Dear ECA and Njoy

[kristin]

I strongly disagree, they aren't all over the Alcohol industry for flavoring beers and liquors, yet the e-cig business is catching all kinds of crap for flavoring our juice, why is this? Money of course... I think it is unfair and flat out ridiculous that anybody would actually think this is a good idea, especially a fellow vaper. I won't go as far as to bash njoy for their decision to stop producing flavored juice, it is their business and they can do with it, but I foresee their sales dropping drastically as a result of their bold decision.

This is an argument I see all of the time - "They don't do this "here" or "there" so we shouldn't have to do it."

That is true, but we aren't liquor or beer or some other flavored adult product. Those products are all established in our society and have known, long-term effects. They have their own stupid rules they have to abide by (think how hard liquor advertising is now regulated.) We are trying to introduce something new and untested. If we are going to get people to accept e-cigs, it won't be 100% on OUR terms. The world doesn't work that way.

As far as sales dropping after a flavor ban, this poll seems to disagree: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...obacco-menthol-other-members-please-vote.html

 

[kristin]

But won't our enemies just argue "see, they have unflavored so people can make their own".

I haven't seen a move to ban "Tasty Puff" flavorings for tobacco.

 

[cassavetes]

I strongly disagree, they aren't all over the Alcohol industry for flavoring beers and liquors, yet the e-cig business is catching all kinds of crap for flavoring our juice, why is this? Money of course

Exactly.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I smoked my first cigarette well before the age of 18, and had my first taste of alcohol before the age of 21.

All this talk about flavorings and what not are simply semantics IMO.

If kids want something bad enough they'll find a way to get it. No matter what laws are put into place.

 

[kristin]

No one said there was any truth or logic to the accusation, but it doesn't mean they still aren't using it. No one is listening to reason and intelligent arguments. The antis are using a tactic that people always seem to follow blindly, without thinking it through.

It's as stupid as not allowing condoms to be given to teens in schools, because it'll make them have sex. They are already HAVING sex!! DUH. Yet, how many high schools do you know of that are allowed to make condoms available to teens?

As long as groups like ASH accuse e-cigs of targeting teens, because of the flavors and lack of age restrictions, it'll be an issue plaguing e-cigs and distracting companies from the greater issue of just keeping them available to their REAL customers, who are mostly over 30 years old. Take away the flavors and impliment or encourage age restrictions and that gives that much less ammunition to groups like ASH and takes away THEIR easiest target and distraction. Really, once testing is done and they are shown to be reasonably safe, the flavors/children argument will be their ONLY argument. Now it'll be a non-issue.

 

[TokenVapor]

I would vape PG and flavoring before I go back to analogs.

 

[Sun Vaporer]

Sun,
While I understand what you're saying, what I don't understand is that to my understanding Judge Leon had already made his decision and just had not made it official or had it docketed. This move by Njoy to eliminate flavors was made after the judge supposedly had his ruling, and that it wouldn't effect or change his ruling. So, it seems to me that Njoy is playing catch up and CYA...instad of doing this WHILE they were making the argument that they were tobacco products..but to do this after he made a ruling but before it was docketed really seems to be a pointless concession. a day late and dollar short.

Drozd--NJOY they are jockying for position on Appeal. This issue will be settled in the Appeals Court. It is a novel case at best and Judge Leon's ruling, no matter how tight, will be ripe for attack on appeal as no Court has ever tried to yet interpert the new legislation giving the FDA jurisdiction over the e-cig.


Sun

 

[motorcity57]

i think you all are off. flavorings are just the next in line, first they made it a health issue. how do we know it is safer, then how do we keep it out of the wrong hands. after that it will be something else.
it will never end. way to much money at stake. the tobacco companies will fight tooth and nail, they have the money and power. then you have big pharm & the medical profession , very powerfull.
and then the government, you know all they want, taxes & control.
i figure by the time it is all said and done, the government will take control, and in the end it will cost you the same to vape as it cost you to smoke, will i be healthier after all is said and done? i dunno yet, after we have the research of what 30 or 40 years of vaping does to a persons body, i'll know more.

 

[cliff5550]

If it would help the future of ecigs, then let the flavors go. Will vapers actually drop their ecigs and go back to tobacco cigarettes if they can't have their blackberry or cotton candy? How many actually smoked fruity-flavored analogs?
What if the only thing available when you started vaping was tobacco-tasting juice. Would you not have started? Once you found you could breath better, taste and smell better than you had in years, and knew full well you were healthier, would you have actually gone back to analogs? I wouldn't. My wife wouldn't. Our friends wouldn't.
There is so much more to ecigs than "tasty flavors". Granted my wife, and so many others, would miss the flavored juice like it was the end of the world. But I know she would stay with her M401. I think most would stay with what they know works.

 

[TropicalBob]

The argument that will follow "flavors attract young people" will be that e-cigs will discourage smokers from quitting, that smokers will use both e-cigs and real cigs instead of just quitting. Anything that promotes continued cigarette consumption will be opposed.

This argument shows up in the history of other smokeless or smokefree products, so get ready for it.

And just read around this forum for proof of its accuracy ...

 

[J W in Texas]

motorcity57 and TropicalBob are correct in saying that there will always be another argument...always.

Just like how so many keep saying that they haven't been tested or just wait until they are tested. For the last time, They have been tested! Remember the above 'always another argument'? Yeah, well that testing doesn't count because...it was New Zealand...it wasn't long-term testing...

See how easy it is? Every time there's another argument. You can never satisfy the antis no matter how much you give. They take and they take. Odd that they never give anything like an admission or concessions. Oh, yeah...they always give another argument. See how the game is played yet?

So please stop helping them by repeating their talking points such as 'They haven't been tested' Sheesh!!

 

[DaMulta]

I don't agree, and I feel bad for the people that are going to have to drop flavors over this.

Smoking, and vapping are two different things. Nicotine Gum comes in flavors, and so PVs should be able to continue on the same path.

 

[rjmporter]

Rules for Radicals.

Its the play book the oposition (ASH and all the anti-smoking lobby) is using. If you don't understand their willingness to "fight regardless of the truth" and "lay aside the false notion that the ends do not justify the means" then you cannot and will not win this fight!

A PV is no more a drug delivery device than a coffe pot is. Almost any substance could be put in the chamber and vaporized.

Nicotine is not tobacco.
PG Vapor is not smoke.
Vaping is not smoking.

The FDA has no authority here. It appears NJOY and the ECA, however, are willing to concede it to them. That should give us all pause.

Yearning to be free,

RJ

 

[umop apisdn]

Rules for Radicals.

Its the play book the oposition (ASH and all the anti-smoking lobby) is using. If you don't understand their willingness to "fight regardless of the truth" and "lay aside the false notion that the ends do not justify the means" then you cannot and will not win this fight!

A PV is no more a drug delivery device than a coffe pot is. Almost any substance could be put in the chamber and vaporized.

Nicotine is not tobacco.
PG Vapor is not smoke.
Vaping is not smoking.

The FDA has no authority here. It appears NJOY and the ECA, however, are willing to concede it to them. That should give us all pause.

Yearning to be free,

RJ

You summed up my opinions in a nutshell!

 

[markarich159]

I can see strawberry, mango, kiwi and cherry as "flavors" and MB, Kent ,Hilton, Camel, Menthol as "tobacco". But what about products like the RY series(RY1,RY2 etc...) 555, Riskee, taboo, etc... . These are all slightly tweeked tobacco varieties(i.e. RY4 has vanilla and caramel overtones, but it is not either directly caramel or vanilla flavored, technically). Same thing with 555.

Where do you draw the line as to what is considered "flavored" as opposed to just different varities of tobacco with inherent flavor overtones?

 

[Silence]

I would be willing to bet that there will be a very definitive line for tobacco. as in NO added flavors... so that you will have straight tobacco or menthol and nothing else.

 

[Slickstick]

My no smoking 15 year old son vaped 3 puffs of zero mg flavorless watermelon with VG only, (never mixed with alcohol or pg or nicotine), after I asked him if he wanted to try it, and he said he liked it. But never asked to try it again. I asked him did he want to try one with nicotine and he said no. He hasn't had any or asked since.

Although my smoking 17 yr old son would rather vape nicotine than smoke.

I really think vaping only appeals to smokers or spouses of non smokers.

 

[JerryRM]

The un-truths abound in the anti smoker/vaper organizations. It used to be "dangerous second hand smoke", now it's "dangerous second hand nicotine". "Flavored e-cigarettes appeal to children". Ok, so kids like different flavors as do adults, but how are kids going to get e-cigs, walk into their local convenience store and buy a pack? You know as well as I do, that it doesn't work that way. Are they going to buy them on the internet? They would need a credit card for that, even for PayPal and you have to be 18 to get a credit card. From some unscrupulous kiosk vender? Perhaps, but not common. "Electronic cigarettes could lead children to smoking cigarettes". From what I have seen, it's the other way around. Does anyone here know of a non-smoker who started vaping and "graduated" to smoking? I doubt it.

The very idea of children buying e-cigs, flavored or un-flavored is ludicrous. I have said it before and I will say it again: "Think of the children", is a weak argument.

The only argument that I can see against e-cigs, is that they are untested by the FDA.
Other than that IMO they are not a cigarette, they do not contain tobacco, children can not easily get them, they do not contain smoke, they are safer and work better than the pharmaceutical "quit smoking" products and they are not dangerous to bystanders.

I agree that NJOY, in order to justify it's argument that the e-cig is a tobacco product, had to discontinue flavored cartridges. But, there should be no more voluntary concessions. If we are lucky enough to not have them banned, no doubt we will have to make concessions then.

It's all about money, power and special interest groups and we may well be the victims of their greed.

 

[MonkeyUrine]

We can't let them take away the flavours!
It's just another step on the way to a full out ban.

Oh, and kids can easily buy things online. Even without a credit card.

 

[duke118]

Why not just sell the flavoring separate? You can use the flavoring on what ever you want, who says it for e-liquid?

 

[JustJulie]

Personally, I think it's a mistake to concede the flavor argument, especially since I consider the ban on flavored cigarettes to be a joke . . . an attempt by the powers to be to look like they're doing something to "save the children" when they're really doing nothing. Go to Dr. Siegel's blog The Rest of the Story: Tobacco News Analysis and Commentary and type in "flavor" to see just how big a farce the ban on flavored cigarettes is.

In my mind, it should be sufficient to limit the sale of PVs and nicotine-containing liquid to those of legal smoking age and to challenge the industry to provide tamper-proof and child-resistant packaging. Those kinds of regulations make sense.

Banning flavors is a slippery slope . . . as others have noted, when is a tobacco flavor really something more than that? If you enjoy a tobacco flavor with a hint of vanilla, is it a tobacco flavor or is it vanilla? Would it fall under a ban or not?

I think conceding the argument before we even understand what a flavor ban would entail is a huge mistake . . . and an even bigger mistake given that there is absolutely no indication that conceding this argument will do anything to further our cause. If we remove the flavors from the arsenal of things the anti-PV crowd has to argue about, we'll still be battling over how PVs themselves are designed and branded to look/sound "cool" and appeal to children.

Just because the anti-PV crowd is making the argument doesn't mean that it's a valid argument. Accept the argument, and we ought to be banning flavored gum containing nicotine as well as flavored alcohol.