E cigs said hazardous

[sob80sup81]

I must say that FDA's lack of interest in having a firm decision on e-cig affects many other countries' FDA-like authorities in perceiving e-cig. Recently Indonesia's food and drug supervision board issued a statement on the danger and legal status of e-cig, i have also heard similar story in Singapore.

None of these authorities interested to have their own test on e-cig, then why shouldn't e-cig industry provide their own test to publish? It's their moral responsibility nonetheless.

 

[Sardonic]

I did not know that about cigars, I'd like to see some sources on that because that info is relevant.
I would like some quality control on the juice though, God knows what people are putting in there or how they're making them in some kitchen sink in Calcutta.

Well, cigar manufacturers don't have to provide any safety testing, in fact the FDA has never said anything about them. A typical cigar has about as much tobacco as two packs of cigs or MORE, and yet they are consumed much more rapidly. True, most people don't inhale much cigar smoke, but I did. Got me alot more buzzed that sucking down 10ml of 24mg juice in a day. They have PG in them, as well as aditives, flavoring etc. Technically, they are much worse that e-cigs because of the CO, tar and other chemicals being burned. The FDA never thought about stepping on the cigar industry. I don't really see why e-cig companies should have to prove anything, seeing as how vaporized PG and VG inhalation studies have already been done. As long as their juice is free from KNOWN toxins(ie that bad batch of chinese juice the FDA tested), then I don't see the problem. It is the FDA who is claiming they are dangerous, so the burden of proof should be for them in our system of gov't in the US.

 

[LowThudd]

Here is an interesting article: FDA Tobacco Regulator Promises Firm Approach, Open Mind - WSJ.com

So, the new honcho for the FDA tobacco regulation IS looking into cigar regulation. But he also points to looking at new technology reguarding harm reduction. Maybe this guy has some sense in his head and won't go after an e-cig ban.

 

[MoonRose]

"Banning menthol cigarettes, which account for about a third of the U.S. cigarette market, could result in the rise of a large, illegal sector in which the government garners no tax revenue from sales, said Nik Modi, an analyst with UBS."

Here's your red flag on this article, it all comes back down to the money.

 

[Luisa]

Here is an interesting article: FDA Tobacco Regulator Promises Firm Approach, Open Mind - WSJ.com

So, the new honcho for the FDA tobacco regulation IS looking into cigar regulation. But he also points to looking at new technology reguarding harm reduction. Maybe this guy has some sense in his head and won't go after an e-cig ban.

Don"t get your hopes up. The article was printed in May and look at the actions of the FDA. They are certainly not friends of ecigs.

 

[Vocalek]

I must say that FDA's lack of interest in having a firm decision on e-cig affects many other countries' FDA-like authorities in perceiving e-cig. Recently Indonesia's food and drug supervision board issued a statement on the danger and legal status of e-cig, i have also heard similar story in Singapore.

None of these authorities interested to have their own test on e-cig, then why shouldn't e-cig industry provide their own test to publish? It's their moral responsibility nonetheless.

Lack of testing isn't the problem. Many e-cig companies haver tested their products. Read the reports linked here.

CASAA.org


If the FDA speaks, the media listens. When it's an e-cig company, their press release is pretty much ignored.

And then the FDA shills (i.e., the ALA, AHA, ACS, CTFK, AMA, etc.) say, "Only one study has been conducted." Translation: "Only one study that we like has been conducted. We pretend all the other studies never happened."

 

[LowThudd]

Lack of testing isn't the problem. Many e-cig companies haver tested their products. Read the reports linked here.

CASAA.org


If the FDA speaks, the media listens. When it's an e-cig company, their press release is pretty much ignored.

And then the FDA shills (i.e., the ALA, AHA, ACS, CTFK, AMA, etc.) say, "Only one study has been conducted." Translation: "Only one study that we like has been conducted. We pretend all the other studies never happened."

Very well said!

 

[NCC]

From the article posted in #1, there is (as of now) a link to this one ...
Thai device power car with water
Treating mobile electrolysis of water as a realistic possibility for powering a car? Just saying, consider the source.

And, I have to add, I've seen much more damning articles on electronic cigarettes, from much more credible sources.


EDIT: Sorry, I just noticed this thread originated two years ago. And admit I didn't read 86 of the posts in it.

 

[LowThudd]

EDIT: Sorry, I just noticed this thread originated two years ago. And admit I didn't read 86 of the posts in it.

LOL. Who has? lol

 

[SeriousLevity]

Wow! Not quite sure what to think just yet.

 

[NCC]

Wow! Not quite sure what to think just yet.

What ever conclusion you come to, please don't base it on this outdated fabrication.

 

[SeriousLevity]

I would seriously doubt that a foreign government would be taking it's cue's on health related issues from many more sources than the W.H.O. and their leadership which is obviously influenced by western policy and interests.

Again I say follow the money, find the truth. The problem is that the money trail is an enigma which takes great effort to dissect, unravel and reconstitute.

I have very little respect for scientific data originating from third world countries. However, just like all crusades we must remember that the ultimate battle is to win the harts and minds of the masses. The means to that end are of no consequence to the victor.