Fallout starting close to home

[DC2]

Question: If juice manufacturers all decided one day to get their nicotine from a different source - tomatoes, let's say. How would that affect the proposed regulations. Granted tobacco has a much higher concentration of nicotine so it is more abundant in this one source. But does that mean that liquids that use nicotine from tomatoes get a free pass?

Mitch Zeller has already said that if it is not derived from tobacco then it can not be regulated as such.
But in my opinion, they would just treat it as a drug, which doesn't help us.

The bottom line, though, is that we won't know until someone tries it.
And my understanding is that there are definitely people preparing to try it.

 

[papergoblin]

Mitch Zeller has already said that if it is not derived from tobacco then it can not be regulated as such.
But in my opinion, they would just treat it as a drug, which doesn't help us.

The bottom line, though, is that we won't know until someone tries it.
And my understanding is that there are definitely people preparing to try it.

I would imagine they'd say once converted to nic. it would be bound by laws covering nic., same as alcohol. Once anything is turned into alcohol it is then governed by whatever regulations are in place. Like you said though, won't know until it's done.

 

[Jman8]

Mike, it's law suit, not suite. I am not the spelling police but that one is rather bothersome. Sorry.

Actually lawsuit is one word. But you were close.

 

[WharfRat1976]

I was making a point...as in LAW SUIT

 

[WharfRat1976]

I was making a point...as in LAW SUIT

Do not start a sentence with Actually and it takes and comma after. You were close as well.

 

[Jman8]

Do not start a sentence with Actually and it takes and comma after. You were close as well.

Actually it doesn't really matter.

 

[skoony]

Mike, it's law suit, not suite. I am not the spelling police but that one is rather bothersome. Sorry.

No problem. I'll just do the right thing and blame spell check.
I'll see if I can get some government agency to regulate it.

Regards
Mike

 

[JMarca]

Do not start a sentence with Actually and it takes and comma after. You were close as well.

Woah, look at you... the spelling police huh? Moving up in the world I see!

 

[Asbestos4004]

"...and it takes and comma after...." It's a grammatical nightmare. I can't take it.

 

[dhood]

Mitch Zeller has already said that if it is not derived from tobacco then it can not be regulated as such.
But in my opinion, they would just treat it as a drug, which doesn't help us.

The bottom line, though, is that we won't know until someone tries it.
And my understanding is that there are definitely people preparing to try it.

There is a startup juice maker here that is trying it using nicotine derived from sources other than tobacco. Guess we'll see how that pans out.

 

[WharfRat1976]

There is a startup juice maker here that is trying it using nicotine derived from sources other than tobacco. Guess we'll see how that pans out.

Yea. Tomato nic. Should have it mastered by oh say, 2073. I am stocking up on Heirloom seeds big time.

 

[Tommy-Chi]

Question: If juice manufacturers all decided one day to get their nicotine from a different source - tomatoes, let's say. How would that affect the proposed regulations. Granted tobacco has a much higher concentration of nicotine so it is more abundant in this one source. But does that mean that liquids that use nicotine from tomatoes get a free pass?

Just throwing that out there.

With the ability to modify DNA, I would think scientists could make any plant produce nicotine, and the better fruit/vegetable to do so with would be one with a lot of water in it, like a tomato or watermelon.

 

[Tommy-Chi]

"...and it takes and comma after...." It's a grammatical nightmare. I can't take it.

 

[papergoblin]

With the ability to modify DNA, I would think scientists could make any plant produce nicotine, and the better fruit/vegetable to do so with would be one with a lot of water in it, like a tomato or watermelon.

Yep, already flavored nic., cut down on the cost for flavorings, lol.

 

[Lessifer]

I haven't made it all the way through thread yet, but there's a reason why many on this forum say that it's user error when a mech mod explodes. That reason is, IT IS ALMOST ALWAYS USER ERROR.

The reason it is almost always user error is, the device itself has no protections. The user is responsible for ensuring the battery wrap is intact, is the proper battery for the application, is in the mod the correct way(if it matters for that mod), that the atomizer to 510 connection doesn't have a short, that the atomizer itself doesn't have a short, and that the resistance is within the operating limit of the battery. The mod does NONE of that.

I would think, with a simple Terms and Conditions agreement, shops could protect themselves from lawsuits when someone makes a mistake.

I would think it would be harder to defend against a device failure, which is almost always the case when a regulated mod goes into thermal runaway, or auto fires, or blows up on a charger.

BTW, the only lawsuit that was found in favor of the plaintiff that I know of, was for a regulated device that burst into flames while charging. There are a few pending law suits involving mechs though.

 

[papergoblin]

I haven't made it all the way through thread yet, but there's a reason why many on this forum say that it's user error when a mech mod explodes. That reason is, IT IS ALMOST ALWAYS USER ERROR.

The reason it is almost always user error is, the device itself has no protections. The user is responsible for ensuring the battery wrap is intact, is the proper battery for the application, is in the mod the correct way(if it matters for that mod), that the atomizer to 510 connection doesn't have a short, that the atomizer itself doesn't have a short, and that the resistance is within the operating limit of the battery. The mod does NONE of that.

I would think, with a simple Terms and Conditions agreement, shops could protect themselves from lawsuits when someone makes a mistake.

I would think it would be harder to defend against a device failure, which is almost always the case when a regulated mod goes into thermal runaway, or auto fires, or blows up on a charger.

BTW, the only lawsuit that was found in favor of the plaintiff that I know of, was for a regulated device that burst into flames while charging. There are a few pending law suits involving mechs though.

Shop owners are going to be sued because of ambulance chasing attorneys. They know they cannot sue the Chinese company so get the next one in the line. There are just too many people out there ready to sue over anything and everything. It just seems that the more advanced of species we become, the stupider the species gets. I think it's that whole survival of the fittest, we squashed that with lawyers.

 

[Lessifer]

So I finally finished reading...

I have one more comment, regarding compassion.

I do feel compassion whenever someone is hurt. I don't feel the need to express my compassion to third or fourth parties. In the ONE case where a person had a "hybrid" mod with a STM vent, and then came on here and posted about it himself, I did express compassion. I also contributed to the others in that thread determining exactly what went wrong and how to avoid it. I do believe the OP of that thread is still a member and vaping today, safer than he was before.

If joevaper posts a link to a news story about unnamed man in notmycity, Kansas, I don't need to express compassion in that thread, because the injured person will never see it. What we do need to do on an informational forum, is attempt to determine exactly what happened, how it happened, and how best to avoid it in the future so that others can learn from the mistakes.

Does that mean we should call people names and deride them? No. I can understand the frustration that leads to that though.

Perhaps ALL mods, regulated or not, should have a warning sticker:
WARNING: contains or for use with Lithium Ion batteries. Please follow proper battery safety.

It won't cut down on the number of accidents because warnings are ignored as they've become ubiquitous, but it might cut down on the number of lawsuits.

 

[DC2]

Perhaps ALL mods, regulated or not, should have a warning sticker:
WARNING: contains or for use with Lithium Ion batteries. Please follow proper battery safety.

While I'm all for warnings, I honestly don't think that goes far enough.

I'm thinking more like this...
WARNING: Improper use of batteries can result in blowing up your face.

I can see why the current slew of warnings don't "go there" but they should.
They need to.

 

[GeorgeS]

I'm sorry but it is all about profit, loss and greed.

The stuff you can buy at the grocery store likely has tamper proof packaging, list of ingredients, date and/or lot code stamped on the packaging. The manufacturers did not include all this out of the "kindness of their hearts" but rather were forced to because they did not have sense enough to do it themselves.

Those thinking that the vaping industry is going to "self regulate" anytime in the near or distant future ought to look at other industries for examples.

 

[Lessifer]

While I'm all for warnings, I honestly don't think that goes far enough.

I'm thinking more like this...
WARNING: Improper use of batteries can result in blowing up your face.

I can see why the current slew of warnings don't "go there" but they should.
They need to.

I understand the intent, but I'm not a fan of "graphic warning labels"

They don't do any good. People see the large black/red/white font of a warning and gloss over it. They could and should be included with every mod, regulated or not, but simply as a legal CYA for the manufacturer and retailer. That is the "protection" America wants. They don't want McDonald's not to serve coffee that is 10 degrees hotter than anyone can drink it, they want a "Warning: Contents are Hot!" on the lid.