Being Reasonable as a Community
- Thread starter machiabelly
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
I agree that it's a lot about the money, but not federal government tax money. The federal government doesn't tax cigarettes, state and local governments do. That's why the price of a pack of cigarettes is so different from one state to the next.
At the federal level, the money involved is the lobbying money from Big Pharma and BT that they spend to protect their "market share" of smokers' and ex-smokers' and trying-to-quit-smokers' money.
But I don't think it's ALL about the money. I wouldn't be surprised if current FDA employees think that the FDA made a huge, awful mistake in not banning cigarettes 80 years ago, and they don't want to make the same mistake again with this new nicotine delivery device. I'm willing to believe that a lot of them are motivated simply by that - wanting to learn from past mistakes. That's why it's so important for them to have good information, so they know they wouldn't be making the same mistake again, wouldn't be making a mistake at all, in fact would be doing a good thing, if they regulated e-juice manufacturers only so far as to make sure the facilities are clean and nothing is going into the juice other than what the maker says. That's it.
Suddenly developing a conscience and now willing to go against BT?? Bless your heart! lol
just so you know, you are an anonymous person speaking on the internet. basically, we all are. how is anybody's point more valid than anybody else's? and it was snarky whether you intended it or not.......
I view every post as genuine, it's my trusting nature and it's easier than looking over your shoulder all the time. If the FDA functioned as most people believe it does, I wouldn't have much of a problem. If they were willing to run proper tests, I'm fairly certain they would find ecigs to be a much safer alternative to smoking. Unfortunately that's just not the way it works.
I would prefer that e-liquid be treated like food. By all means, regulate the nicotine supply lines(I'm pretty sure they already are), and limit what can be added to e-liquid so that only things deemed "safe" are added(most places only use stuff that's "known" to be safe anyway). Do spot checks on liquids to make sure they only contain what they say and that the nicotine levels are what they say they are. Limit sales to 18 and over, that's fine, but allow me to use an online verification process so that I can still place my orders.
There are reasons I don't trust the FDA. Their knee jerk reaction to e-cigs was to ban them, without scientific study. They regulate the pharmaceutical industry, and horror stories abound in that arena. They regulate food stuffs, and there are widespread cases of contamination every year. So again, while the idea is sound, the execution is lacking.
I would prefer that e-liquid be treated like food. By all means, regulate the nicotine supply lines(I'm pretty sure they already are), and limit what can be added to e-liquid so that only things deemed "safe" are added(most places only use stuff that's "known" to be safe anyway). Do spot checks on liquids to make sure they only contain what they say and that the nicotine levels are what they say they are. Limit sales to 18 and over, that's fine, but allow me to use an online verification process so that I can still place my orders.
There are reasons I don't trust the FDA. Their knee jerk reaction to e-cigs was to ban them, without scientific study. They regulate the pharmaceutical industry, and horror stories abound in that arena. They regulate food stuffs, and there are widespread cases of contamination every year. So again, while the idea is sound, the execution is lacking.
Never mind. I give up.
I tried to explain and you just want to be antagonistic.
Have a nice day, anyway.
OH they have done a great job on food. Look at the cancer and heart disease rates before the 50's when big agriculture wanted veg oils to be top dog. Everything is chemical these days-no more eggs milk etc just chem substitutes that are cheaper to bring in more profits for major corps. Wake up people.
It happens everywhere, even on UK Vapers. You'll find very similar "concerns" expressed about how potentially risky vaping is. Sometimes they're even expressed in similarly tortured English. In fact to anyone familiar with this individual machiabelly's negative attitude and bizarre sentence structure looks eerily familiar. You might almost think it's the same person...
All I can say to the OP is ignorance is bliss, except when it ends up killing people. You would think that before posting a diatribe about why the FDA is our friend, the OP would have taken the time to actually do some research on the FDA and it's history concerning vaping. But that would require effort and thinking and might actually punch a hole in his/her "the FDA is our friend" theory. It's obvious the OP has never read or (my guess) ever heard of the FDA's "deeming regulations" and how it would affect our ability to vape. Or maybe his post is all just a "troll" thing.
Last edited:
BUZZZZ... wrong!
Re Wiki:
"On February 4, 2009, the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009 was signed into law, which raised the federal tax rate for cigarettes on April 1, 2009 from $0.39 per pack to $1.01 per pack.[8][9] The purpose of the State Childrens Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) is to provide aid for impoverished children. SCHIP expanded its coverage of liability (in 2009)to include families with up to three times the federal poverty level as well as children from high-income families in New York and New Jersey. SCHIP is proposed to also cover dental benefits and treatment of mental illnesses where it previously did not exist</ref>. In addition to providing these services for U.S. citizens, SCHIP is also expanded to cover immigrant children and immigrant pregnant women.[10]
President Barack Obama has received both criticism and support for signing it."
And if dat's not 'nuff fer ya, just peruse da government's CDC site! Shouldn't take too long to find what ya missed.
Ya wouldn't be on furlough, would ya?
Not surprising considering your post. Do you understand the term "research" or do you consider "just off the top of my head" the same as research?
It's a shame he didn't add to his edit that he was going to click on the useful links we gave him and learn more about the subject and thanks for letting him know.
Of course, I get the impression that he has no intention of doing any such thing.
The more one knows, the better one is able to understand and form rational opinions. There really isn't a need for argument. Just sharing and obtaining data.
"As it stands now, our decisions about what liquids to put in our vaporizers is pretty much based on trust. We rely on vendors to have the decency to tell us what is in the juices they sell us, and simply have to hope that they aren't lying or do not use chemicals that are known to be harmful."
It's working just fine. Whether that's due to the deterrent effect of the threat of government regulation, or the action of the community in regards to those who abuse the community's trust (think: Box Elder), remains to be seen. Either way, it is sufficient. At this point in time, FDA regulation provides no real benefit to the community that it doesn't provide for itself, especially in relation to the cost to the community and industry as a whole.
Thomas Jefferson defined liberty thusly, "Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others." As long as the equal rights of others are not being violated, government regulation is neither warranted nor appropriate.
While I always welcome research into the health effects of vaping, as we all do to confirm or refute the benefits/dangers of the activity, regulations before those conclusions are ascertained is grossly inappropriate without evidence that government regulations (abridgements of liberty) are necessary to achieve legitimate social interests.
Liberty demands that the rights of others only be abridged for the greatest of necessity, nothing less. Such necessity has not been established.
It's working just fine. Whether that's due to the deterrent effect of the threat of government regulation, or the action of the community in regards to those who abuse the community's trust (think: Box Elder), remains to be seen. Either way, it is sufficient. At this point in time, FDA regulation provides no real benefit to the community that it doesn't provide for itself, especially in relation to the cost to the community and industry as a whole.
Thomas Jefferson defined liberty thusly, "Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others." As long as the equal rights of others are not being violated, government regulation is neither warranted nor appropriate.
While I always welcome research into the health effects of vaping, as we all do to confirm or refute the benefits/dangers of the activity, regulations before those conclusions are ascertained is grossly inappropriate without evidence that government regulations (abridgements of liberty) are necessary to achieve legitimate social interests.
Liberty demands that the rights of others only be abridged for the greatest of necessity, nothing less. Such necessity has not been established.
It seems that remains a possibility unsupported by EVIDENCE
"You can get killed walking your doggie." - Lt. Vincent Hanna (character played by Al Pachino in HEAT)
Last edited:
I 'feel' soooo much better now dat da train was derailed and da conductor survived...
Coming to this forum and being pro-fda is like going to the Star Wars forum and saying George Lucas sucks.
What are you talking about? People do that all the time.
Ever since "Greedo shot first".....lol
To me the insistence on being "polite" and "non confrontational" is a sure recipe for losing our rights. There are people who want to stamp out vaping, and if we are not vigilant and ready to fight we will lose. Many of us lived through the demonization of smoking, and we were polite and non confrontational, and look where things wound up.
- Status
Similar threads
