Well done, DC2, well done!
And I agree with KentC, we need to stress, at every opportunity, that FDA's use of "exit," is a cowardly way of trying to avoid saying "this rule will drive many ecig manufacturers out of business."
Excellent! If memory serves, when I joined ECF and then CASAA about a year ago, there were around 5,000 members. Let's see that this growth rate continues!!!
Welcome to ECF, Keshnai, and thank you for joining CASAA! You'll be able to PM once you get 5 posts under your belt:
From: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/new-members-information/78262-new-members-how-many-posts-do-i-need.html
Thank you, SingedVapor, for starting this thread. I see it as a place we can talk about feelings, when "feelings" wouldn't be appropriate to the more technical discussions happening in other threads.
I have been sick this past week. Reading the deemings and impace analysis has prompted...
Echoing an earlier post: Joining CASAA may well be the most important thing you do today! Numbers count. It's free, it's quick, it's easy. Please....
Click on "Help us" below.
Soooo.... Mr. Allan is saying that the FDA's rule, the purpose of which is to Save the Children, is a failure? Nothing will ever be enough for these people, will it?
I'm going to split hairs here on the local usage bans (because frankly I'm too exhausted by deeming-induced anger and frustration to talk about economic impact analysis): Putting ecigs and vaping under the federal "tobacco products" umbrella won't necessarily change any local laws restricting...
I'm with the Bear. We are not in a negotiation with FDA, where compromise is an accepted tactic. This is war.
I submit that anyone who believes that FDA is willing to compromise on its stance against ecigs is sadly delusional.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.