Search results

Our best hope is that the FDA, after having its ... handed to it in both the district and appeals courts, will not try to push its luck on top of it by proposing unreasonable regulations. Also, there's a public hearing period, right? If yes, that may be even more the reason for the FDA to "tone...

No offense OP, but with your limited post count and this statement right here: ...it's hard to read your thread as anything but an attempt to help generate lots of hype, go viral, and actually get our products banned through the mail. Call me a skeptic, but I recommend that nobody share this...

I'd also like to point out that it's difficult (impossible really) to be proactive against an evil, greedy, power-hungry organization that has already made up its mind on the subject. The potential to lose money is so threatening to Big Pharma (who is really holding the strings that control the...

I received the same letter (email). It did indeed come from "The White House info@messages.whitehouse.gov via service.govdelivery.com" as the sender. Whatever you said, Bill. Without going into too much of a rant, I echo your thoughts. Why in the world is the government spamming us just because...

My guess is the FDA will place the burden on the supplier to show that their products are legal...which is a nightmare for a large majority of suppliers. It's times like this when groups like CASAA will be invaluable for the industry. Hopefully everything about the pre-2/15/07 prototypes will be...

I'd also like to add my disgust to the many others who commented in this thread. Doesn't the FDA need to apply reasonable regulations to ecigs (and other reduced harm tobacco products), according to the spirit of Judge Leon's ruling? Allowing only exact copies of a 4081 or 801 3-piece design...

The FDA says this: '6. Question: If a manufacturer markets a cigarette as "Brand X" on February 15, 2007, and, after that date, continues to market Brand X but also begins to market the identical cigarette under the additional name "Brand Y," would "Brand Y" be a "new tobacco product," and...

Based off of the stats from these reports alone, a good argument could be made that, just like with flavored cigarettes, ecig usage among children would also increase if the products were forced underground. And anyone who denies such a connection would in essence be calling one of the two...

They’re on the 2009 FDA report, right next to the stats for TSNAs contained in the Nicotrol inhaler.

It looks like that thread was locked. The forum Mod sent me a PM explaining that it was TomCowley's last post (with personal attacks directed towards me) which caused the thread to be closed. I thought science-minded people would be more accepting of electronic cigarettes than the general...

Elaine, you made it! :) When you do something good, there's no need to apologize.

If I were still posting in that thread, I would link this appropriate article: Shills at NY Times Spew the Same Propaganda as CASAA and Our House

Probably. Or maybe a shill for FDA or Big Pharma. As my wife just pointed out to me, it's reasonable to expect spokespeople from any of those groups to come into threads badmouthing ecigs. Too bad they wasted their money on such awful posting.

Thanks Roly/CJ for getting involved. I'm not sure if I'm allowed to post in that thread anymore, but at least there's a nice debate to watch from the sidelines now. Really hoping VocalEK can come by soon and start busting heads. :)

Yeah. I am sooo heated and on life tilt right now. Try to help out...

Ugh...got the opposite result from what was expected of this thread. Instead of having ECF gurus jump in and help out in the other forum, some lurker from this forum pops in and posts the following in that thread: So irritating and frustrating that the truths about ecigarettes can't even be...

I realize this isn't exactly news, so mods feel free to move if necessary, but this is my home subforum on ECF so I'm posting here. Basically, this is the scoop: My wife had an ecig distributorship for years and I have been getting more and more involved over time. We've even released our own...

It is definitely conceivable that BT would be willing to throw smokeless products (along with ecigs) under the bus in order to protect their much larger cigarette interests. Compared to the number of cigarette smokers, the combined number of smokeless tobacco users is minuscule. And a high RYO...

Ok good. I knew the bill seemed too bad to be false. :p

It depends upon the intent of the tobacco tax laws. If taxes are (still) intended to be applied based on harm*, it should theoretically be difficult for Congress to tax ecigarettes unreasonably with the legal precedence set by Judge Leon and the US Court of Appeals. However... For years on...