25 states have banned e-cigarette sales to minors despite opposition by CTFK, ACS, AHA, ALA

[stevegmu]

Exactly! ANd why should e-cigs be held to higher standards or even banned online when analogs aren't? "Some crazy thinkin' right there!"

Other than sketchy Russian and E. European sites, where can cigarettes be bought online? Little cigars and stuff your own tobacco, yes, but not cigarettes. That is, of course, if by analogs you mean cigarettes?

 

[eteach]

Australia banned all sales of tobacco and e-cigs to under 18's but i still find it difficult to believe that the legal drinking age is 21 in usa .... lmfao

 

[stevegmu]

Australia banned all sales of tobacco and e-cigs to over 18's but i still find it difficult to believe that the legal drinking age is 21 in usa .... lmfao

There is no minimum legal drinking age in the US. It is up to individual states to set an age.

 

[Angiebubs]

Other than sketchy Russian and E. European sites, where can cigarettes be bought online? Little cigars and stuff your own tobacco, yes, but not cigarettes. That is, of course, if by analogs you mean cigarettes?

I didn't spend enough time checking the cig websites to see where they were coming from. However, I know of many people that buy US cigs from Indian reservations regularly as they are cheaper.

 

[stevegmu]

I didn't spend enough time checking the cig websites to see where they were coming from. However, I know of many people that buy US cigs from Indian reservations regularly as they are cheaper.

If it is from a reservation, they voluntarily use age verification, or none. They are basically their own nations. Certain tribes even have their own passports.

 

[ennagizer]

There is no minimum legal drinking age in the US. It is up to individual states to set an age.

Just to clarify - The National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 required States to legislate 21 as the minimum age for purchasing and publicly possessing alcohol. What the act didn't do is set the minimum age of consumption, which is still up to individual states. Many states permit underage drinking in certain circumstances & locations, which varies by state.

Edit: Forgot to add that states that don't have 21 as the minimum age lose federal highway funding dollars. So, in effect, states can set the age, but if it's under 21 they lose federal money.

 

[stevegmu]

Just to clarify - The National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 required States to legislate 21 as the minimum age for purchasing and publicly possessing alcohol. What the act didn't do is set the minimum age of consumption, which is still up to individual states. Many states permit underage drinking in certain circumstances & locations, which varies by state.

Yes, I said drinking, not purchasing or possessing.

 

[ennagizer]

Yes, I said drinking, not purchasing or possessing.

Yupp, just wanted to clarify for others that might read the post.

 

[Angiebubs]

If it is from a reservation, they voluntarily use age verification, or none. They are basically their own nations. Certain tribes even have their own passports.

Exactly my point-analogs can be bought online by minors with little to no effort needed by those selling, so again-I do not understand why e-cigs are being targeted.

 

[zoiDman]

Yupp, just wanted to clarify for others that might read the post.

I like that ennagizer.

Because you would be Amazed at just how many people read these ECF Threads.

 

[randomhousegir]

Thats funny that you have to be 19 to buy vape gear, but you can start smoking real cigarettes at 18.... Sounds fishy to me.

In utah tou have to be 19 for tobacco. Its not just vape

sent from my phone via tapatalk 2 because I can't stop reading and posting on ECF

 

[stevegmu]

Exactly my point-analogs can be bought online by minors with little to no effort needed by those selling, so again-I do not understand why e-cigs are being targeted.

Do a little research on Indian reservations and you will understand.

 

[Uma]

Exactly my point-analogs can be bought online by minors with little to no effort needed by those selling, so again-I do not understand why e-cigs are being targeted.

Because if our generation stops smoking and stops big Pharma patches and gums, and the next generation follows suit (some are in the progress already, of switching). There won't be anybody left to collect cigarette taxes off. There will be a lull between those taxes and the new sin taxes called not smoking taxes. Ie. vaping, soda, sugar, obesity, ... (In the planning stages, but they need a few more years of brainwashing the public to take a self righteous judgemental stand and stand up and yell, hell ya, tax those toothless air hogging fat sobs)


edit.. Correcting auto corrector
And to add that there will also be a lull between big Pharmas patch gum investment and new big Pharmas
Super duper ultra 10 lb hammer TH dizzy making prescription 6mg level nic eVaporette.

 

[Bill Godshall]

This thread of a very important issue quickly became off topic, which is such a shame.

Among many other false fear mongering claims about nicotine toxicity, ZoiDman wrote:

If you Swallow 30ml of 24mg e-Liquid you will find out Very Quickly if there Really is a God.

If anyone tried to swallow even 1ml of 24mg e-liquid, their stomach would immediately react by puking it out.

Same thing goes for anyone who has ever tried to swallow 1ml of smokeless tobacco juice.

In sum, the human body (as well as those of animals unless they are force fed) has many natural defenses against excessive nicotine exposure.

There is NO evidence that any human has ever died (or has been severely harmed) from excessive consumption of (or exposure to) nicotine (whether via inhalation, ingestion, mucosal or transdermal absorbtion).

Tobacco farmers are exposed to far more nicotine (transdermally when harvesting tobacco) than any tobacco product consumers.

But while this excessive exposure (called "green tobacco sickness") can cause enough displeasure and nausea in farmers to temporarily stop them from harvesting tobacco (or to put on long sleeve shirts, long pants and gloves, which most tobacco harvesters wear to prevent this problem), it's never been known to kill or severely harm anyone.

All of the claims about a "lethal dose" of nicotine (for adults and for children) are based upon zero scientific evidence, as it would be highly unethical and illegal to give increasingly higher nicotine doses to humans (especially children) until they die just to find out the level of a "lethal dose".

Besides, virtually all of the "lethal dose" and "nicotine toxicity" claims have been made by abstinence-only ANTZ who consider any exposure to or use of nicotine as excessive, abusive and/or unacceptable.

So please stop reposting these false and misleading fear mongering claims about nicotine on ECF.

 

[NorthOfAtlanta]

Before spreading the terrible chance of nicotine poisoning death you may want to read this article by Dr Farsalinos. It seems there was 5 deaths over an 11 year period (1996-2007), 10 if you count the 5 from NRTs.

A case of nicotine poisoning from e-liquid (?)

 

[zoiDman]

This thread of a very important issue quickly became off topic, which is such a shame.

Among many other false fear mongering claims about nicotine toxicity, ZoiDman wrote:



If anyone tried to swallow even 1ml of 24mg e-liquid, they're stomach would immediately react by puking it out.

Same thing goes for anyone who has ever tried to swallow 1ml of smokeless tobacco juice.

In sum, the human body (as well as those of animals unless they are force fed) has many natural defenses against excessive nicotine exposure.

There is NO evidence that any human has ever died (or has been severely harmed) from excessive consumption of (or exposure to) nicotine (whether via inhalation, ingestion, mucosal or transdermal absorbtion).

...

Gee Bill. Sorry if you see someone Pointing out the Hazards of Drinking 720mg of Nicotine as Fear Mongering.

So the Body is Going to Puke out the Nicotine? And everything is Going to be All Right.

Two UK suicides using nicotine extracted fr... [Forensic Sci Int. 2010] - PubMed - NCBI

I guess now you can Change your Post to Almost No One has died from Swallowing Nicotine.

BTW - If the Body does such a Great Job of Expelling Poisons when Swallowed, why are there Numbers on these Charts? I guess all of these Statistics were from Topical Exposures?

Poisoning Stats

 

[randomhousegir]

In the spirit of this threads topic I am going to say I am glad there are laws to stop children from getting products that could potentially have nicotine in them.

*prepares for hazing from someone misunderstanding what I said or somehow twisting it because they are a troll*

sent from my phone via tapatalk 2 because I can't stop reading and posting on ECF

 

[Bill Godshall]

The Reynolds document cited by Farsalinos and the original data from the Poison Control Center were not confirmed deaths, but rather were reported deaths. This is a huge difference, as anyone can report a suspected cause of death to the Poison Control Center. Just because someone dies who recently consumed nicotine doesn't mean that the nicotine caused the death (or had anything to do with the death).

Same thing for reported poisonings at
Poisoning Stats

I'm also not aware of any confirmation (when the autopsy was performed) that the death of a toddler in Israel (also cited by Farsalinos) was caused by nicotine (which was reported in the news media the day of the death).

In regards to the abstract of an article in Forensic Science International at
Two UK suicides using nicotine extracted fr... [Forensic Sci Int. 2010] - PubMed - NCBI
I haven't seen the full text of the article, but some of the claims made in the abstract raise more questions than they answer.

For example, how did the two suicide victims extract the nicotine from tobacco (its not as easy as following directions on the Internet)?

And while the reported nicotine plasma level of 5.5mg/l (in one of the suicide victims) appears to be very high (and could be a lethal dose), that statement contradicts (or at least calls into question the validity of) another sentence in the abstract that "Information that nicotine was the agent responsible only became apparent some time after death." If that level of nicotine was found in the blood (presumably during an autopsy), why did it take so long for the cause of death to be attributed to nicotine?

 

[zoiDman]

The Reynolds document cited by Farsalinos and the original data from the Poison Control Center were not confirmed deaths, but rather were reported deaths. This is a huge difference, as anyone can report a suspected cause of death to the Poison Control Center. Just because someone dies who recently consumed nicotine doesn't mean that the nicotine caused the death (or had anything to do with the death).

Same thing for reported poisonings at
Poisoning Stats

I'm also not aware of any confirmation (when the autopsy was performed) that the death of a toddler in Israel (also cited by Farsalinos) was caused by nicotine (which was reported in the news media the day of the death).

In regards to the abstract of an article in Forensic Science International at
Two UK suicides using nicotine extracted fr... [Forensic Sci Int. 2010] - PubMed - NCBI
I haven't seen the full text of the article, but some of the claims made in the abstract raise more questions than they answer.

For example, how did the two suicide victims extract the nicotine from tobacco (its not as easy as following directions on the Internet)?

And while the reported nicotine plasma level of 5.5mg/l (in one of the suicide victims) appears to be very high (and could be a lethal dose), that statement contradicts (or at least calls into question the validity of) another sentence in the abstract that "Information that nicotine was the agent responsible only became apparent some time after death." If that level of nicotine was found in the blood (presumably during an autopsy), why did it take so long for the cause of death to be attributed to nicotine?

We don't we just Agree that Swallowing Liquid Nicotine is Not Advisable?

 

[Etownguy]

I'm sorry but I fail to see what the problem is here?

I do not want my son to vape whether it is 0mg or not. If they are doing 0 then the ONLY reason is for cool factor and I'm sorry kids do not yet see vaping as "cool". I see vaping as an alternative to smoking therefore I do not think anyone who isn't already consuming nicotine has a reason to start.