Deeming Regulations have been released!!!!

SeniorBoy

VapeFight.com Founder
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
May 21, 2013
1,738
5,168
Las Vegas, NV
vapefight.com
Here comes the FDA! Report your defective e-cig to the FDA!

Updated on 6/8/16

"Problems with E-Cigarettes, vape Products, Hookah, Cigarettes or tobacco? Tell FDA

Are you using a tobacco product—from e-cigs to cigars and cigarettes, hookah to smokeless—that you believe is defective or is causing an unexpected health problem? Does it have a strange taste or smell?"

Source which includes a link to the reporting tool!

:evil:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Yiana

halonut

Unregistered Supplier
ECF Veteran
Perhaps consumers, retailers, and manufacturers need to come together and form ONE entity to fight the 2007 grandfather date. That is our first and biggest concern. I propose "Vapers Against Government Interference Negating Advancements". Together, we can lick em!
LMAO...I see what ya did there! Lick em good :lol:
 

halonut

Unregistered Supplier
ECF Veteran
This is Lessifer's first post in the exchange:



Should shops do all they can to change things?? Yes. And I agree with Mazinny - wouldn't it be nice if just 50% of the shops would inform their customers - Yes.

But then Less says: "What good does it do to keep customers in the dark?"

Here is where the problem starts. Because it implies (stronger than implies - states outright) that the business has an intention to "keep customers uninformed".

An observation in reality is one thing. Assigning intent (which one never knows) is another. And this is mainly the problem.

I tried to explain it - albeit unsuccessfully to Lessifer (and evidently you) - here:



And it's an either/or situation - the observation may be from a 5-15 minute visit to a shop (or later "many shops" and from you "dozens of shops") - this is basically the Anecdotal fallacy – using a personal experience or an isolated example instead of sound reasoning or compelling evidence.

OR the intentionally "keeping customers in the dark" is a conclusion based, not on an observation itself. From where does this "conclusion" come? Either there is more actual evidence that has not been stated - for example, say the person talked to the owner and the owner said - 'we're just keeping the customers in the dark on this, no need to involve them' which would tend to explain such a declaration... OR it is from a bias of the person making the observation and conclusion of intent.

I acknowledge there are 'anecdotals' on 'both sides' - some shops saying nothing, some shops saying and displaying CASAA stuff with letters to sign and informing their customers of the situation:



I have been in many discussion with Lessifer and while I know that we have some differences in views, we have 'liked' many of each others posts in the past. And while I don't claim to have read every post of his, I have read almost all of his in these types of forums. And I never recall him ever either misreading so badly or misrepresenting - by putting words in the mouths of those with whom he takes up a point, like he has multiple times in this exchange. Things I never said. Perhaps others who have similarly exchanged with him, could point me to such cases, but personally I have never seen it, prior to this. I expect it from some others and they usually comply :- ) ...but not from Lessifer, which is now a source of disappointment to put it mildly.

It isn't shops god given duty to inform customers. If they choose to do so...good for them, if they think it's in their best interest to keep it low key then that's their prerogative.

This is the whole problem with American society today, everyone's more worried about everyone else's business than they are their own.

So if a certain shop is on their soapbox crying as loud as they can about FDA deeming & it gets delayed or shot down will they not be vilified for trying to create "panic buying" just to make a buck?

Kent put it well, when he said "you're not in their (the vendors) shoes"
 

bigdancehawk

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jan 27, 2010
1,462
5,477
Kansas City, Missouri
Here comes the FDA! Report your defective e-cig to the FDA!

Updated on 6/8/16

"Problems with E-Cigarettes, Vape Products, Hookah, Cigarettes or Tobacco? Tell FDA

Are you using a tobacco product—from e-cigs to cigars and cigarettes, hookah to smokeless—that you believe is defective or is causing an unexpected health problem? Does it have a strange taste or smell?"

Source which includes a link to the reporting tool!

:evil:
You can read these reports HERE. I wouldn't recommend it, but they might be good for some laughs. Reading the first 4 or 5, I discovered that a mere whiff of second hand vapor causes extreme adverse reactions such as nausea, headaches, coughing, trouble breathing, aggravation of chest colds, wheezing and "lung infection."

A person who used a Blu found that it caused pain, numbness, itching and an "unusual sensation."

Another person reported that their "neighbor's" vapor causes her to suffer "painful respiratory and auditory problems," "eye redness," "severe tightness to the chest," and "problem breathing." Her dog suffers similar effects. Naturally, this has resulted in "many trips to doctor" and a trip to the emergency room. Blood work and lab results showed "traces of various chemicals and nicotine." Sadly, she now needs an inhaler and she's being treated for "asthma related symptoms directly related to e-cigarette second hand smoke."

This was just from reading the first few 2014 reports. Nothing after 2014 is available to view on line yet.

So, will the FDA dismiss these as mere "anecdotes" unworthy of serious consideration in formulating policy? If so, why are they collecting this garbage?
 

Kent C

ECF Guru
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 12, 2009
26,547
60,051
NW Ohio US
Kent put it well, when he said "you're not in their (the vendors) shoes"

Appreciate the comments but have no intention of continuing this. People said what they thought, and I think Lessifer and others who said if the vendor isn't 'involved' - hoping that at least they asked the vendor rather than just assumed so - and they refuse to give them their business, then I'm good with that.
 

wiredlove

Master Lurker
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Feb 2, 2010
394
1,320
KY
You can read these reports HERE. I wouldn't recommend it, but they might be good for some laughs. Reading the first 4 or 5, I discovered that a mere whiff of second hand vapor causes extreme adverse reactions such as nausea, headaches, coughing, trouble breathing, aggravation of chest colds, wheezing and "lung infection."

A person who used a Blu found that it caused pain, numbness, itching and an "unusual sensation."

Another person reported that their "neighbor's" vapor causes her to suffer "painful respiratory and auditory problems," "eye redness," "severe tightness to the chest," and "problem breathing." Her dog suffers similar effects. Naturally, this has resulted in "many trips to doctor" and a trip to the emergency room. Blood work and lab results showed "traces of various chemicals and nicotine." Sadly, she now needs an inhaler and she's being treated for "asthma related symptoms directly related to e-cigarette second hand smoke."

This was just from reading the first few 2014 reports. Nothing after 2014 is available to view on line yet.

So, will the FDA dismiss these as mere "anecdotes" unworthy of serious consideration in formulating policy? If so, why are they collecting this garbage?

While they may actually be gathering information about those particular issues, I suspect part of it is also an attempt to weed out the, "Someone vaped on me and my eyeball fell out." It seems aimed to keep them off the phone and makes it extremely easy to move the reports to the circular file folder / file 13. God help us if they give any self-reporting any level of credence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bigdancehawk

Lessifer

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Feb 5, 2013
8,309
28,986
Sacramento, California
It isn't shops god given duty to inform customers. If they choose to do so...good for them, if they think it's in their best interest to keep it low key then that's their prerogative.

This is the whole problem with American society today, everyone's more worried about everyone else's business than they are their own.

So if a certain shop is on their soapbox crying as loud as they can about FDA deeming & it gets delayed or shot down will they not be vilified for trying to create "panic buying" just to make a buck?

Kent put it well, when he said "you're not in their (the vendors) shoes"
In that case, no vendor/industry person should ever say that there aren't enough of us(consumers) involved. If vendors can't be asked to inform as many customers as possible that there IS a problem, then they can't expect those consumers to help.

Vendors can of course choose to do what they want, and I can choose to spend money where I want.
 

DC2

Tootie Puffer
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 21, 2009
24,161
40,974
San Diego
It isn't shops god given duty to inform customers. If they choose to do so...good for them, if they think it's in their best interest to keep it low key then that's their prerogative.

This is the whole problem with American society today, everyone's more worried about everyone else's business than they are their own.

So if a certain shop is on their soapbox crying as loud as they can about FDA deeming & it gets delayed or shot down will they not be vilified for trying to create "panic buying" just to make a buck?

Kent put it well, when he said "you're not in their (the vendors) shoes"
So, out of curiosity... what would be a good reason not to direct customers to CASAA?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Yiana

DC2

Tootie Puffer
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 21, 2009
24,161
40,974
San Diego
So, will the FDA dismiss these as mere "anecdotes" unworthy of serious consideration in formulating policy? If so, why are they collecting this garbage?
No silly.

The FDA is doing a "study" and the results will be published in mainstream media.
At which point it will become all sciency and be held up as gospel.

We are "anecdotes" but their "reports" represent valid data points.
So now you can see where the difference lies.

Because, yeah.
:unsure:
 
Last edited:

GaryInTexas

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Mar 20, 2013
1,439
4,477
NE Texas, USA
You can read these reports HERE. I wouldn't recommend it, but they might be good for some laughs. Reading the first 4 or 5, I discovered that a mere whiff of second hand vapor causes extreme adverse reactions such as nausea, headaches, coughing, trouble breathing, aggravation of chest colds, wheezing and "lung infection."

A person who used a Blu found that it caused pain, numbness, itching and an "unusual sensation."

Another person reported that their "neighbor's" vapor causes her to suffer "painful respiratory and auditory problems," "eye redness," "severe tightness to the chest," and "problem breathing." Her dog suffers similar effects. Naturally, this has resulted in "many trips to doctor" and a trip to the emergency room. Blood work and lab results showed "traces of various chemicals and nicotine." Sadly, she now needs an inhaler and she's being treated for "asthma related symptoms directly related to e-cigarette second hand smoke."

This was just from reading the first few 2014 reports. Nothing after 2014 is available to view on line yet.

So, will the FDA dismiss these as mere "anecdotes" unworthy of serious consideration in formulating policy? If so, why are they collecting this garbage?

Appears it also brings on severe bouts of mental disability with total loss of common sense and ability to reason.
 

classwife

Admin
Admin
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
May 9, 2010
98,564
161,088
68
Wesley Chapel, Florida
You can read these reports HERE. I wouldn't recommend it, but they might be good for some laughs. Reading the first 4 or 5, I discovered that a mere whiff of second hand vapor causes extreme adverse reactions such as nausea, headaches, coughing, trouble breathing, aggravation of chest colds, wheezing and "lung infection."

A person who used a Blu found that it caused pain, numbness, itching and an "unusual sensation."

Another person reported that their "neighbor's" vapor causes her to suffer "painful respiratory and auditory problems," "eye redness," "severe tightness to the chest," and "problem breathing." Her dog suffers similar effects. Naturally, this has resulted in "many trips to doctor" and a trip to the emergency room. Blood work and lab results showed "traces of various chemicals and nicotine." Sadly, she now needs an inhaler and she's being treated for "asthma related symptoms directly related to e-cigarette second hand smoke."

This was just from reading the first few 2014 reports. Nothing after 2014 is available to view on line yet.

So, will the FDA dismiss these as mere "anecdotes" unworthy of serious consideration in formulating policy? If so, why are they collecting this garbage?


...my never smoked or vaped co-worker and boss are laughing at the ridiculousness of this - (they aren't ignorant...I vape at work and I never even had to ask if it was ok)
 

DC2

Tootie Puffer
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 21, 2009
24,161
40,974
San Diego
Appears it also brings on severe bouts of mental disability with total loss of common sense and ability to reason.
See, here's the thing...

We have a lot of retired people here with time on their hands.
And they are motivated to action for the positive.

The other side has retired people too, with time on their hands.
They have folks who they loved that died of cancer.
They, too, are quite motivated.

They are willing to lie...
Or maybe they've been lied to and just don't know any better...
But we don't have to lie at all...

They, therefore, qualify as minions.
We are advocates.

That seems to be the difference.
 
Last edited:

Kent C

ECF Guru
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 12, 2009
26,547
60,051
NW Ohio US
You can read these reports HERE. I wouldn't recommend it, but they might be good for some laughs. Reading the first 4 or 5, I discovered that a mere whiff of second hand vapor causes extreme adverse reactions such as nausea, headaches, coughing, trouble breathing, aggravation of chest colds, wheezing and "lung infection."

A person who used a Blu found that it caused pain, numbness, itching and an "unusual sensation."

Another person reported that their "neighbor's" vapor causes her to suffer "painful respiratory and auditory problems," "eye redness," "severe tightness to the chest," and "problem breathing." Her dog suffers similar effects. Naturally, this has resulted in "many trips to doctor" and a trip to the emergency room. Blood work and lab results showed "traces of various chemicals and nicotine." Sadly, she now needs an inhaler and she's being treated for "asthma related symptoms directly related to e-cigarette second hand smoke."

This was just from reading the first few 2014 reports. Nothing after 2014 is available to view on line yet.

So, will the FDA dismiss these as mere "anecdotes" unworthy of serious consideration in formulating policy? If so, why are they collecting this garbage?

Wonder how many actually vape and how many are part of the Glantz, ACA, ALA et al 'network''??
 

bigdancehawk

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jan 27, 2010
1,462
5,477
Kansas City, Missouri
Wonder how many actually vape and how many are part of the Glantz, ACA, ALA et al 'network''??
Very few actual vapers, I'd imagine. "Victims" of second-hand vapor account for a majority of these "reports." This country has more than its share of useful idiots, hypochondriacs, whiners, and highly suggestible people whose primary "skills" consist of lying, imagining things and making up crap.
 

classwife

Admin
Admin
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
May 9, 2010
98,564
161,088
68
Wesley Chapel, Florida
Wonder how many actually vape and how many are part of the Glantz, ACA, ALA et al 'network''??


Yep, nothing "verifiable"


Heck...go through the E-Liquid Forum and find all the "this liquid tastes like cat pee" threads :lol:

Taste is all subjective AND there are SO MANY withdrawl symptoms from smoking cigarettes !!

Plus...people ARE nervous about vaping with the negative crap they hear - you NEED someone to tell you it's ok.
 

zoiDman

My -0^10 = Nothing at All*
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 16, 2010
41,618
1
84,742
So-Cal
It isn't shops god given duty to inform customers. If they choose to do so...good for them, if they think it's in their best interest to keep it low key then that's their prerogative.

...

Just Curious?

What is your Take of Shops/Online Retailers who, when asked, tell their Customers/Employees that there is Nothing to Worry about regarding the FDA and e-Cigarettes?
 

Users who are viewing this thread