- Status
LMAO Rev!
That sucker have a 2 liter Cart?!?
Thats kinda what I invisioned when I first heard the SE claim that their carts were equal to a carton of analogs! LOL
That sucker have a 2 liter Cart?!?
Thats kinda what I invisioned when I first heard the SE claim that their carts were equal to a carton of analogs! LOL
It's funny that one of the reasons FDA sites that there is a problem is that there has been no testing done, but this has been around for years and they could simply look into whether or not there have been reported issues that could be tied to the ingredients contained within the product. I also feel that they have no right to control the device or the Propylene Glycol fluid, as long as the PG fluid continues to only use GRAS products. In addition, under current law they have no ability to control nicotine products, so what do they think they're doing? I do like that the FDA continues to watch out for potentially harmful products, but I think common sense should come into play. And if their concern is that there has been no testing done, then do some tests, until then they should use some common sense and allow people to do their own research and come to their own conclusions.
Comeon, this has nothing to do with safety issues. The only reason is that too many people are not using analogs! Welcome to Russia.
No, the above quoted is not correct. Under current law the FDA has no jurisdiction over tobacco products. That is why Smoking Everywhere can mount it's legal challenge to the FDA stopping of their shipments, by arguing that ecigs are the functional equivalent of cigarettes due to the tobacco-derived liquid in their cartridges, and that they are (allegedly) being marketed solely as a smoking alternative.
The FDA does currently have full jurisdiction over strictly nicotine products, such as the patch, gum, inhaler, etc, all of which have been FDA approved for marketing as NRT/smoking cessation products.
If the court decides SE's ecigs are not essentially tobacco products as SE argues, then SE loses it's case, and the FDA will have won the court's blessing to proceed full-out with it's enforcement actions.
You know, something that just popped in my head about this ban. It bans e-cigarettes. But it doesn't ban the parts. If I was to remove any categories that had starter kits and just sold batteries, they're not banned.
If another site just sold atomizers, they're not banned either. And yet another site just sold mouthpieces, they wouldn't be banned either. What the customer did with those parts wouldn't be something that a reseller could be responsible for. The same way that manufacturers of markers can't be responsible if someone decides to sit at their desk and sniff the marker all day.
E-liquid that contains nicotine may be a different story. But the e-cigarette parts is just that. Parts. Yeah, I know it doesn't take a large leap for some authority to say that you have everything needed to assemble a banned item. But I just wonder if when ordering from overseas if you only had a shipment of one of the components come in separate from each other what could customs say about that.
If another site just sold atomizers, they're not banned either. And yet another site just sold mouthpieces, they wouldn't be banned either. What the customer did with those parts wouldn't be something that a reseller could be responsible for. The same way that manufacturers of markers can't be responsible if someone decides to sit at their desk and sniff the marker all day.
E-liquid that contains nicotine may be a different story. But the e-cigarette parts is just that. Parts. Yeah, I know it doesn't take a large leap for some authority to say that you have everything needed to assemble a banned item. But I just wonder if when ordering from overseas if you only had a shipment of one of the components come in separate from each other what could customs say about that.
How can the FDA regulate a vaporizer? Or block shipment of them.
They have been available for years.
The e-juice I can see, but the devices???
They have been available for years.
The e-juice I can see, but the devices???
Ok, I've been reading alot about the FDA and the ban for the past couple months, and this announcement has me really worried. I'm afraid this is going to go far beyond a simple ban. Usually when the FDA talks about a new medication, they use the term "unapproved". Like a new unapproved drug. But Rita Chappelle has repeatedly called ecigs ILLEGAL drugs. To me an "unproved drug" is a new medication that hasn't gotten FDA approval, but an illegal drug is a controlled substance.
The FDA also doesn't go through this big song and dance to announce enforcement of an unapproved drug. The transcripts of press conferences I've found on the net are just conference calls with reporters where they announce that they have sent out C&D orders or Cyber Letters, not the dog and pony show they're planning.
I've seen the quots from Chappelle going back several months. Everybody here has been wondering what the FDA has been waiting for. Some people thought that they were just considering what type of enforcement to take, but maybe they've been working with the DOJ to add ecigs to the schedules of controlled substances, and this is the big announcement.
I really hope I'm wrong, but right now I'm scares ****less.
The FDA also doesn't go through this big song and dance to announce enforcement of an unapproved drug. The transcripts of press conferences I've found on the net are just conference calls with reporters where they announce that they have sent out C&D orders or Cyber Letters, not the dog and pony show they're planning.
I've seen the quots from Chappelle going back several months. Everybody here has been wondering what the FDA has been waiting for. Some people thought that they were just considering what type of enforcement to take, but maybe they've been working with the DOJ to add ecigs to the schedules of controlled substances, and this is the big announcement.
I really hope I'm wrong, but right now I'm scares ****less.
An ecig is an electronic device, the product it vaporizes is PG, VG, food flavorings (all GRAS products) and Nicotine. If they classify this a controlled substance, thus illegal to possess, cigarettes and all NRT's have to be considered, as well.....thus putting one MASSIVE segment of our economy (think of the tax revenue streams!!!) straight into the can, and slapping another massive segment (big pharma) in the teeth. They have to have an ingestible, inhalable, absorbable, or injectable substance to call it a controlled substance - and they ain't going to go to full nicotine prohibition with BT and BP pulling their strings behind the curtain.
They will (from their history) slap a "drug delivery device" label on the equipment to stop imports and sales of the product, but it won't go to full DEA status.
Like I say, I hope I'm wrong, but they wouldn't need to ban cigs and NRT. Look at Pseudoephedrin. It's perfectly legal in Sudafed, but perfectly illegal in methamphetamine. All they have to say is that nicotine suspended in a PG or VG solution is a controlled substance. I'm sure being lawyers and science people they could come up with a perfectly incomprehensable description. That clears Phillip Morris and Big Pharma from the ban.
what about personel possesion of the pv would that be illegal? or purshcasing them for personel use?
8-o
It's bull****. This originated on a blog, yes?
Who is it that keeps spreading crap like this around? This is really starting to annoy the hell out of me. Internets! You are on notice! No more nonsense! Serious business only!
No, Space, that's just not possible. Nicotine cannot be classified as a controlled substance without it impacting any and all nicotine containing products, as Vicks said. Never going to happen.
In your analogy, methamphetamine is the controlled substance, not pseudoephedrine.
Here's the full list: http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/schedules/alpha/alphabetical.htm
Did you know that flea killer Capstar is essentially nicotine? I gave some to my animals and yup - I was amazed. All fleas dead on animals and in house in 30 minutes. The fleas bite the animal, or get on it's skin, and the nicotine poisons them. I wondered how something could be so cheap and effective. It advises that you can give your pet another tablet in 24 hours, but I've stayed off doing that. Not necessary, really. This was recommended to me as safe by a vet. I have an elderly cat and she can't stomach sprays or drops any longer without having a violent reaction. She copped a major buzz off the nicotine and spazzed out but nothing else.
So yeah, that would have to become a controlled substance as well and I don't forsee that happening.
If you google the phone number listed in the e-mail, it shows up as a Lamps Unlimited store in Rockville MD. If you search for the name Zawalick on fda.org, you come up with a Karen but not a Heather. Google "Heather Zawalick" and you come up with a photographer -- in Washington DC, but still, a photographer not an FDA person. All these things might not add up to a hoax, but it has me pretty suspicious. (Not enough to stop buying liquid though!)
And it's crap like this that gets circulated on this forum at least once a week.
Is it just that people enjoy the drama or is there a reason behind it?
Regarding just selling parts, atomizers, batteries, carts, etc. It wont fly, they are seizing parts orders as well, though they do seem to get through more often. Now if you could buy the unassembled ecigs.... well.... Can't out law various parts shipped separately can you? ie buy the tubing, atomizers, battery parts, chips, etc.
I actually been thinking along the same lines. Instead of starter kits, I'd just offer parts.
Electronic parts have a different customs coding, so if a shipment only contains batteries, customs would not stop it. Same goes for chargers. With atomizers We might have to get creative and invent another use for them.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
