FDA Lawsuits more concerning

[englishmick]

And I do find the trend in these suits to be ANTZ driven, and orchestrated to align with timing from FDA regulations, due out very soon (as I think we all know).

I'm not convinced that there's a need to invoke antz conspiracies or anything else to explain the activities of ambulance chasing lawyers. Someone gets hurt in a battery accident. It gets in the news with gory pictures. A lawyer sees it, calls the injured party, and tells them they might be in line for a big payoff.

 

[skoony]

Well, if you have no link, then I'm going to stand by idea that it was ANTZ driven. Given what you've said, it strongly reads as such.

ETA: I found link on it: Minnesota Litigation

Now, I have no doubts that it was ANTZ driven.

No one is saying it wasn't aNTZ approved. Even the ANTZ were ...... as
no smoker ever received one penny from the settlement.
Even today as the legislature is looking at this again there are those
that remember that we are meeting the goals and there are plans to
do without the settlement agreement.
Mike

 

[Jman8]

I'm not convinced that there's a need to invoke antz conspiracies or anything else to explain the activities of ambulance chasing lawyers. Someone gets hurt in a battery accident. It gets in the news with gory pictures. A lawyer sees it, calls the injured party, and tells them they might be in line for a big payoff.

You don't think ambulance chasing lawyers have an agenda and/or serve an agenda?

Do you think ANTZ exist? If yes, how would you prove this?

 

[Kent C]

I'm not convinced that there's a need to invoke antz conspiracies or anything else to explain the activities of ambulance chasing lawyers. Someone gets hurt in a battery accident. It gets in the news with gory pictures. A lawyer sees it, calls the injured party, and tells them they might be in line for a big payoff.

I doubt there's any direct 'ANTZ' link, however, when you see story after story about how harmful ecigs can be - from ANTZ and ANTZ funded studies, then it sets up an atmosphere where someone could blame an accident on ecigs and it looks like 'just another problem with ecigs'. And acceptable to the press that reports both types of incidences. A 'piling on' if you will - when in fact, there was no real 'tackle' to begin with - iow - our studies have shown the lies and junk science that has shown ecigs to be harmful when they are not.

 

[Jman8]

I doubt there's any direct 'ANTZ' link, however, when you see story after story about how harmful ecigs can be - from ANTZ and ANTZ funded studies, then it sets up an atmosphere where someone could blame an accident on ecigs and it looks like 'just another problem with ecigs'. And acceptable to the press that reports both types of incidences. A 'piling on' if you will - when in fact, there was no real 'tackle' to begin with - iow - our studies have shown the lies and junk science that has shown ecigs to be harmful when they are not.

And they've already been sued due to the inherently harmful nature of their products. Everyone knows this to be the case. Why would you even deny it?

As if the results of these suits will be "Plaintiffs were wrong, eCigs are completely harmless!"

 

[AndriaD]

Yeah... Believing that people should be able to File a Lawsuit is Definitely a Rain on the Parade Move.

LOL

It has nothing to do with that. It has to do with everything you've ever said indicating that soon, vaping will cease to exist. I disagree. No matter what the FDA or any other gov't body does, they can't dematerialize my rebuildable atties or the nicotine in my freezer. And they cannot force me to comply.

Personally, I'm in favor of lawsuits brought by people who've been lied to, against businesses who've done the lying. Class action is pretty much the only way for "regular" (not billionaire) people to seek redress. However, no matter how much I sympathize with those who've been lied to, the fact remains that the ANTZ will be all over these lawsuits, going "See? SEE??? We TOLD you that stuff was baaaaaad!" In that way, Jman has a valid point.

Andria

 

[AndriaD]

hope you enjoy underground market as well.

I don't have a single problem with a black market. I've been a customer of that market for over 30 yrs now, and not dead yet. If I have to get vape stuff from "a guy I know" as I get that "other stuff," that's fine, other than the fact that it will probably cost a good deal more than it does now -- though I suspect that if the FDA gets their way, buying nicotine legally, if allowed at all, will cost even more than from "a guy I know." That's *really* what I suspect ALL of this is about... to scare us to death, afraid that they're about to 'ban" vaping.. so that when, instead, they merely stick a 500% tax on it, vapers will breathe a sigh of relief, oh thank goodness they didn't ban it. In that case, then the black market will probably be LESS costly than legal channels. Like cigarettes in NY.

Andria

 

[AndriaD]

I did receive, as part of that settlement, MN state govt.-issued, FDA-approved smoking treatment in the form of free patches. I think they were distributed through meetings at the AM Lung Association. I loved what the doctor who distributed them told us. "I"m supposed to tell you that you shouldn't smoke while using the patch, but if it were really that dangerous, most people who used them would get sick, since most people feel the need to smoke at the same time."

I guess they gave out what they considered move valuable than money.

I actually did "slip" and smoke while wearing a patch... ONCE. The nausea and racing pounding heart made it so ungodly, I simply yanked the stupid patch off and didn't bother with them anymore, since they don't work -- you STILL get cravings, which have little or nothing to do with nicotine -- in fact, patches gave me so much nicotine, I had heart palpitations... and still craved a cigarette.

Andria

 

[NoFumus]

I actually did "slip" and smoke while wearing a patch... ONCE. The nausea and racing pounding heart made it so ungodly, I simply yanked the stupid patch off and didn't bother with them anymore, since they don't work -- you STILL get cravings, which have little or nothing to do with nicotine -- in fact, patches gave me so much nicotine, I had heart palpitations... and still craved a cigarette.

Andria

Best I accomplished while on patches was to cut back on cigs. Oh, and I tended to leave them on, just adding a new the next day, in the hopes that the old one still had a bit of nic left.

 

[AndriaD]

Best I accomplished while on patches was to cut back on cigs. Oh, and I tended to leave them on, just adding a new the next day, in the hopes that the old one still had a bit of nic left.

It's never been about nicotine for me -- it's about the behavior primarily, followed closely by the whole tobacco alkaloids -- which is 95% nicotine, but without the rest of the alkaloid cocktail, just nicotine is nearly useless to me; I've never vaped higher than 10mg, because anything higher just made me nauseous, but it's taken me 11 months to reduce my WTA percentage from 10% to currently 1.2%.

Andria

 

[OldBatty]

Best I accomplished while on patches was to cut back on cigs. Oh, and I tended to leave them on, just adding a new the next day, in the hopes that the old one still had a bit of nic left.

They lasted about 30 hours for me. Tried that schedule awhile to save money but every forth day it meant a fresh patch at bedtime. Not advisable unless you enjoy extremely vivid dreams!

 

[zoiDman]

It has nothing to do with that. It has to do with everything you've ever said indicating that soon, vaping will cease to exist. I disagree. No matter what the FDA or any other gov't body does, they can't dematerialize my rebuildable atties or the nicotine in my freezer. And they cannot force me to comply.

Personally, I'm in favor of lawsuits brought by people who've been lied to, against businesses who've done the lying. Class action is pretty much the only way for "regular" (not billionaire) people to seek redress. However, no matter how much I sympathize with those who've been lied to, the fact remains that the ANTZ will be all over these lawsuits, going "See? SEE??? We TOLD you that stuff was baaaaaad!" In that way, Jman has a valid point.

Andria

Then I think you have me Confused with another Member.

Because I am the One who believes that e-Cigarettes will Never be Banned. Heavily Regulated and PMTA's that only BT and BV can achieve, Sure. But Not Banned. Because the Feds/States want to use e-Cigarettes as a Tax Vehicle. Just like they used Regular Cigarettes the same way.

Here is what I posted in the TVECA Thread when talking about e-Cigarettes wanting to be Banned. A post BTW that you put a Like on...

OK...

So the Federal Government, who is Made of States who are Just Begging to Tax the Living Snit out of e-Liquids, wants to Ban e-Cigarettes.

And that Same Federal Government, who is 19 Trillion or so in the Hole, is going to Turn Their Backs on a 4 Billion/Year (2015 Dollars) Taxable Market by Banning e-Cigarettes.

Why on God's Earth would they (anyone) Want to do That?

Deeming/GF Date doesn't need to be Changed for BT and a few BV's to control the Market. And with so few Players, and the Money goes in Less Pockets. But those Pockets get More. Much More.

Just Doesn't make sense for Anyone to Ban e-Cigarettes.

---

Good to hear that you believe that Individuals should have the Right to bring a Lawsuit against an e-Cigarette Company (or any company) if they feel they have been Wronged.

I feel the Exact same way that You do.

 

[YoursTruli]

So much for no personal attacks.... Playing the ANTZ card is a copout, it's easy for the self-aggrandizing to throw it out on the table in ploy to shut down the debate, curry favor and cast aspersions on the character of others here that do not fall in line with their rhetoric, but, it's not the trump card that those who (constantly) choose to use it have come to make themselves believe. Rather, this tactic tends to diminish or dismiss any point they were trying to make.

 

[zapped]

I thought zoid was an ANTZ troll for probably the first 6 months I was here. But over time I changed my opinion; now I just think he's a pessimist who likes to rain on the vaping parade -- but he's in good company on that around here, with everyone saying that vaping is about to be abolished or banned or some such garbage. It will never be abolished as long as there is anyone with a rebuildable atty, nic in the freezer, and the gumption to make their own ejuice. I haven't bought any ejuice for probably 6 months, so if it's "effectively banned", it's no skin off my nose. I haven't bought blisterpak coils in way over a year, so if they go the way of the dinosaur, I don't care.

Yes it's very sad for those who still smoke, but I do not think that any "effective ban" will stand for too long, before it's challenged in the courts and eventually overturned. It's overreach pure and simple, and I think the courts will remedy that. If in fact the office in the white house doesn't do it first.

Andria

I agree with much of what you said here, particularly the parts bolded in blue.

As for the last part, surely youre joking right?

The current administration in Washington is responsible for a very large part of the overreach were seeing in regards to vaping...and in a lot of other areas of our lives as well.

 

[AndriaD]

Then I think you have me Confused with another Member.

Because I am the One who believes that e-Cigarettes will Never be Banned. Heavily Regulated and PMTA's that only BT and BV can achieve, Sure. But Not Banned. Because the Feds/States want to use e-Cigarettes as a Tax Vehicle. Just like they used Regular Cigarettes the same way.

And the more I read of this sort of thing, the more I did change my opinion (that you were an ANTZ troll). Because I also came to this realization, that they're scaring the hell out of us now so that later when they impose ridiculous taxes, vapers will sigh in relief that it wasn't banned, just ridiculously and egregiously taxed.

I think the FDA, along with the ANTZ, probably *would prefer* for vaping to just disappear. But I also think that they're aware that that isn't going to happen, and they probably even realize how unethical it would be for them to MAKE it disappear -- and what they really want is money anyway (money is power, after all), so they'll "settle" for taxing us out the yin-yang -- but in order for them to "justify" their "sin tax", they have to make a big lie about vaping being dangerous.

Andria

 

[AndriaD]

I agree with much of what you said here, particularly the parts bolded in blue.

As for the last part, surely youre joking right?

The current administration in Washington is responsible for a very large part of the overreach were seeing in regards to vaping...and in a lot of other areas of our lives as well.

Well, I admit it's a faint hope, but they haven't done anything yet, so the hope hasn't been entirely squashed. I try to be optimistic rather than throwing out "negative vibes."

Andria

 

[Jman8]

So much for no personal attacks....

Record shows who began that tangent...

Playing the ANTZ card is a copout, it's easy for the self-aggrandizing to throw it out on the table in ploy to shut down the debate

Self aggrandizing sounds like a personal attack. Who might you be speaking of when you say that?

Carl Phillips of CASAA leadership uses the term a lot of the time. Would you say the same thing to him?

How about just sticking to the thread's notion that a trend of lawsuits are visibly occurring against vaping vendors, all claiming that vendors are lying? Instead you take issue with ANTZ use of term. Guess what? I'm not going to back down from that claim.

curry favor and cast aspersions on the character of others here that do not fall in line with their rhetoric

As you are doing in this post?

but, it's not the trump card that those who (constantly) choose to use it have come to make themselves believe. Rather, this tactic tends to diminish or dismiss any point they were trying to make.

Point has been stated in this post and in the OP, and yet those put off by use of word "ANTZ" only want to make the thread about that.

Me, I'm convinced our actual adversaries are orchestrating these lawsuits. Can't prove it, but can stick to the notion that trial lawyers have suddenly taken a keen interest in going after several vaping vendors based on idea that they are lying to their consumers. IMO, all vaping vendors could be nailed on same account. Those who say "if you've lied, you should be sued" are essentially saying all vaping vendors should be sued. IMO, you may as well just say, "as long as your product isn't completely harmless, you should be regulated" and then advocate that no one ever fight any regulations. Those that still wish to fight regulations and who may apply any sort of labels to those who seek to employ onerous regulations, we can just say they are engaging in character assassination tactics.

You know, in an attempt to end the debate.

 

[DC2]

I doubt there's any direct 'ANTZ' link, however, when you see story after story about how harmful ecigs can be - from ANTZ and ANTZ funded studies, then it sets up an atmosphere where someone could blame an accident on ecigs and it looks like 'just another problem with ecigs'. And acceptable to the press that reports both types of incidences. A 'piling on' if you will - when in fact, there was no real 'tackle' to begin with - iow - our studies have shown the lies and junk science that has shown ecigs to be harmful when they are not.

[/THREAD]

 

[DC2]

They lasted about 30 hours for me. Tried that schedule awhile to save money but every forth day it meant a fresh patch at bedtime. Not advisable unless you enjoy extremely vivid dreams!

I've been thinking about trying patches for the vivid dreams I've been told about.
Because, yeah, I'm that kind of person.


Although I hear that Chantix can cause incredibly vivid dreams.
But I'm not sure that kind of vivid dreams is something I'd like to experience.

 

[DC2]

I feel the Exact same way that You do.

I stand in opposition to the idea that they want to tax rather than ban.
Taxing is the secondary goal, should the first goal fail.

So if you and AndriaD have found common ground, I'll go ahead and stand in opposition.
We have to keep the thread interesting.


EDIT: I didn't even know that you and AndriaD had a thing going on
EDIT: I'm usually up on these things
EDIT: