Kate has a recipe on making your own as well as warnings of nicotine in the DIY thread. I stongly suggest you read her comments for aid and advice. I am going to see about making my own and hoarding up on supplies.
An idea for avoiding FDA approval or control
- Thread starter Satire
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
-
- Tags
- fda regulation
- Status
Kate has a recipe on making your own as well as warnings of nicotine in the DIY thread. I stongly suggest you read her comments for aid and advice. I am going to see about making my own and hoarding up on supplies.
I didn't mean that comment about strongly suggest to be disrespectful in any way. It was concern mostly because of what I read. Sorry, I don't know how much you do know and I don't usually check time here dates.
It is fixing to heat up here in the usa, with all these companys rolling out the e-cigs. Ruyan is showing it Jazzy at a truck stop store convention and said it is fixing to put them in some travel stores. We are in for some interesting times.
Rock on! I can't wait to try the Jazz, a true disposable. Keep the price down -- and welcome to the MASS MARKET.
Yes I'll whine and cry about us being the USA and not the UN while you run around yelling the sky is falling. I guess that's who we each are.
You are too funny, TropicalBob.
WHO is the UN not the FDA.
Furthermore what you posted supports what I say. It's a tobacco product and therefore should be marketed as an alternative tobacco product and not NRT.
If they want to market it as NRT they need to reformulate and use a medicinal form of nicotine and go through medical testing.
Read the JC ingredients on their bottles and it sounds like a tobacco product to me. It even lists the leaf types.
Guess what, Bob. WHO also says tobacco should be banned. Is that a law you want to embrace because the UN told you to?
They also say all member nations should ban guns.
According to Dr. Murray Laugesen at least Ruyan is NOT a tobacco product:
2.2 Tobacco-specific nitrosamines
Rationale. Trace levels are found in all nicotine products extracted from tobacco; higher levels suggest the presence of tobacco. Very low levels suggest the e-cigarette cartridge liquid is tobacco free.
Method. Labstat method TWT-333. Determination of tobacco specific nitrosamines (TSNAs) in whole tobacco, modified for the e-cartridges supplied, using LC-MS/MS.
Laboratory. Labstat International ULC, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
Results. TSNAs, found only in tobacco, were not found in the Ruyan® e-cigarette cartridge liquid except at trace quantity, at a very low level uncharacteristic of tobacco...
...Comment. 1) Tobacco-specific nitrosamines (TSNAs) were found, equal to 8 ng, in the 1g of liquid of the 16 mg cartridge. This amount is extremely small, equal for example, to the amount reported to be present in a nicotine medicinal patch. (8 ng in 1g = eight parts per trillion).
2) These very small amounts traces are likely to be due to the fact that even medicinal grade nicotine is extracted from tobacco....
So to determinate if the product is a tobacco product the levels of TSNAs have to be measured if the levels are minimum then it is NOT a tobacco product.
Please read carefuly the report, it will answer a lot of question been posted here, of course this is ONLY for Ruyan products, but at this moment it is the only concret info we have, the report also answer the question of the second hand vapor and the safety of PG and it also remarks that this is not smoking:
http://www.healthnz.co.nz/RuyanCartridgeReport30-Oct-08.pdf
2.2 Tobacco-specific nitrosamines
Rationale. Trace levels are found in all nicotine products extracted from tobacco; higher levels suggest the presence of tobacco. Very low levels suggest the e-cigarette cartridge liquid is tobacco free.
Method. Labstat method TWT-333. Determination of tobacco specific nitrosamines (TSNAs) in whole tobacco, modified for the e-cartridges supplied, using LC-MS/MS.
Laboratory. Labstat International ULC, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
Results. TSNAs, found only in tobacco, were not found in the Ruyan® e-cigarette cartridge liquid except at trace quantity, at a very low level uncharacteristic of tobacco...
...Comment. 1) Tobacco-specific nitrosamines (TSNAs) were found, equal to 8 ng, in the 1g of liquid of the 16 mg cartridge. This amount is extremely small, equal for example, to the amount reported to be present in a nicotine medicinal patch. (8 ng in 1g = eight parts per trillion).
2) These very small amounts traces are likely to be due to the fact that even medicinal grade nicotine is extracted from tobacco....
So to determinate if the product is a tobacco product the levels of TSNAs have to be measured if the levels are minimum then it is NOT a tobacco product.
Please read carefuly the report, it will answer a lot of question been posted here, of course this is ONLY for Ruyan products, but at this moment it is the only concret info we have, the report also answer the question of the second hand vapor and the safety of PG and it also remarks that this is not smoking:
http://www.healthnz.co.nz/RuyanCartridgeReport30-Oct-08.pdf
Last edited:
Thanks, Lithium, for a moment of intelligence following the previous ignorant rant.
Myk is utterly hopeless. Not a grain of sense, yet he brays on. I'll leave it others to educate him. If they don't, time will.
Myk is utterly hopeless. Not a grain of sense, yet he brays on. I'll leave it others to educate him. If they don't, time will.
Thanks, Lithium.
So it seems the way to keep this away from the FDA until Congress/SCOTUS says otherwise is to boost those TSNAs to levels that make it certain to be classified as tobacco under scientific testing but low enough to have an extremely low cancer risk.
I bet that is how Nicotine Water managed to come back. If it's not then how Nicotine Water managed needs to be looked at to satisfy US laws.
Until you decide to start using substantiated facts you may as well put me on ignore because I don't listen to idiots and it's you who are the braying ....
Now do you want to keep on escalating this name calling war or would you like to act like you are at least 1/10th of your age?
So it seems the way to keep this away from the FDA until Congress/SCOTUS says otherwise is to boost those TSNAs to levels that make it certain to be classified as tobacco under scientific testing but low enough to have an extremely low cancer risk.
I bet that is how Nicotine Water managed to come back. If it's not then how Nicotine Water managed needs to be looked at to satisfy US laws.
Bob, if you weren't such a freakin ..... running around like a chicken with its head cut off using no facts only your irrational fears maybe I would listen.
Until you decide to start using substantiated facts you may as well put me on ignore because I don't listen to idiots and it's you who are the braying ....
Now do you want to keep on escalating this name calling war or would you like to act like you are at least 1/10th of your age?
It's registered as a homeopathic. Smoke Free Choice
I am still working on this route because according to a couple of manu's, this is a very viable option based on the research I have found thus far.... The Electronic Cigarette as a Homeopathic Drug | e-Cigarettes - Electronic Cigarettes I am hoping to update that post very shortly with some new info I have found.
Yes Myk we need to know how nicowater did it, the problem increasing TSNAs is that then this will be a tobacco product and then may fall under the anti-smokers laws, I don't know how is this law in the U.S but if it is forbiden to lit or warm any tobacco product then this devices could not be used on smoke-free areas, this is so tricky because this devices at the time seems don't fit in any place, they are not a tobacco product, they are not a NRT product, they are smokeless, but they resemble a real cigarette so technically speaking they can be used in a free-SMOKE area, because there is no smoke, but can't be claim it is a NRT and it is NOT a tobacco product, they are not cigarettes neither so WTH are them? the words "cigarette", "smoke", "smoking", etc, has done a big damage to this devices because those words are inaccurated technically speaking this are vaporizers, nothing more, vaporizers for what? well for liquids that may have or may not have nicotine in them, the whole problem is not to avoid the FDA, eventually the FDA will regulate them we like it or not, the problem is where to make this devices to fit, we need to find the best place for them, maybe the homeopathic route, by the way some supplier and manufacturers are starting to label the boxes as "Personal Vaporizers".
Someone's listening - or way ahead of us
I like your post Lacey, the only thing I disagree is with the "going for a smoke" Dr. Murray says it is not smoking because there is no smoke, he says that the Ruyan products are a SAFE ALTERNATIVE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS (even snus). Even if there is no smoke with e-cigarettes they are STILL a smoking alternative, just like snus, there is no smoke with snus but it IS A SMOKING ALTERNATIVE this are NOT cigarettes and this is NOT smoking, sorry.
Someone's listening - or way ahead of us
I like your post Lacey, the only thing I disagree is with the "going for a smoke" Dr. Murray says it is not smoking because there is no smoke, he says that the Ruyan products are a SAFE ALTERNATIVE TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS (even snus). Even if there is no smoke with e-cigarettes they are STILL a smoking alternative, just like snus, there is no smoke with snus but it IS A SMOKING ALTERNATIVE this are NOT cigarettes and this is NOT smoking, sorry.
There are two different ways to register as homeopathic. Homeopathic Educational Services - The Homeopathic Pharmacopoeia and the Assurance of Quality One gets you listed in the US directory and HPCS directory and the other is soley HPCS.
I say "going for a smoke" because that is how I use the e-cig. I use it as an alternative to my tobacco smokes. I know many use it as a puffer, hence the USB passthroughs. I take breaks and go for a "smoke". I know what Ruyan has said, but this is one of those symantics that I think we can be lenient on. Unlike the "healthy" claims. And "going for a smoke" is more the action of smoking than the production of smoke. It goes back to the smoking vs. vaping argument. I identify myself as a smoker and not a vaper, even though I use a personal vaporizer instead of a cigarette.
Believe me Lacey, calling it smoke is gonna scare people, do you want a bunch of scared antis pushing us to a corner? let that for the time when this things are properly regulated, then "smoke" on the antis faces (I will).
False claims are false claims for good or for bad, and saying this is smoke is a false claim according tho the little studies done at least for a Ruyan product.
I use it as a NRT but if I say it is a NRT then it is a false claim, because there is no prove of it.
Again: It is proved that this is not smoke at least for Ruyan products.
False claims are false claims for good or for bad, and saying this is smoke is a false claim according tho the little studies done at least for a Ruyan product.
I use it as a NRT but if I say it is a NRT then it is a false claim, because there is no prove of it.
Again: It is proved that this is not smoke at least for Ruyan products.
I know... Kate and I didn't see eye to eye on this either. I simply say that it is one way to use the e-cig because frankly, if we look at how much some people use their e-cig and that they puff all day and go through a 15ml bottle every two days, well... one could make the argument that that is drug abuse. I myself use a 15ml bottle every two weeks and I am not smoking analogs at all.
And as far as the anti's are concerned... their facist control over the US is quickly coming to an end here... so we will see what they have to say once we are smoking in our privately owned businesses again
Just stick to the proved facts, of course anyone can make arguments, but those arguments need to be proved scientificly, if they are not proved, then those arguments are just false claims.
Calling it smoking or cigarettes don't gonna make this devices fit more like a smoking alternative, because they already are, but it can complicate the path to a favorable regulation for us.
Calling it smoking or cigarettes don't gonna make this devices fit more like a smoking alternative, because they already are, but it can complicate the path to a favorable regulation for us.
And likewise then, we should stop pushing the Ruyan report because it is clear that they are attempting to get this approved as a smoking cessation device, an NRT. The clinical trial is focused on whether or not this device helps in quitting smoking. - I am still 100% focused on the Homeopathic route because it IS the way to go from what I have found... and I have manufacturers who think I might be dead on here.
And how I choose to use my device doesn't need to be proven scientifically... it's just one way of using the e-cig. That's all.
Last edited:
Come on Lacey, you know that they don't want to make it a NRT:
Findings. Ruyan® e-cigarette is designed to be a safe alternative to smoking. The various test results confirm this is the case. It is very safe relative to cigarettes, and also safe in absolute terms on all measurements we have applied. Using micro-electronics it vaporizes, separately for each puff, very small quantities of nicotine dissolved in propylene glycol, two small well-known molecules with excellent safety profiles, – into a fine aerosol. Each puff contains one third to one half the nicotine in a tobacco cigarette’s puff. The cartridge liquid is tobacco-free and no combustion occurs.
You can call it whatever you want, but if you don't have a studie saying it is smoke, then your calls are as false as jon's claims.
http://www.healthnz.co.nz/RuyanCartridgeReport30-Oct-08.pdf
Findings. Ruyan® e-cigarette is designed to be a safe alternative to smoking. The various test results confirm this is the case. It is very safe relative to cigarettes, and also safe in absolute terms on all measurements we have applied. Using micro-electronics it vaporizes, separately for each puff, very small quantities of nicotine dissolved in propylene glycol, two small well-known molecules with excellent safety profiles, – into a fine aerosol. Each puff contains one third to one half the nicotine in a tobacco cigarette’s puff. The cartridge liquid is tobacco-free and no combustion occurs.
You can call it whatever you want, but if you don't have a studie saying it is smoke, then your calls are as false as jon's claims.
http://www.healthnz.co.nz/RuyanCartridgeReport30-Oct-08.pdf
Last edited:
Ok... we can beat this to death if we must. I said in my post... "I don't call it going out for a "vape" I call it going out for a smoke." That isn't a false claim. I choose to use my urban slang choice of word "smoke" and you choose to use your urban slang "vape". And that is exactly what the word "vape" is. Urban slang. It did not come from the word "vapor". It cannot be found as a variation of the word "vapor" in any English or Latin dictionary. No matter how many times I have asked for a link to any definition or use of the word "vape" other than from urbandictionary.com, no one can produce one single link to that word. So, by using the word "vape", aren't you claiming that you smoke marijuana? Because that is what people think the word to mean and making any claims otherwise would be making false claims.
That one sentence is toward the action and not the vapor. Sorry. I am giving you guys vape because over at RTV, you are using vape as there are several different types of vaporizers and at RTV, the attempt is to safe guard ALL "vaping" devices. I am writing posts strictly on electronic cigarettes. They are called electronic cigarettes. I smoke my electronic cigarette. It is an action... not a health claim...
Should I continue or can we agree to disagree? By agreeing to disagree, you acknowledge that I am in no way making any false claims. Actually, I didn't make any claims at all.
PS... not the only one who sees using an e-cig as smoking... http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/e-cigarette-public/5627-talking-smoker.html#post94014 Excellent post...
Last edited:
AND... my ... they aren't trying to get this as an NRT
Clinical Trials Research Unit
Look at the rationale behind the study... specifically the last sentence and then compare it to the aims they want to achieve. They are leaving the door wide open yes... but they do leave it open so they can be an NRT if they want.
Clinical Trials Research Unit
Look at the rationale behind the study... specifically the last sentence and then compare it to the aims they want to achieve. They are leaving the door wide open yes... but they do leave it open so they can be an NRT if they want.
- Status
Similar threads
