A storm in a teacup...FDA etc

[atomaton]

I get confused with the discussion that big pharma companies and tobacco companies are losing out. i don't understand why people are always bringing up this point. There really is nothing stopping pharma/tobacco companies from producing vapour devices and liquid themselves. If a tobacco company started selling their own e liquid using their own brand name on the bottle i have no doubt ecigs would become much more popular with smokers. As things are the eicg market is a "cottage industry" and the mainstream never really pickup on any cottage industry. You can imagine all tobacco companies getting away with advertising their brand without actually advertising tobacco at all just their e liquid and branded hardware. A good universal brandname would be a good thing for the ecig industry. Afterall consumers buy what they are familiar with but ignore everything they aren't familiar with. Isn't that how advertising works !?. This kind of development is what i am expecting. Tobacco companies cannot afford not to jump on the bandwagon. As for the FDA etc and their involvement i would say that it is all just a storm in a teacup. A whole world of speculation and supposition. The controversy being created is blowing everything out of proportion and making a mountain out of a molehill. There is too much money too be made from this adolescent industry for it too be swept under the carpet by a government department. Massive global revenue can be made if this blooming industry were to be nurtured. It just has to be done right. So don't be so pessimistic and look at how big ecigs could become in the future instead of thinking it's all going to be doom and gloom. Your bringing me down man !.Get it together..

 

[miketv]

I totally agree atomaton. When i read what some hammerhead has written in a blog about the decision the FDA are going to make they wind on and on in the most negative way throughout. They talk about back handers by tobacco companies. Everything they say in their super paraniod blogs is total fantasy. Why they do it no one knows. But i bet that any other blogs or columns about this subject will be in the same vein. Worst thing is though is that readers go along with it. No one has any idea at all about what way the FDA is going to go but read a blog by someone that claims to know it all and the next thing you know you are signing some petition and who's idea was the petition, the paraniod blogger of course. People like those "scaremongers" are the ones that should be regulated. Regulate the amount of crap they can talk. Obsessed they are. You watch. When the FDA do reach a decision and nothing changes people like these bloggers, instead of realising how stupid they look, will say it was because of their petition. Do you see these guys having their say in the newspapers or on the tv news. If it really was an issue and our rights were at risk then it would be a much bigger story than some stupid blog tucked away in some corner of the world wide web. So any bloggers that write about the FDA and the decision they are going to make on ecigs/nicotine i say "GET IT TOGETHER MAN" and stop talking crap !.

 

[jerseyrob]

WOW... Is it just me, or do these 2 posters same like the same person ????

 

[Abe_Katz]

Actually there is a tobacco company that is in the e-cig market. Lorilard, makers of Newport Cigarettes, own Blu. But it would seem to me that if the BT wanted to survive, because smoking cigarettes is "passe" these days, they would jump on the bandwagon. I think the problem might be resistance on their boards that is preventing them from doing so.

That said I do not think it paranoid to equate FDA bans or other regulations to virtually outlaw e-cigs as paranoid. The fact of the mater is that the FDA is primarily funded not by tax money, but rather by charging fees for approval to Big Pharma. Big Pharma has an interest in not having e-cigs around because they want to sell their gums, patches and Chantix. All of which are about as harmful as an e-cig and has a lower smoking cessation success rate.

 

[Los Marauder]

I think Atomation, and Miketv, both make good points. There are very few but some "negative" people on ECF that seem to constantly atack every thing about goverment envolvement in the e cig industry.

I myself have no idea how all this FDA stuff will work out, but I signed the petitions, and read the threads to protect ourself.

I have found Bill Godshall, CASAA advisor, to be incredibly reliable on this and any other subject he talks about. Even if he is wrong about what the future will bring he is totaly intent on providing the trueth.

Some people have a habit of posting cartoons, or comments that will make you feel bad if you voice certain "everything will be fine" opinion. But I think we need some possitive hopes, and we certainly have the right to feel that way.

 

[miketv]

Actually there is a tobacco company that is in the e-cig market. Lorilard, makers of Newport Cigarettes, own Blu. But it would seem to me that if the BT wanted to survive, because smoking cigarettes is "passe" these days, they would jump on the bandwagon. I think the problem might be resistance on their boards that is preventing them from doing so.

That said I do not think it paranoid to equate FDA bans or other regulations to virtually outlaw e-cigs as paranoid. The fact of the mater is that the FDA is primarily funded not by tax money, but rather by charging fees for approval to Big Pharma. Big Pharma has an interest in not having e-cigs around because they want to sell their gums, patches and Chantix. All of which are about as harmful as an e-cig and has a lower smoking cessation success rate.

What about the obvious revenue stream that would make a lot more money. I see it from a business point of view. Propylen Glycol and Vegetable Glycerine are a very cheap raw material. Both these products are used in dozens of different things already. Building a global industry which is based on these two products will eventually become bigger than the entire global tobacco industry.
When a blogger talks about the decision that the FDA will make about this it would be nice for them to be positive rather than negative. Think of all the positive things that could come from the right decision by the FDA and put it in a blog rather than depressing the crap out of everyone. I haven't seen anyone do this. Telling everyone it's all going to end is truly depressing and no one wants to hear it. So these bloggers want people to think they've got their finger on the pulse. Well point taken. Now tell us it's going to be ok and how the ecig industry is going to grow in leaps and bounds.

 

[miketv]

I think Atomation, and Miketv, both make good points. There are very few but some "negative" people on ECF that seem to constantly atack every thing about goverment envolvement in the e cig industry.

Not just on ecf either. Although there are plenty of links on this site if you want to go and get depressed about it. And that's my point. Where are links to the positive blogs about the FDA's final decision ?. There aren't any !. Just weird !

 

[Factor52]

WOW... Is it just me, or do these 2 posters same like the same person ????

I wonder why it says "Moved on" by Atomaton's name now...?

 

[Abe_Katz]

Miketv, in some ways I agree with you. It would be preferable to hear positive things on blogs. We agree there. However, I do not for a second think that the FDA will come to the right regulations--except perhaps regulations such as requiring IDs to be shown when buying in B&M E-Cig/Juice vendors, and perhaps requiring more testing of the flavor agents used in juice.

I say that because I've done loads of research on the issue of e-juice. VG and PG are basically harmless when inhaled. Both are used in smoke machines at rock concerts, night clubs and etc. We know what the drug nicotine does--we have hundreds of years of experience with it being ingested by smoking and through various mucosa tissues (nose, cheeks, gums, lips etc). The only real X-Factor in juice is the flavorings which we know to be safe in food, but inhaling them is a little different.

Personally I only see the following regulations being necessary for the industry.

1. Business licenses to sell hardware and juice (online and B&M). The states can do this, no federal involvement necessary. A simple business license is all thats necessary. It will keep a lot of the scam artists out of the market. That is a good thing.

2. Proof of age at point of sale for B&Ms. Online it is harder to prove age but I think minors ordering e-cigs and juice online is more difficult than trying to pass themselves off as 18 or 21 at a B&M. Ordering things on the internet usually requires a credit card, and in order for a minor to order PVs and juice online they would need to first steal their parent's card, make the order and then later hide the card statement when it comes. Most kids, even older kids (16-17) are going to get caught and their parents will know what to do. B&Ms though can and do operate on a cash basis. Also the upfront start up cost of vaping will scare away many kids anyway. Why spend 60 bucks on this set up plus an other 10 for a decent set of juices when a pack of marlboros or newports is like 7 bucks?

3. E-juice manufacturers need to use pure ingredients. The FDA already regulates PG, VG, and flavor agents. No new regulations needed here.

4. E-juice needs to have a ingredients list on the packaging. This list should include the PG/VG content. Pretty standard like on most food packaging.

5. E-juice needs to be sold in child proof containers. Again like OTC medications.

6. DIY juice materials need to be easily available. I see no reason for these to be regulated beyond needing a business license to sell them and child proof containers on the nicotine components.

Essentially the regulations I would like to see put into place are the same self-regulations already followed by responsible manufactures and vendors.

 

[Dusty_D]

WOW... Is it just me, or do these 2 posters same like the same person ????

Good call, it WAS the same person.

I wonder why it says "Moved on" by Atomaton's name now...?

Because he was a multiple identity of a previously banned user, same as miketv now..

 

[VapApe]

Never mind it not good to over feed trolls

 

[beelzebub]

Good call, it WAS the same person.



Because he was a multiple identity of a previously banned user, same as miketv now..

Still.........It doesn't change the fact that i am right about this subject And all ecf does is keep endorsing this paranoid crap. And most of the blogs i am referring to are by idoits that work/mediate in this forum. And i suppose when the decision is made by the FDA ecf will want some credit for it. Why don't the ecf administration take a big step back and piss off while their doing it.

 

[Dusty_D]

There's ways to make a point, and this is not it.

Thread closed.