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

[iz2sick]

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.

Yup, that's exactly what I was saying in my posts.

But here's what I was wondering... what if you found out that your kid is addicted to analogs? This is just a "what if" scenario. Would you consider the 0 nicotine vaping? Again, this is hypothetical so no answers like "I'd lock my kid up in a room" lol.

 

[Junquemail Contessa]

Dumbfounded: Why wouldn't we support keeping minors from purchasing vape gear, liquids (regardless if they are 0 nicotine)? I have 2 teenage daughters, and you better believe I want it to be as difficult as possible for them to purchase certain items like tobacco, liquor and vaping supplies. I think it makes the vaping community, as a whole, look like we support children being able to purchase these items by calling out legislation that restricts it.
Just because I vape and I want to continue to vape doesn't mean I want my kids to or be able to until they are 18.

 

[TTK]

I've heard the same arguments from those who smoke alternative substances...

My doctor, who is a doctor- I'm guessing you aren't, was thrilled I quit smoking, but said dependence on nicotine and using nicotine isn't healthy. Perhaps some think elevated blood pressure while nicotine is being consumed is good. I'm guessing not many in medical field would, however. What do they know? After all, they are doctors, not posters on a e-nic forum.

Okay, then do you eliminate all substances that elevate your blood pressure? How about all ACTIVITIES? Nevertheless, I am in favor of laws prohibiting nicotine sales to under aged people.

 

[Berylanna]

Okay, then do you eliminate all substances that elevate your blood pressure? How about all ACTIVITIES? Nevertheless, I am in favor of laws prohibiting nicotine sales to under aged people.

Hmmm, that would have to include caffeine, rosemary, licorice, and a lot of other things. Not to mention physical activity.

My blood pressure has always been almost dangerously low. Who says that one size fits all?

Also, I suspect that ecigs don't cause a SUDDEN change in blood pressure like the rush from combustibles can. The aborption rate is slower, I think I've heard it's like halfway between gum and combustibles. Without carbon monoxide, COPD, and a bunch of other things that seriously tax the heart. So my feeling is that while I can sort-of forgive cardiologists for forbidding some of their patients from trying e-cigs, they have NO business making the same recommendation to people who do NOT have blood pressure problems or heart conditions. (And this does not even take into account the studies showing snus consumers do not have health problems that other non-smokers do not have, or that quite a few folks I've heard have been congratulated by their own cardiologists AFTER seeing test results from switching to e-cigs.)

 

[hawkeye46]

Iowa att. general is proposing regulating e-cigs. He mainly focused on ban to minors(which I'm ok with), but also wants to stop advertising. Seems to be very anti e-cig, and wonder what else he has in mind. Worried in Iowa--Bo

 

[Petrodus]

This country is addicted to and co-dependent on Federal Regulations
to protect them from themselves (period)

Because Mommie FDA hasn't regulated yet ...
States, counties, cities, ETC have stepped up to the plate
offering their regulations to give the masses their Drug Regulation Fix.

 

[dianeofarcadia]

this whole "think of the children" argument is stupid...
there are a whole lot of other things out there they need to focus on if they really want to "think of the children"....

bottom line.
it's all about money, they are loosing revenue and just discovered a new way to line their pocketbooks.
nothing more than greedy little control freaks in disguise.

 

[randomhousegir]

this whole "think of the children" argument is stupid...
there are a whole lot of other things out there they need to focus on if they really want to "think of the children"....

bottom line.
it's all about money, they are loosing revenue and just discovered a new way to line their pocketbooks.
nothing more than greedy little control freaks in disguise.

I make juice is in Utah for a few mom and pop type shops. I am a father and also used to be a smoker. I would gladly go out of business and do anything I could to make it so that no children grow up smoking. I know there are other important things, but the health of our children is one of the most important things that a parent can focus on. Do you have children? If you do, do you disagree with this statement that your children's health is one of the most important things to you? Sure education could be worked on and a lot of other things the government is in control of, but if you don't like the way the government is educating your children, home school. If you don't like the way they're treating by other kids, help them learn how to communicate with others and get things resolved in a different matter. I really feel upset by your comment about the Save the Children is a stupid argument, because we should be always thinking of our children as parents. It is our parent duty and obligation because we chose whether on accident or not to take part in making them, and we need to be responsible grown ups so they can grow up to be healthy responsible grown ups.

Not attacking you, not dislike for you, just my opinion that children come first. If you don't have kids, & I completely understand your comments because I would have felt the same way seven years ago before I had my beautiful daughter. Children change your life, if you don't have any, get married and have some you'll love it. Lol

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

 

[dianeofarcadia]

I make juice is in Utah for a few mom and pop type shops. I am a father and also used to be a smoker. I would gladly go out of business and do anything I could to make it so that no children grow up smoking. I know there are other important things, but the health of our children is one of the most important things that a parent can focus on. Do you have children? If you do, do you disagree with this statement that your children's health is one of the most important things to you? Sure education could be worked on and a lot of other things the government is in control of, but if you don't like the way the government is educating your children, home school. If you don't like the way they're treating by other kids, help them learn how to communicate with others and get things resolved in a different matter. I really feel upset by your comment about the Save the Children is a stupid argument, because we should be always thinking of our children as parents. It is our parent duty and obligation because we chose whether on accident or not to take part in making them, and we need to be responsible grown ups so they can grow up to be healthy responsible grown ups.

Not attacking you, not dislike for you, just my opinion that children come first. If you don't have kids, & I completely understand your comments because I would have felt the same way seven years ago before I had my beautiful daughter. Children change your life, if you don't have any, get married and have some you'll love it. Lol

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

My comment didn't come across in the manner it should have.
oh boy...

I am a widowed mom of six boys (30 to 16). It is our job to teach our children right from wrong, not the government. It just feels like from some of the reading that the government wants to put these bans in place and part of their comments have been "think of the kids". We don't need the government to put these restriction in place. We are adults. Every vapor store I have been into so far would not allow under 18, so I really don't think there needs to be any laws that are going to cause restrictions on e-cigs/pv. I just feel like this attempt at the government trying to get into regulating e-cigs is just an attempt for tax and control.
Hopefully that clears up my point. I normally stay out of debates...

 

[Fulgurant]

Yup, that's exactly what I was saying in my posts.

But here's what I was wondering... what if you found out that your kid is addicted to analogs? This is just a "what if" scenario. Would you consider the 0 nicotine vaping? Again, this is hypothetical so no answers like "I'd lock my kid up in a room" lol.

I wish I'd had access to e-cigarettes when I was a teenager. And if my teenager were to tell me now that he's addicted to cigarettes, I'd support any effort to ween him off of them. (I'd just buy the e-cig for him.)

That said, I have no problem with a law prohibiting the sale of e-cigarettes to minors. It was bound to happen, and it's not gonna unhappen no matter what arguments are made. Reputable stores usually don't (knowingly) sell e-cigs to minors, anyway. The real fight is in preserving the rights of adults to make, sell, and use vaping products.

 

[randomhousegir]

My comment didn't come across in the manner it should have.
oh boy...

I am a widowed mom of six boys (30 to 16). It is our job to teach our children right from wrong, not the government. It just feels like from some of the reading that the government wants to put these bans in place and part of their comments have been "think of the kids". We don't need the government to put these restriction in place. We are adults. Every vapor store I have been into so far would not allow under 18, so I really don't think there needs to be any laws that are going to cause restrictions on e-cigs/pv. I just feel like this attempt at the government trying to get into regulating e-cigs is just an attempt for tax and control.
Hopefully that clears up my point. I normally stay out of debates...

My bad. Sorry

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

 

[Berylanna]

If parents want their kids to switch from smoking to vaping, the parents can buy the ecigs for the kids.

That is why I'd support laws against kids purchasing but not posession. I think that should be a parental right.

 

[Bill Godshall]

I agree with Berylanna, and I was featured on a 1999 CBS News 60 Minutes segment exposing and opposing tobacco industry sponsored legislation to criminalize and scapegoat youth for possessing and/or using tobacco products.

From 1990 to 2002, I actively opposed (and defeated dozens of) state bills (and several federal bills) that would have turned all youth tobacco users into criminals, and would have imposed harsh and ineffective penalties on the youth (i.e. fines, mandatory tobacco cessation classes, dozens of hours of community service, expulsion from school, loss of driver's license and even jail).

The problem is that about 30 states enacted tobacco industry sponsored laws that criminalize youth for possessing or using tobacco products, and now these laws (which also ban tobacco sales to minors) are being amended to include e-cigs.

But I think its more important to get laws enacted in all 50 states that ban e-cig sales to minors (to prevent the FDA from claiming their chief reason for imposing counterproductive e-cig regs is to "protect children") even if those laws criminalize youth for possessing or using e-cigs (as the latter mentioned laws are rarely enforced, and the youth who are charged with those violations are typically only required to attend ineffective tobacco cessation programs, suspended from school, and/or required to do community service).

 

[Berylanna]

But I think its more important to get laws enacted in all 50 states that ban e-cig sales to minors (to prevent the FDA from claiming their chief reason for imposing counterproductive e-cig regs is to "protect children")

YES, but...

even if those laws criminalize youth for possessing or using e-cigs (as the latter mentioned laws are rarely enforced, and the youth who are charged with those violations are typically only required to attend ineffective tobacco cessation programs, suspended from school, and/or required to do community service).

Having newphews who are both poor and black, we have found that enough cops (5-10%) are MORE than happy to impose fines and life-limiting penalties on those young men (starting at age 10 or earlier) for things that are NEVER enforced against anybody else. So....I have very mixed feelings about this. I guess it depends on the penalties. If you can get suspended from school and be required to PAY FOR the tobacco cessation class for having tobacco or e-cigs OUTSIDE of school, that's too much. Each little brick they tie to these kids' necks slows them down in the "merit-based" race for success.

(If you know statistics, you'll understand how 5-10% are few enough to go unnoticed by the general population but plenty to ruin the lives of their targets.)

 

[DC2]

The LD50 is obviously a tested study. But those numbers represent the amount ABSORBED. Drinking a 180mg of diluted nicotine doesn't automatically mean that the person absorbed 180mg of nicotine. They absorbed FAR LESS than what they ingest unless of course it stayed in their system and got digested since the small intestine does absorb nicotine very well.

Anybody that has ever swallowed a little too much juice from chewing tobacco knows...
You will puke your brains out, right quick, and nothing will stop you.

 

[DC2]

The solution is simple. Ban children!

Having no children myself, it's easy to see the obvious logic in this concept.
It would solve so many of the world's problems, that's for sure.

 

[DC2]

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.

Sorry, didn't realize I was already late to the party.
Seems to happen to me all the time.

 

[zoiDman]

Anybody that has ever swallowed a little too much juice from chewing tobacco knows...
You will puke your brains out, right quick, and nothing will stop you.

I don't think the issue of Whether or Not a person is going to Puke if they Swallowed 720mg of Nicotine was ever in question.

I think where some Disagreed was Whether or Not a person would Suffer Physical Harm or even Die by doing it.

 

[DC2]

I think where some Disagreed was Whether or Not a person would Suffer Physical Harm or even Die by doing it.

It would be interesting to have more details on the cases discussed below...

During the past 27 years, the only child death related to tobacco involved a child that had both cigarettes and Valium in his system. Perhaps the Valium suppressed the body's natural defense mechanism against nicotine poisoning. Or perhaps the Valium itself killed the child.

The majority of cases require no medical treatment whatsoever. For example in 2009, out of 8,774 tobacco exposures, 1602 cases were treated in a medical facility, and only 4 cases were considered "Major". Of 1,307 pharmaceutical nicotine exposures, 315 were treated in a medical facility, and 2 cases were considered Major. There were no Deaths in either category.

 

[zoiDman]

It would be interesting to have more details on the cases discussed below...

That is Something that I think No One would argue with.