An idea for avoiding FDA approval or control

[TropicalBob]

They are "the future" today, Rockbassray. They look like something that might be used aboard the Starship Enterprise (and, in fact, could be!). If we don't kill this embryo, I'm sure it will mature into something valuable to smokers and others (for inhalation therapy).

As for dissolvable ... sorry, it's tobacco. I have been an avid user of Stonewall Java for about two years. I buy a five-pack of 20 every week. I'm using one now. E-smoking has never given me enough nicotine, so I use Stonewall and strong snus all the time. Stonewall's tobacco is 100% "Star-Cured Virginia tobacco" by Star Scientific. Bless 'em.

Very different from the extracted nicotine used in our liquid.

Dissolvables are natural; e-liquid is synthetic. No getting around it.

[Satire]

Perhaps I was mistaken about those dissolvables, I honestly didn't know what was in them I just assumed. Still, they have tobacco products made using tobacco extractions, and all tobacco is chemically treated in some way (including extractions), it doesn't make them any less of a tobacco product. That would be like saying coffee isn't a product of coffee beans because it is chemically extracted using a solvent (water).

Here is the Phillip Morris Patent Application for the products I was thinking of http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2008/0149121.html

A consumable tobacco film strip adapted to dissolve in the oral cavity includes a tobacco component, a binder, a humectant, and optionally a flavorant. The tobacco component can include ground or powdered tobacco and/or a tobacco extract. Tobacco flavoring can be incorporated in the film strip by casting or extruding a mixture or the tobacco component may be added to a film strip after formation of the film. The film strips are adapted to dissolve and provide tobacco satisfaction.



rawr!

[TropicalBob]

Nothing is "extracted" in making dissolvables. They are compressed, powdered tobacco with a sweetener. That's it. No extraction of nicotine. We are not like that. Our e-liquids last saw tobacco somewhere in Cuba! This is not a natural product we use. It's a chemical concoction of untested ingredients of which nicotine is only one we crave. It's a drug. A highly addictive, toxic drug.

I posted this to a Ruyan supplier and it's probably worthy of dissecting in this interesting thread:

"With all the fuss now and fear of bans, it might turn out that only a true disposable like the Ruyan Jazz has any chance of approval. The device must be tamperproof. No taking anything apart. Everything must be sealed as a single unit and the e-cig thrown away when dry and/or dead. That kind of device might -- might -- have a chance at approval since it couldn't kill children or pets.

"I'm looking forward to some day trying the Jazz, but it needs to be cheaper still. If the specs are correct, it's equal to 4 or 5 packs of cigs, for $20 to $25. That's $5 a pack. Now, someone can toss around New York City prices if they want, but packs of cigarettes are about $3 where I live. Using a Jazz would be a significant increased expense for me."

[Satire]

Our friends at Phillip Morris disagree, sir. They have tobacco products with no tobacco leaves in it, and they do not seem to require extra approval for them. The flavorings and PG may be added, but it is a product made with tobacco extractions and therefore classified as a tobacco product, and tobacco is well tested and allowed for adult consumption in all forms, including inhalation and mouth absorption. Energy drinks are also "chemical concoctions" made from all kinds of crazy stuff and not safety tested, but since all the ingredients are not controlled, then the drink is ok to sell. I'm still failing to see any definitive line separating the eliquid from tobacco products.

Also, the eliquids DO have a legal obligation to put the same warnings as other tobacco products on their labels when they are sold commercially, so the suppliers need to get on their game about that, but if it isn't being sold (like if you made it for yourself or friends), and the liquid contains no illegal ingredients, I see no possibility of it being prosecutable. However it is legally required to put those warnings on it to make sure your customers are knowledgeable about the dangers of your product, so any supplier hoping to claim the "tobacco product" rationale might want to start adding these.

[TropicalBob]

What Philip Morris products are you referring to that are tobacco-free? Not the Heatbar, right? That uses tobacco.

I guess we could agree to disagree, but I'll bet no agency concludes e-liquid qualifies for tobacco product regulation. No matter how the liquid is framed. It's a chemical cocktail, not a tobacco product.

[yvilla]

Bob, its the new stuff coming out that Satire's referring to - a thin strip that dissolves in your mouth. It's linked to in the post above.

"Here is the Phillip Morris Patent Application for the products I was thinking of http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2008/0149121.html"

[TropicalBob]

Those are the new dissolvables. I've only used the Star Scientific products. I look forward to those strips, toothpicks and tablets. But note that the strip is a tobacco product, not a nicotine delivery system. The entire patent makes reference to this;

The film strip of claim 1, wherein the tobacco component comprises ground or powdered tobacco with an average particle size of between about 100 nm and 1 mm.

Also note that I have been testing and using tobacco soaked in glycerine that I stuff into empty cartridges, allowing the glycerine to vaporize without the tobacco touching the atomizer. It works. It's a tobacco product. But it doesn't work as well as liquid nicotine solutions. And I have no idea how much nicotine I'm inhaling this way.

[Myk]

They are "the future" today, Rockbassray. They look like something that might be used aboard the Starship Enterprise (and, in fact, could be!).

I picture the non-cigarette looking e-cigs in a Star Wars (which I've never seen) like bar scene.

Our friends at Phillip Morris disagree, sir. They have tobacco products with no tobacco leaves in it, and they do not seem to require extra approval for them. The flavorings and PG may be added, but it is a product made with tobacco extractions and therefore classified as a tobacco product, and tobacco is well tested and allowed for adult consumption in all forms, including inhalation and mouth absorption. Energy drinks are also "chemical concoctions" made from all kinds of crazy stuff and not safety tested, but since all the ingredients are not controlled, then the drink is ok to sell. I'm still failing to see any definitive line separating the eliquid from tobacco products.

Also, the eliquids DO have a legal obligation to put the same warnings as other tobacco products on their labels when they are sold commercially, so the suppliers need to get on their game about that, but if it isn't being sold (like if you made it for yourself or friends), and the liquid contains no illegal ingredients, I see no possibility of it being prosecutable. However it is legally required to put those warnings on it to make sure your customers are knowledgeable about the dangers of your product, so any supplier hoping to claim the "tobacco product" rationale might want to start adding these.

I agree, caffeine added to a drink that it isn't natural to is not a drug. Caffeine tablets are.
Ginseng extracts are not drugs (and I've had some there were more potent than drinking tea).
They tried banning ephedra supplements as a drug because people used it to make meth and the ban was lifted, then it was brought back, now as far as I know it's a behind the counter type thing where they keep track of the purchasers.

[TropicalBob]

Good luck, guys. I see where you're coming from, but I surely don't think it will fly. Our nic liquid is not a tobacco product any more than Nicorette gum or a Big Pharma nicotine inhaler is. Every product containing nicotine will not qualify for tobacco regulation. Witness what happened with nic lip balm or water. We're in that boat.

Aside: I did a full search of the dissolvable patent for the word "nicotine". Not there. Interesting? Yep.

[halopunker]

If they are banning the cartridges just because of the nicotine...a Simple solution to this entire mess would be to have all the nicotine from the cartridges/device be removed.

Then leave it up to the consumer to actually add their own nicotine to their cocktail. But it's entirely too late to change how things have been operating so far.

I've been kicking around the idea of selling only juice/cartridges with 0 Nicotine in it...yet for some reason I don't think the idea will sell to too many customers.