Big Tobacco proposes open container tank ban for e-liquid

[AndriaD]

Everytime I see that graphic in a new quote, I get furious all over again. If the FDA goes along with this, what they're basically saying/doing is "we don't like the way this industry has grown organically, so we're going to get rid of this entire aspect that has led to its huge growth and restructure according to how our well-paying bedmates would prefer it, which is that it suit them and no one else."

I hope hurricane season this year is especially bad for the DC environs. Hope the Potomac floods the entire city away.

Andria

 

[DaveOno]

If RJR doesn't want tampering with the liquids, then shouldn't loose tobacco also be banned?

Idiocy.

 

[Sirius]

It really makes me proud! Yes proud of all the vapers. BT wouldn't be shaking in their boots and taking such measures as suggesting anything to do with vaping be banned unless we all haven't made a big impact on their bottom line. I hope the Bar Stuarts go so broke it runs them all out of business.

 

[HauntedMyst]

poopsenders - the ULTIMATE gag gift - SWEET revenge at its finest

These are my new favorite people.

 

[Sirius]

These are my new favorite people.

Sending this Bar Stuart a quart. Gorilla Poop should do nicely!

Sen. Jay Rockefeller (W.Va.)
531 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC
20510

 

[DaveOno]

I'd be afraid to send a poopogram to BT. They will just throw it into the line and it'll wind up in packs of analogs.

And sending to Congress? Isn't that like sending snow to an Eskimo?

 

[Heavyrocker]

They are taking you guns away and now your Ecigs...TIME TO STAND UP FIGHT.

 

[Mowgli]

BT's just throwing .... at the wall to see if any will stick. Desperate.

I agree with the The Streisand Effect comment on this thread

 

[aikanae1]

I think they are all throwing ...... at the wall hoping anything will stick because they have nothing else.
What burns me is this is nothing new - testimony from 2003 before Congress
http://www.smokersonly.org/media/Congressional Testimony 2003.pdf

This has been going on since the mid-90's over THR.

The publication of the first two articles in medical journals was followed by strong negative reaction from organizations that traditionally provide funding for tobacco related research. For example, in 1994 Dr. Rodu and colleagues sent a letter of inquiry to the National Cancer Institute with regard to obtaining support for tobacco harm reduction research ( Reference 15, above). The letter was never answered, but Dr. Rodu and the University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) were accused of possible ethical, legal and medical malpractice violations by the acting director of the NCI. This resulted in a year- long investigation of research by Rodu and others at UAB by the NIH Office for Protection from Research Risks. This investigation concluded that the research was on a solid ethical and legal foundation, but the broad message was clear: The NIH and other organizations would not fund research in the area of tobacco harm reduction.

How many millions of lives has that cost?

Our first approach was to put a face to the people THR is helping by using our stories - maybe it's time to start putting faces on their "way" (quit or die) has cost in the number of human lives they've cost "public health".

 

[AndriaD]

I think they are all throwing ...... at the wall hoping anything will stick because they have nothing else.
What burns me is this is nothing new - testimony from 2003 before Congress
http://www.smokersonly.org/media/Congressional Testimony 2003.pdf

This has been going on since the mid-90's over THR.


How many millions of lives has that cost?

Our first approach was to put a face to the people THR is helping by using our stories - maybe it's time to start putting faces on their "way" (quit or die) has cost in the number of human lives they've cost "public health".

I just read that, and this speaks volumes:

"Our strategy has evoked criticisms that are inaccurate, irrelevant or both. The usual
complaint is that providing risk information about SLT to adults will prompt children to use
these products. We painstakingly point out that our strategy is tailored to adult smokers.
This is not a children's issue. Eliminating children's access to tobacco is important, but the
10 million Americans who will die from smoking over the next two decades are now
adults. Withholding life-saving information from these adults, in the name of children, is
shortsighted, even immoral." (emphasis mine!)

So, FIFTEEN YEARS AGO they were already playing that "for the chiiiiildren" card -- they'd rather prevent all info about THR from reaching ANYONE, if there's any risk at all that "children" might learn something about THR -- even though at the time the only kind of THR that existed was smokeless tobacco, which "children" are VERRRRRRRRRRRY unlikely to use -- you can't even get a lot of them to put perfectly good food in their mouths, because it looks "icky"!

What evil, greedy, lying, IMMORAL... I can't even think of a word bad enough for them that ECF won't censor.

Andria

 

[DrMA]

I wrote to FDA that BT sees them as a pillar of their business model (look it up on my blog). This is exactly how FDA will become the biggest supporter and enforcer of BT supremacy in the nicotine business.

 

[Auntie Mame]

The World Health Organization seems to at least understand that BT is not our friend. This is from their latest paper on e-cigs.

7. The role of the tobacco industry: The future role of ENDS is strongly determined by the
commercial interests of the industry that manufactures and sells ENDS. While there are “independent”
ENDS companies that have reported no interest in perpetuating tobacco use, the tobacco industry
involved in the production and sale of ENDS certainly is.

(a) The ENDS market, initially dominated by companies with no links to the tobacco
industry, is increasingly owned by the tobacco industry. All main transnational tobacco
companies sell ENDS and one of them is launching legal proceedings over patents against its
rivals as they become increasingly aggressive in the battle for the fast-growing e-cigarette
market. The increasing concentration of the ENDS market in the hands of the transnational
tobacco companies is of grave concern in light of the history of the corporations that dominate
that industry.

(b) It is unclear yet what this means for the ENDS market. However, if prior interest of the
tobacco industry in reduced-risk products serves as a precedent, their interest lies in
maintaining the status quo in favour of cigarettes for as long as possible, while simultaneously
providing a longer-term source of profit should the cigarette model prove unsustainable. In
addition, selling these products is intended to bring reputational benefits to these companies, as
they can pretend to be part of the solution to the smoking epidemic.

2 ENDS may follow the
trend of smokeless tobacco wherein the industry’s historic interest in smokeless tobacco
products outside some Nordic countries was both because they could be used in smoke-free
environments and because they could be promoted to young, non-tobacco users to create a new form of tobacco use.

ENDS = Electronic nicotine delivery systems

 

[Sirius]

I'd be afraid to send a poopogram to BT. They will just throw it into the line and it'll wind up in packs of analogs.

And sending to Congress? Isn't that like sending snow to an Eskimo?

Dave..you are right! On second thought maybe I should just send a snow shovel. That what we use to use for horse biscuits.
It would take them 10 years to shovel all the crap that comes out of Congress.

 

[Sirius]

The World Health Organization seems to at least understand that BT is not our friend. This is from their latest paper on e-cigs.

7. The role of the tobacco industry: The future role of ENDS is strongly determined by the
commercial interests of the industry that manufactures and sells ENDS. While there are “independent”
ENDS companies that have reported no interest in perpetuating tobacco use, the tobacco industry
involved in the production and sale of ENDS certainly is.

(a) The ENDS market, initially dominated by companies with no links to the tobacco
industry, is increasingly owned by the tobacco industry. All main transnational tobacco
companies sell ENDS and one of them is launching legal proceedings over patents against its
rivals as they become increasingly aggressive in the battle for the fast-growing e-cigarette
market. The increasing concentration of the ENDS market in the hands of the transnational
tobacco companies is of grave concern in light of the history of the corporations that dominate
that industry.

(b) It is unclear yet what this means for the ENDS market. However, if prior interest of the
tobacco industry in reduced-risk products serves as a precedent, their interest lies in
maintaining the status quo in favour of cigarettes for as long as possible, while simultaneously
providing a longer-term source of profit should the cigarette model prove unsustainable. In
addition, selling these products is intended to bring reputational benefits to these companies, as
they can pretend to be part of the solution to the smoking epidemic.

2 ENDS may follow the
trend of smokeless tobacco wherein the industry’s historic interest in smokeless tobacco
products outside some Nordic countries was both because they could be used in smoke-free
environments and because they could be promoted to young, non-tobacco users to create a new form of tobacco use.

ENDS = Electronic nicotine delivery systems

Everybody wants a piece of the action. BT and the FDA. God only knows who else.

 

[aikanae1]

1. I think someone needs to inform WHO (and others) that ENDS means the phony plastic nasty-tasting tobbacco company products and ENDS does not mean / represent the vaping industry or THR products that are consumer friendly, taste good and work.

2. ENDS is not a "fast growing industry". It never will be because it offers nothing people want nor is it effective and it is unlikely a tobacco company or pharmacetical company ever will produce an effective product unless they want to risk a lawsuit from their shareholders for limiting the company's growth potential (a corporations legal obligation).

3. THR is fast growing. Thousands of small business' can adapt to a market's changing needs, including one that will eventually become self-limiting if successful.

4. TEN MILLION people have died because they weren't told the truth about THR.

5. How's their "quit or die" method been working out so far?

* We MUST divorce ecigs from the association with tobacco companies.

 

[Big Me]

Of course, we should remember that no tobacco company would ever adulterate their own products...

[PDF]
Tobacco Additives - cigarette engineering and nicotine addiction
www​.ash.org.uk/files/.../ASH_623.pdf

The words "pot" and "kettle" do spring to mind.

 

[Heavyrocker]

BT ang the govt are the biggest liars on the planet.

 

[skoony]

1. I think someone needs to inform WHO (and others) that ENDS means the phony plastic nasty-tasting tobbacco company products and ENDS does not mean / represent the vaping industry or THR products that are consumer friendly, taste good and work.

2. ENDS is not a "fast growing industry". It never will be because it offers nothing people want nor is it effective and it is unlikely a tobacco company or pharmacetical company ever will produce an effective product unless they want to risk a lawsuit from their shareholders for limiting the company's growth potential (a corporations legal obligation).

3. THR is fast growing. Thousands of small business' can adapt to a market's changing needs, including one that will eventually become self-limiting if successful.

4. TEN MILLION people have died because they weren't told the truth about THR.

5. How's their "quit or die" method been working out so far?

* We MUST divorce ecigs from the association with tobacco companies.

the WHO most certainly considers any electronic device that delivers nicotine in any shape
or form an ENDS. (electronic nicotine delivery devices)
the quit or die strategy started with the the WHO along with most of all ANTZ strategy.
second hand smoke,the flavors and the gateway effect and of course,the children are all
originally WHO concepts to be used in the fight against tobacco.

the acronym ENDS is no snarkey play on words but a well thought out tactic to make PV's
and nicotine sound ominous and bad in the eyes pf the public.

get used to the word ENDS,this and the flavors,highly addictive and dangerous nicotine and lastly
the children is what all this is going to boil down too.

regards
mike

 

[Sirius]

the WHO most certainly considers any electronic device that delivers nicotine in any shape
or form an ENDS. (electronic nicotine delivery devices)
the quit or die strategy started with the the WHO along with most of all ANTZ strategy.
second hand smoke,the flavors and the gateway effect and of course,the children are all
originally WHO concepts to be used in the fight against tobacco.

the acronym ENDS is no snarkey play on words but a well thought out tactic to make PV's
and nicotine sound ominous and bad in the eyes pf the public.

get used to the word ENDS,this and the flavors,highly addictive and dangerous nicotine and lastly
the children is what all this is going to boil down too.

regards
mike

Reminds me of this gif..

 

[Damrin]

Considering the billions the big tobacco companies spend on lobbying each year, I believe we are in big trouble. The question is, what are WE going to do about it?