First of 8,000 lawsuits against Big Smoke for addicting consumers to a deadly product

[keys]

You are right. It is about perception. And this will require education. I just hope that the common sense of nicotine being available unattached to the evil cigarette, can be made in time. I think the argument just has to be simply on the offense.

Those who do not want e-cigs available want people to die.

There is no other way, because they will want to twist it into being about the negative impact of nic addition and how this is a major health concern. It is. But only as it relates to tobacco. And that's where the change needs to be made. Nicotine is probably no more harmful than caffeine (and studies indicate that, outside of severly hypertensive people, caffeine is actually a mild health plus).

We need to say to anyone against e-cigs: why do you want people to die? Why are you in favor of cancer?

We need to be on the offense when the time comes. t's hard to argue in favor of cancer.

Being against e-cigs is like those people who have a problem with condoms to prevent STDs. They say you simply shouldn't have sex if you want to remain disease free. And they will say you shouldn't have e-cigs because of the addictive nature of nicotine. But people want both sex and nicotine (usually right after).

So why not simply do what is in the best interest and what is for the greater good? Nicotine. Caffeine. Same thing. Mild stimulant. If people can't quit, at least they should be able to take this creative solution and live.

[coppull]

Keys, iam fascinated and completely in agreement with your views. Put another way iam worried about societys view of e-cigs, and sometimes worry myself that ecigs are"too good to be true". Governments around the world have pushed so much anti tobacco propaganda, that people will hit out at even safe alternatives to cigarettes.

[Myk]

Originally Posted by Kate

You accept the risk when the risks are made clear but some companies pretend their products are not dangerous. That's what tobacco companies used to say.

Esmoking sellers will have to answer to claims for selling a toxic, addictive chemical to us without clear warnings and proper packaging if they are not more careful.

The tobacco companies used to market cigarettes as increasing health, not just not dangerous. Compared to e-cigs they were, "a healthy alternative to breathing."

Maybe some distributors but RS clearly says they are intended as a smoking alternative or a cessation device. They clearly outline that you are to lessen your nicotine levels. (At least as clear as can be expected when written by an obvious native Chinese speaker.)

I don't know how it works in your country but here warnings are government mandated. Legal disclaimers are what individuals do to cover themselves, and I have seen disclaimers at some distributors.

[Kate]

Yeah, unfortunately there are still plenty of rogues around claiming NRT, it's not allowed here but some still do it. The only eliquid I've seen with warnings, ingredients list etc is Wicked. Some others now use child safe caps but there is still a long way to go unfortunately.

[Kate]

In the UK the Advertising Standards Committee have this code about marketing - The CAP Code Index

Some of the relevant things it says are:

All marketing communications should be legal, decent, honest and truthful

All marketing communications should be prepared with a sense of responsibility to consumers and to society.

The Code is applied in the spirit as well as in the letter.

Marketers should deal fairly with consumers.

Before distributing or submitting a marketing communication for publication, marketers must hold documentary evidence to prove all claims, whether direct or implied, that are capable of objective substantiation.

If there is a significant division of informed opinion about any claims made in a marketing communication they should not be portrayed as generally agreed.

Marketers should not exploit the credulity, lack of knowledge or inexperience of consumers.

No marketing communication should mislead, or be likely to mislead, by inaccuracy, ambiguity, exaggeration, omission or otherwise.

Marketing communications should not condone or encourage unsafe practices. Particular care should be taken with marketing communications addressed to or depicting children

Marketers should hold signed and dated proof, including a contact address, for any testimonial they use. Unless they are genuine opinions taken from a published source, testimonials should be used only with the written permission of those giving them.

Testimonials alone do not constitute substantiation and the opinions expressed in them must be supported, where necessary, with independent evidence of their accuracy. Any claims based on a testimonial must conform with the Code

Unless they are genuine statements taken from a published source, references to tests, trials, professional endorsements, research facilities and professional journals should be used only with the permission of those concerned.

Marketers should not display a trust mark, quality mark or equivalent without having obtained the necessary authorisation. Marketers must not claim that they, or any other entity that features in their marketing communications, or their products have been approved, endorsed or authorised by a public or private body if it has not or without complying with the terms of the approval.

Guarantees may be legally binding on those offering them. The word 'guarantee' should not be used in a way that could cause confusion about consumers' legal rights. Substantial limitations on the guarantee should be spelled out in the marketing communication. Before commitment, consumers should be able to obtain the full terms of the guarantee from marketers.

Marketers should inform consumers about the nature and extent of any additional rights provided by the guarantee, over and above those given to them by law, and should make clear how to obtain redress.

Marketing communications should not mislead consumers about who manufactures the product.


I noticed one UK supplier implies that their products are approved by the medicines regulatory authority and also that they are quit smoking devices.

[Texas]

It just makes me sick to read all the statements that a lot of these websites are claiming this to be.. They are the ones that are going to make a good thing bad...

I really think we all need to email each and every website that we find and let them know to not do this because they will in turn loose out in the long run...