TSA Approved E-cigarettes Claims Are False

[wonder]

If you search google for "tsa approved electronic cigarettes" you will find many claims by Njoy reps stating that these items are TSA approved those claims are false as per Assistant Administrator of Security Operations for the TSA.

Original email minus names can be found at Smokeless Wonder News

[Somoney]

TSA only approves bags, cases, and locks. To go out of their way and approve such a rare item as an e-cigarette is down right laughable. I think Njoy's stance is IF there are no laws that prohibit atomizers, nebulizers, etc, then its legal to bring on a plane.
Common sense tells us though that if a TSA official asks "Whats That" and you go into explaining its a portable nubulizer, only holds 3-4 drops of liquid in it, and your laws dont apply, say goodby to your e-cigarette.

[wonder]

Somoney,

The reason I brought this up is because of quotes like the following: "Are approved by the TSA. So you can smoke them in airports and even on airplanes." found at http://www.njoy-npro.com/

and "The fact that electronic cigarettes do not burn any tobacco means that they are completely legal and can be smoked anywhere that traditional cigarettes are prohibited including bars, restaurants, the workplace; they are even approved by the TSA which means that they can be smoked on airplanes." from Do Electronic Cigarettes Really Work? | Njoy Electronic Cigarette and Accessory Store

and my personal favorite for smokeanywhere.com: NEWS FLASH>>>>>>
The TSA | Transportation Security Administration | U.S. Department of Transportation Security Administration | U.S. Department of Homeland Security (agency that protects the nation’s transportation systems to ensure freedom of movement for people and commerce)……… has APPROVED the NJOY Electronic Cigarette for use on any method of transportation, be it Air Land or Sea. Yes.. this means your customers can in fact use the Njoy Electronic Cigarette on Airplanes.
We will have the official “Seal of Approval” on TSA letterhead within the next few weeks. The moment we have it in hand we will post it on our site and notify you where to read or download it.
Again to those “super sales men & women” keep up the great work.
Affiliate Manager


from: TSA - Njoy Electronic Cigarette SmokeAnywhere.com’s Weblog


and from smokeanywhere.com


Our Products Are.... "FAA", "TSA" & "Homeland Security" APPROVED


All a bunch of false claims.......

[TropicalBob]

If untrue, those are shameful claims. We all better see that "Seal of Approval" real quick. But this all fits The Big Lie patterns of many sellers. That can't be content with the very real benefits of e-devices and instead spin untruths to further greedy ambitions.

Typical business practice, I know, but nonetheless shameful...

[Grumpysanta]

Trouble is miss-leading claims will inevitably be damaging to e-cigs. Let's face it we're fighting a hard enough battle as it is.

[leaford]

This is a timely thread, I had e-mailed a few days ago to Smokewanywhere asking about those claims. Mark Anton, the president wrote that "We do have letters from Homeland Security about the NJOY product we are in discussion and relationship with the airlines to get these approved on each and every carrier but this is lengthy. We have some carriers that allow on small selected flights and others that are going through the process." I wrote back asking to see the documents, and a verifiable contact. I will note that SmokelessWonder's letter is not an actual document, and isn't verifiable. I would also note that it's kind of tasteless for one supplier to bash another in this forum, regardless of who's right about their claims.

[Pegaso]

I don't know the American law, but here in Spain (I think in all EU, but not sure), a seller cannot claim something false about his products, not even for advertising... it's considered "deceiving publicity" and court can close the shop.

The good thing here would be that, if a provider under that law tell's me I can use my ecig in a plane, and I go and do it, and then I have a problem 'cos it wasn't really allowed, I could claim him for a compensation for damages...

I ignore if there is a similar law in USA...

I also ignore if that claim about TSA approving ecigs is true or false... but, as fas as I've read in this forum, Njoy products are supposed to be quite good, one of the best if it's true what I read here... so, is it really neccesary for the owner of that shop to fool his costumers? can't he rely the sales on the quality of his products?

If he is lying (wich I don't know), I think it's a terrible mistake, bad for his business, and bad for every ecig user, as this can bring misunderstandings, problems, and undesirable situations...

[wonder]

I in no way meant to bash anyone, If I came across that way I am sorry publicly.

This is a timely thread, I had e-mailed a few days ago to Smokewanywhere asking about those claims. Mark Anton, the president wrote that "We do have letters from Homeland Security about the NJOY product we are in discussion and relationship with the airlines to get these approved on each and every carrier but this is lengthy. We have some carriers that allow on small selected flights and others that are going through the process." I wrote back asking to see the documents, and a verifiable contact. I will note that SmokelessWonder's letter is not an actual document, and isn't verifiable. I would also note that it's kind of tasteless for one supplier to bash another in this forum, regardless of who's right about their claims.

[Keltrey]

I now know this might be a dead horse, however I felt the need to inquire myself about this company. The results were interesting.




.ExternalClass .EC_hmmessage P {padding:0px;} .ExternalClass body.EC_hmmessage {font-size:10pt;font-family:Verdana;} The site in question: www.smokeanywhere.com

The Statement: "FAA", "TSA" & "Homeland Security" APPROVED

Question: "FAA, TSA, & Homeland Security Approved" Can you provide documentation to support these claims?

Response:


Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2009 22:26:14 -0500
From: info@smokeanywhere.com
Subject: faa and Tsa
To: **Edited**

Mr *Edited**,
Yes we can.
Sincerely,
Customer Service
Smokeanywhere.com

Second Question:
Could you please send me a copy of said documents?

Thank you in advance.

Second Response:


Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 11:52:48 -0500
From: info@smokeanywhere.com
Subject: Re: faa and Tsa
To: **Edited**

.ExternalClass .EC_hmmessage P {padding-right:0px;padding-left:0px;padding-bottom:0px;padding-top:0px;} .ExternalClass BODY.EC_hmmessage {font-size:10pt;font-family:Verdana;} Dear **Edited**,
May I inquire as to your need for our letter?
Mark

Third Question: Because I would like to see proof. I have seen a lot of false claims and I am interested to see if your establishment is different. If you do not want to provide me with a copy I am sure I could just receive them from those agencies upon request.

Third Response:

Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 13:56:17 -0500
From: info@smokeanywhere.com
Subject: Re: faa and Tsa
To: **Edited**


.ExternalClass .EC_hmmessage P {padding-right:0px;padding-left:0px;padding-bottom:0px;padding-top:0px;} .ExternalClass BODY.EC_hmmessage {font-size:10pt;font-family:Verdana;} The reason we do not share with people we do not have relations is our competitors claim the same and have done none of the research and they like to tell there customers in the mall where they charge twice as much as we do that they have the same status. The other reason is some can make claims that with our letter could hurt the vital work we are trying to accomplish to get on airplanes.

I tell you what I will have my web guy copy and post it on site in the next week with out the ability of being copied on site.
Would this help you in making a purchase?
Mark


Fourth Email:

I see and can understand your point. That is why I will just request those approvals from those agencies myself. Thank you for your time.

P.S.

"we are trying to accomplish to get on airplanes."

If they were already approved you would be on the airplanes


My Conclusion: I am awaiting my own responses from said agencies as to the validity of these statements.

[Keltrey]

I apologize for the coding in the post. I am not sure how to remove it