Can aemsa help save the industry??

[zoiDman]

Yes extremely hard to say. Just when I think things are changing, I wouldn't be surprised If we get the pounding we all have been expecting from the FDA. I personally don't believe that to be the case, but one just never knows.

I told someone once that there is an Upside to be a Pessimistic Person like myself. And that is you are Never Surprised by Bad News.

 

[2coils]

I told someone once that there is an Upside to be a Pessimistic Person like myself. And that is you are Never Surprised by Bad News.

I guess it makes for some interesting debate here on the forum too!! As I know I have my hands full with a few of you!

 

[RosaJ]

On the topic of AEMSA, I came across this a few minutes ago: AEMSA Welcomes Newest Subject Matter Expert (SME) Member: Dr. Konstantinos Farsalinos | AEMSA

 

[2coils]

On the topic of AEMSA, I came across this a few minutes ago: AEMSA Welcomes Newest Subject Matter Expert (SME) Member: Dr. Konstantinos Farsalinos | AEMSA

Definitely adds credibility IMO!

 

[Cool_Breeze]

AEMSA is Big eliquid in the making... The interests of a Broker may not be the same as consumers. Be wary of who you support in brokering your interests.

 

[Vocalek]

Yes, do be wary of who is more likely to represent the interests of consumers regarding safety and quality of e-liquids. Ideally, such an organization would be directly affected by the outcome and would be including consumers in its decision-making process.

Right now, the choices appear to be AMESA or the FDA.

 

[Cool_Breeze]

Yes, do be wary of who is more likely to represent the interests of consumers regarding safety and quality of e-liquids. Ideally, such an organization would be directly affected by the outcome and would be including consumers in its decision-making process.

Right now, the choices appear to be AMESA or the FDA.

...interesting that you state succinctly (and solidly?) the choices.

For me, the search for choices continues...

 

[DC2]

Yes, do be wary of who is more likely to represent the interests of consumers regarding safety and quality of e-liquids. Ideally, such an organization would be directly affected by the outcome and would be including consumers in its decision-making process.

Right now, the choices appear to be AMESA or the FDA.

Where is TVECA in all this?

Not that I would support completely throw my support behind them either...
But it seems they would have more power to get the ear of the FDA than AEMSA has.

 

[Vocalek]

Where is TVECA in all this?

Not that I would support completely throw my support behind them either...
But it seems they would have more power to get the ear of the FDA than AEMSA has.

Here's where they are in all this:

From page: Tobacco Vapor Electronic Cigarette Association

1. Make no medical claims regarding, but not limited to: safety, health benefits, smoking cessation.
2. Ensure product packaging does not appeal to young adults (e.g. cartoons, candy, etc.)
3. Ensure marketing materials do not appeal to young adults (l.e. BE COOL).
4. Show prominently, the TVECA approved warning on products that contain nicotine, on print materials, and throughout member websites.
5. When offering e-liquid, ensure all containers have child-safety caps.
6. When offering e-liquid, the maximum size bottle containing nicotine will be 30ml.
7. Show clearly, lot numbers and product manufactured dates on individual cartridge packaging (applies also to e-liquid).
8. Show clearly, nicotine level on individual cartridge packaging (applies also to e-liquid).
9. List all basic ingredients on any two items below:
A) Product Packaging
B) Instruction Card
C) Company Website
10. All TVECA members will have in-office staff available to expeditiously field incoming customer service issues during normal business hours.
11. All TVECA members must display on their websites their place of business and address where consumers may conduct business in person. No P.O. Boxes. (Brick and Mortar Business Only).
12. Display cartridge or e-liquid nicotine levels numerically (e.g. 0 mg/ml, 6 mg/ml, 12 mg/ml etc.) and/or show nicotine percentage per content of (e.g. 24 mg/ml =2.4%).
13. When offering e-liquid, sell a maximum nicotine level to the consumer to be no greater than 36 mg/ml or 3.6% of total volume of e-cig cartridge.
14. Instruct consumers on e-cig packaging that all components of the electronic cigarettes are fully recyclable.
15. Ensure, with reasonable certainty (e.g. verification services), online buyers to be of legal age to purchase ln area consumer resides and/or more specifically where the product will be shipped. E-cig distributors are responsible to abide by all state legislation in regard to age verification for the purchase of product.
16. Ensure, with reasonable certainty (e.g. state issued photo ID), in-person buyers to be of legal age to purchase in area consumer resides and/or more specifically the area of the place of business.
17. Ensure auto-ship can be cancelled at anytime and refunds expedited in a timely manner:
18. Not offer Free Trials (a money back guarantee is sufficient).
19. Have and enforce a Terms and Conditions Agreement with any resellers who will accept and enforce all the TVECA rules and regulations regarding the sale of e-cigs (violation of rules by a company, regardless of the direct or indirect nature of infraction, will result in suspension).
20. Submit to, and pay for, cartridge/e-liquid random testing once every 6 months and that all samples will be sent within 3 days of notification.
21. Adhere to the terms and conditions of the TVECA Bylaws and Constitution.

AEMSA's standards are in a PDF document downloadable from: STANDARDS | AEMSA

Here is another trade association: SFATA

 

[DC2]

Here's where they are in all this:

From page: Tobacco Vapor Electronic Cigarette Association

That actually doesn't sound so bad on the face of it.

I do seem to remember that they came out against "APVs" because of the "dangers" to the consumer.
But I thought they were also on board with "no flavors" as well.

I don't see either of those things in their guidelines.
But what they are doing behind the scenes may be another story.

How does CASAA feel about TVECA at this point in time?

 

[Cool_Breeze]

Does someone understand the 30ml limit on bottle size in TVECA's standards?

 

[Vocalek]

That actually doesn't sound so bad on the face of it.

I do seem to remember that they came out against "APVs" because of the "dangers" to the consumer.
But I thought they were also on board with "no flavors" as well.

I don't see either of those things in their guidelines.
But what they are doing behind the scenes may be another story.

How does CASAA feel about TVECA at this point in time?

If you have strong feelings about any particular product features that are not addressed in an organization's published standards, you might want to contact the organization directly.

 

[DC2]

If you have strong feelings about any particular product features that are not addressed in an organization's published standards, you might want to contact the organization directly.

Their published standards sound somewhat reasonable.
What I have heard from them in print in the past has not sounded quite as reasonable.

I've never really seen any reason to trust Ray Story, but I've seem enough to distrust him.
Looks like nothing has changed on that front.

 

[Vocalek]

Does someone understand the 30ml limit on bottle size in TVECA's standards?

No. This would be worth asking about. Let us know what they tell you.

 

[zoiDman]

No. This would be worth asking about. Let us know what they tell you.

I heard that it was in regards to how much a Person/Child could swallow and not OD.

I don't want to Sidetrack this thread with the Debate about Swallowing e-Liquids. It's just what I heard.