Action regarding FDA: No banter here, please

[zero7starz]

I say we find a complete list, of every chemical the FDA has against whats in our liquid, and find every product that has the same chemical in it, and shove it in their face. Scare everyone into not wanting to use ANYTHING... and just keep doing it until they can come clean.

I mean what about all those TRUTH commercials that they used to do against tobacco? (Lately they're big thing is above the influence but its the same thing) lets shed some light on what the FDA is trying to do.

 

[frankie1]

Here is a site where the government is actually ASKING for input into the FDA's implementation of its authority. Pay particular attention to Ira Huff's comment. This person addresses the e cig question. I will try to post the link. Then once there, you can view other people's comments from a link at the bottom right side of the page and you can post your comment. Maybe we all should express our opinion.

I thought the dissertation about the positioning of Phillip Morris (Marlboro) was spot on!

Here is the link (hopefully...)


fda dot gov front slash tobacco products front slash ucm171216 dot htm

 

[UrbanCowboy]

Here is a site where the government is actually ASKING for input into the FDA's implementation of its authority. Pay particular attention to Ira Huff's comment. This person addresses the e cig question. I will try to post the link. Then once there, you can view other people's comments from a link at the bottom right side of the page and you can post your comment. Maybe we all should express our opinion.

I thought the dissertation about the positioning of Phillip Morris (Marlboro) was spot on!

Here is the link (hopefully...)


fda dot gov front slash tobacco products front slash ucm171216 dot htm

fda.gov./tabaccoproducts/ucm1771216.htm

if thats the url then it goes no where.

 

[frankie1]

Urban cowboy...take out the dot after gov and I think it will work

 

[UrbanCowboy]

Urban cowboy...take out the dot after gov and I think it will work

Still nothing. Post the link you used but put a few spaces in.

 

[frankie1]

Oh and fix the spelling of tobacco and take out the extra 7 in the number. I am sorry for the problem, but I cannot post links because I haven't been a member long enough.

 

[UrbanCowboy]

Oh and fix the spelling of tobacco and take out the extra 7 in the number. I am sorry for the problem, but I cannot post links because I haven't been a member long enough.

Lol, its all me not being able to read.

fda.gov/tobaccoproducts/ucm171216.htm

Hope that works

or not.. Anyone else see the problem?

 

[frankie1]

Urban...I tried that but couldn't....will try again below

www . http / / fda. gov/ TobaccoProducts/ ucm171216. htm

I am on the page now!

 

[frankie1]

According to a Jed Rose, Duke University, they are researching alternative nicotine inhalers at Duke. Maybe getting researchers interested in these products would lend some scientific weight to the use of them?

 

[jen28f]

fda.gov./tabaccoproducts/ucm1771216.htm

if thats the url then it goes no where.

you spelled tobacco wrong and have an extra dot...here is the corrected url

FDA Seeks Your Input on Tobacco Regulation

 

[frankie1]

Well, I posted a comment, will have to wait to see if it shows up! I guess the FDA moderates

 

[CattMurry]

I'm not sure we should post there.....
The E-cig is NOT A TOBACCO PRUDUCT and in no way, shape or form should it be part of the FDA's "implementation of its historic new authority overseeing tobacco products in the United States"

The more we can distance ourselves from tobacco the better right?

My fear is that when the PVs (e-cigs) are taxed, they will try and put the same type of "sin/public health risk taxes" on them as they do with analogs. Then I couldn't afford to vap as well.
Just my 2 cents worth (and that might be all it's worth)

 

[frankie1]

I agree that personal vaporizers are not tobacco related. The problem is that they are nicotine related and nicotine is a drug. FDA will keep personal vaporizers as their target. Big government just wants to get bigger. IMHO

 

[sherid]

I'm not sure we should post there.....
The E-cig is NOT A TOBACCO PRUDUCT and in no way, shape or form should it be part of the FDA's "implementation of its historic new authority overseeing tobacco products in the United States"

The more we can distance ourselves from tobacco the better right?

My fear is that when the PVs (e-cigs) are taxed, they will try and put the same type of "sin/public health risk taxes" on them as they do with analogs. Then I couldn't afford to vap as well.
Just my 2 cents worth (and that might be all it's worth)

Think very carefully about that. If you distance from tobacco, you align with drug companies. Do you want a product that requires doctor's visits, prescriptions, and tastes like crap with no vapor? That is what you will get if BP gets control. Most of us could never afford or want such products. Cost of doctor visit each month: $125, cost of prescription $100-200