) said that the FDA’s laboratory analysis of electronic cigarettes released today is too narrow to reach any valid and reliable conclusions and ignores the continued efforts by its member companies to ensure that their products include health warnings and to only market its products as an alternative to long-time, adult smokers.

“I’m a little shocked that the FDA would release a study that is so narrow in its scope and target a specific industry when there are a number of nicotine products on the market today not in the FDA’s crosshairs. Are they saying that those products and cigarettes themselves are safer to use,” said Matt Salmon, former Arizona Congressman and president of the ECA. “Our member companies have taken a responsible approach by ensuring that those who use their products are well-informed about their products and to ensure that their products are not marketed or accessible to children.”

The Electronic Cigarette Association (ECA) was created to help the industry and its participants establish and follow codes of conduct and best practices for the good of consumers, society and the industry. These practices outlined include:

• Agreeing to not make any cessation claims in all marketing materials.
• Agreeing to not make any health claims in all marketing materials.
• Agreeing to not sell the product to those younger than the legal smoking age.

“We understand the FDA concern about manufacturing standards, and have been a priority of ours in establishing best practices beyond the electronic cigarette companies themselves,” said Salmon. “We have been reaching out and working with companies and manufacturers since our inception last March, and have already come a long way in setting the standards, as noted in our requirements to be an ECA member.”

NJOY is a recognized member of the ECA. For more information on ECA visit www.ecassoc.org.

[JohnR]

.................

[JohnR]

I will likely do that, this week Zofryer - thanks.

When I'm not completely ticked at the FDA, I am appreciative of the quality of food and drugs that I enjoy. They are however, 'ho's. Of that I'm certain.

Some of the issues/questions that have crossed my mind

Smokers have no political power. Zip. No leverage. So smokers will be taxed and whipped at leisure for the continued right to have access to cigarettes. That may not be something that can be changed.

For much of the non-smoking community, as long as e-cigarettes are an alternative to smoking, it's undesirable. It fails by association even if the association isn't one-for-one. That's a product of both education and information but also may reflect a prejudice that won't change, regardless.

Tobacco companies have major political power. = $$$. They'll be coddled, and swabbed down while taking a "beating". Their production may actually benefit if the FDA (I can't believe I'm even writing this) determines and puts it's name on a "better, safer" cigarette. It's better than being shut down point blank, for them.

Individual management of nicotine is a downside to the medical community - the fact that a user can self-administer and tinker to their heart's content is a win for the vaper but a negative to everyone else. A futurre FDA regulated solution would probably address that and try to eliminate the ability to alter and change the product at will.


The cost will increase. Safer, better, faster, reliable - whether they're needed or not, improvements will come at a cost. Off the shelf products will simply cost more.

[lvlninety9]

Ok after hearing the FDA teleconference and reading the articles and the rebuttal statement by the ECA, I have to say I'm really disappointed. The 3 articles are a major failure as I did not see anywhere in there that the FDA was wrong or any attempt to refute their findings. That amazing failure of a statement? Don't make me laugh. Are you kidding me? The FDA touts their findings of cartridges and you try to call BS but provide nothing to back it up. Instead you spout off about advertising and quality control. While I do agree that these are things that need to be addressed I mean come on. Anyone could obviously see that what should have been done was to give facts and findings to discredit anything that the FDA had done. This is failure number one. Failure number 2 is that in those 3 articles, nothing was given to show that the FDA study was invalid except for the study was to narrow to come to any kind of conclusion. Are you serious? All those articles failed to get us any ground and you want to brag about them? Get real. If someone is saying hey this thing is horrible then my GOD people give the facts that say they are wrong. The whole statement is a failure. It's like 2 kids playing the slapping game. It's stupid and just idiotic. Yes I am calling the ECA out on their major failure to discredit the FDA. If the people on this forum can find facts, statistics, and studies, then why can't a group that is supposedly organized to keep our hopes alive do it? I could have came up with a better rebuttal statement sitting on my toilet. Scream all you like about we are still a new organization, it costs money and all the garbage. That will make the ECA even more of a failure then it already is. I honestly feel that right now the people on these boards (ECA excluded) could have put up a better effort. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that you fight facts with facts. You want to fight with the FDA hey that's great. But do it right. Don't say well their study is to narrow or what not then not provide facts showing that they were wrong. I have long debated donating to the ECA and now I'm glad I saved my money instead of donating it to an organization that is a failure in itself. Ban me, flame me, do whatever you like but right at this moment my thoughts on the ECA is that you guys are failures for the cause and are making us look worse then we should be. You want to win the cause for us? Then get someone with some brains to help because the lackluster approach to this situation is getting worse by the minute. ECA? That's the biggest joke in the e-cigarette industry if I ever heard one. You want our support? Hey that's great. But stop doing a half a$$ job and address the issues at hand. Stop dancing around subjects like idiots. Someone issues a statement with their own findings? Then discredit them with the real facts. Not this nyah nyah you're wrong but I'm not gonna say why crap. It makes you look stupid and uninformed. And please PLEASE if you are going to contribute to any article then please make it worth the time and provide the facts for us. The garbage I saw in those 3 articles are a failure. Yeah yeah brag all you wish about being on TV or having a blip in an article. Everything I have seen and read that the ECA is supposed to be doing is nothing but talk. While the FDA is providing their own findings, you guys play the well they are wrong with no evidence game. Address the issues that come up with facts that dispute what they say. The ECA took us one HUGE step backwards with that very poorly executed statement. Let me ask you this. If someone comes to you and says hey this study says that those things contain this and that they will cause cancer and potentially kill you. They did a study and can prove it. Are you going to seriously tell me well we are working on our advertising and quality control? I'd slap you right in the face for a very bad attempt to avoid the subject. Get real ECA. Do something right for a change. Like I said ban me if you like I really don't care anymore because I see more of a fight with people on this forum then I do in the ECA. If something isn't done the right way soon then I really don't see you guys lasting much longer. Fight facts with facts people. Stop dancing around the subject. And no it does NOT take much money to gather up the facts. Hell you can browse around this forum and find tons of information. Yes I stir the pot. Yes I'm argumentative. But you know what? The few of us on this forum that aren't happy with the ECA are starting to speak. Stop the raping of business by charging outlandish fees to be members. Stop neglecting the consumers. And please get it right when the FDA provides facts. I'm done for the moment but I'd really LOVE to hear the ECA's response to their failings at this stab by the FDA.