Deeming Regulations have been released!!!!

[The Ocelot]

[emoji38]

Whine: because wearing that shirt, it's inevitable.

[emoji23]

Tapatyped

 

[The Ocelot]

I loved these when I was a kid. We always had them at Christmas.

 

[OcalaFlGuy]

Cinnamon, Menthol are both on a Questionable list.

I think you can still get Oil of Cinnamon at a drug store.

When I was a kid, we would get wood toothpicks and SOAK them in OoC. If you soaked them too long
the Cinnamon would be strong enough to blister a lip. And like snuff, blood vessels are Right There in the lip to take anything Bad in.
Other than a burned lip now and then....we were good to go.
Bruce in Ocala, Fl

 

[Kent C]

Vapor is not good for you. Hell, it's not even not NOT bad for you.

If you want nicotine for its own merits, chew some gum, or eat a bunch of tomatoes.

Nicotine can be good for people in ways that I expressed earlier - Parkinson's, Alhzeimer's, as well as focus and relaxation. It's also an anti-inflammatory good for arthritis and other ailments. Two Swiss studies found less pain in heavier smokers. But of course they didn't advocated smoking. :- )

As far as vapor vs. eating tomatoes - it's a choice and I think there's a contemplative aspect to the vapor/smoke.

"Sherlock Holmes sat silent for a few minutes with his finger tips still pressed together, his legs stretched out in front of him and his gaze directed upwards to the ceiling. Then he took down from the rack the old and oily clay pipe , which was to him as a counselor, and, having it, he leaned back in his chair, with the thick blue cloud-wreaths spinning up from him, and a look of infinite languor in his face."

Holmes again, to Watson:
"It is quite a three pipe problem, and I beg that you won't speak to me for fifty minutes."

Or, we can remember the case in which Holmes needed a pound of the strongest shag tobacco to resolve the problem and stayed alone all the day smoking, and Watson found him in a sort of trance, in a room that "was so filled with the smoke that the light of the lamp upon the table was blurred by it and my first impression as I opened the door was that a fire has broken out".

While it's true that it is fiction, it comes from the mind of a great writer and duplicates his own thoughts on the matter - he's not the only one to have considered this. I'm guessing many of us 'ex-smokers' have experienced this 'positive aspect' of smoke, then vapor.

People who would never consider themselves of that particular political bent quickly discover their Libertarian leanings when their own personal issue comes under attack.

There is no doubt that this is true whether they put it in libertarian terms or not. What doesn't happen for some, is extending that to other issues. They see no correlation. Sad...

If ONLY the harm-reduction is engaged, then, at best, we'll end up with closed-systems using state-defined nic levels, packaged by multi-million dollar "trusted" BT and BP labs.

The only way you're going to keep the right to taste-test juice in a shop to take home and drip onto the coil of your choice, is to win the personal-freedoms debate.

You seem to have had a different, if not opposite, take earlier in this thread:

If you want a chance at success, you need to put away the personal freedoms argument at least until you've won some ground. From here on out, it needs to be entirely about harm-reduction- a mature, articulate, carefully crafted discussion about vaping to get away from tobacco.

....unless you think we've "won some ground" since then. I'd disagree with that. I think we've lost some - although not "lost" :- )

 

[VNeil]

Nicotine can be good for people in ways that I expressed earlier - Parkinson's, Alhzeimer's, as well as focus and relaxation. It's also an anti-inflammatory good for arthritis and other ailments. Two Swiss studies found less pain in heavier smokers. But of course they didn't advocated smoking. :- )

As far as vapor vs. eating tomatoes - it's a choice and I think there's a contemplative aspect to the vapor/smoke.

"Sherlock Holmes sat silent for a few minutes with his finger tips still pressed together, his legs stretched out in front of him and his gaze directed upwards to the ceiling. Then he took down from the rack the old and oily clay pipe , which was to him as a counselor, and, having it, he leaned back in his chair, with the thick blue cloud-wreaths spinning up from him, and a look of infinite languor in his face."

Holmes again, to Watson:
"It is quite a three pipe problem, and I beg that you won't speak to me for fifty minutes."

Or, we can remember the case in which Holmes needed a pound of the strongest shag tobacco to resolve the problem and stayed alone all the day smoking, and Watson found him in a sort of trance, in a room that "was so filled with the smoke that the light of the lamp upon the table was blurred by it and my first impression as I opened the door was that a fire has broken out".

While it's true that it is fiction, it comes from the mind of a great writer and duplicates his own thoughts on the matter - he's not the only one to have considered this. I'm guessing many of us 'ex-smokers' have experienced this 'positive aspect' of smoke, then vapor.




There is no doubt that this is true whether they put it in libertarian terms or not. What doesn't happen for some, is extending that to other issues. They see no correlation. Sad...



You seem to have had a different, if not opposite, take earlier in this thread:



....unless you think we've "won some ground" since then. I'd disagree with that. I think we've lost some - although not "lost" :- )

I think it is so sad that the personal freedoms argument seems to be at the bottom of the priority list. It was very evident to me during the AEI video,. where it was all about the public interests. Little about personal freedom or liberty. The Constitution has been fully shredded.

 

[The Ocelot]

Lol, I remember NY's proposed (failed) Big Gulp ban.... NY is always first it seems, they're very caring that way. Important civics lesson? I've got one for you, impose a 100% excise tax on "junk food" that way you cover sweet snacks, pop, fatty foods, hollow calories etc. Let's call it the "Save our children from terrorism Act". I know-I know, it has absolutely nothing to do with the intent/purpose of the law but that's what works to secure unwavering public support. Roll the law under the "Patriot Act" so that no one actually reads it before passing it into law. Wordsmith the law so vaguely that it could apply to pretty much anything you decided to target/tax. Appoint a "Food Czar" to oversee the law, I'm thinking NY governor Chris Christie would be a shoo in.

 

[The Ocelot]

Since this is the thread I usually post to. I am asking you to send prayers and your good vibes to my City Beautiful Orlando as we go through this horrible time. My heart is broken that this has happened in my little city. Thanks to you all.

It is impossible for me to comprehend that many people. My heart hurts.

 

[Katya]

Since this is the thread I usually post to. I am asking you to send prayers and your good vibes to my City Beautiful Orlando as we go through this horrible time. My heart is broken that this has happened in my little city. Thanks to you all.

My love and my deepest sympathies to all of you in Florida and to the entire GLBT community.

 

[GunMonkeyINTL]

You seem to have had a different, if not opposite, take earlier in this thread:



....unless you think we've "won some ground" since then. I'd disagree with that. I think we've lost some - although not "lost" :- )

Good catch. And, actually, my change of heart has come about because I feel like we've lost ground. Two weeks, and 300 or so pages ago, I was still naively optimistic what we would see some counter-point in the mass media.

I though, for sure, that we'd see some mobilization by the vaping organizations, between-the-commercials visits from spokespeople frm CASAA and SAFATA on CNN, FNC, and MSNBC. I though, by now, that when a Dr. JJ recited the lies about formaldehyde, there'd at least be someone on the panel to say "...but didn't we see Dr. Siegel say..."

But...nothing.

The mainstream media play seems to be over, it's on to something else, and the biggest media we're discussing now is a bit from the Hallmark channel- and with no counter, at that.

I'm afraid that all we may have left is to demand to be left alone as others would have for themselves.

The media had the harm-reduction debate, and they never even called anyone from our side.

We're nearly half way to August, now, and I don't see where J Q Public has even heard from our side.

 

[Kent C]

Good catch. And, actually, my change of heart has come about because I feel like we've lost ground. Two weeks, and 300 or so pages ago, I was still naively optimistic what we would see some counter-point in the mass media.

Well since then the hammer has come down - rather harder than some of us thought. So.... Understood!! :- )

The media had the harm-reduction debate, and they never even called anyone from our side.

The "harm-reduction" debate is Scientists vs. Junk Scientists - as has been shown by 'our' scientists - with little or no response by their side, only reiterations, that the media is more than happy to repeat. AND... sadly, some don't know about Junk Science, so for them there's no judgment to be made one way or another. They'd actually have to read the studies like most of us in the Media/Regulation/Legislation forums have done. No hit on them - they have better things to do, I'm sure, esp. if they don't vape or don't know vapers.

And harm reduction vs. tobacco control is a 'practical' exercise (or some would say 'empirical') but when it comes to rights - some don't employ pragmatism. No matter how much evidence there might be that restricting speech may be "good for the net public", many civil libertarians, left-right- and center wouldn't be for it no matter how much science was applied. And that's as it should be. I could give other not so politically correct examples as well, but won't get into that - you'll know what I mean. :- )

 

[The Ocelot]

How about the fda just bans the children?

They say It Takes a Village. So put them in a freaking village until they're 18. If you like kids, you can go visit them. You can even feed them. A bag of sugar snacks is $1.00.

 

[leftyandsparky]

They say It Takes a Village. So put them in a freaking village until they're 18. If you like kids, you can go visit them. You can even feed them. A bag of sugar snacks is $1.00.

They do, it's called public school and snacks cost $1-$2

 

[Yiana]

They say It Takes a Village. So put them in a freaking village until they're 18. If you like kids, you can go visit them. You can even feed them. A bag of sugar snacks is $1.00.

They do, it's called public school and snacks cost $1-$2

 

[leftyandsparky]

That snack cart cost this momma $10 last month

 

[Yiana]

That snack cart cost this momma $10 last month

I remember those days...my daughter is now 19, but she was always hitting me up for money for snacks.

 

[lauragal]

Lol, I remember NY's proposed (failed) Big Gulp ban.... NY is always first it seems, they're very caring that way. Important civics lesson? I've got one for you, impose a 100% excise tax on "junk food" that way you cover sweet snacks, pop, fatty foods, hollow calories etc. Let's call it the "Save our children from terrorism Act". I know-I know, it has absolutely nothing to do with the intent/purpose of the law but that's what works to secure unwavering public support. Roll the law under the "Patriot Act" so that no one actually reads it before passing it into law. Wordsmith the law so vaguely that it could apply to pretty much anything you decided to target/tax. Appoint a "Food Czar" to oversee the law, I'm thinking NY governor Chris Christie would be a shoo in.

Chris Christie is gov of NJ - lucky NY'ers have DiBlasio

 

[FlamingoTutu]

This just popped up. Vaping teens more apt to move on to regular cigarettes: U.S. study The only good part is Dr. Siegel at the end.

 

[Bob Chill]

Good catch. And, actually, my change of heart has come about because I feel like we've lost ground. Two weeks, and 300 or so pages ago, I was still naively optimistic what we would see some counter-point in the mass media.

I though, for sure, that we'd see some mobilization by the vaping organizations, between-the-commercials visits from spokespeople frm CASAA and SAFATA on CNN, FNC, and MSNBC. I though, by now, that when a Dr. JJ recited the lies about formaldehyde, there'd at least be someone on the panel to say "...but didn't we see Dr. Siegel say..."

But...nothing.

The mainstream media play seems to be over, it's on to something else, and the biggest media we're discussing now is a bit from the Hallmark channel- and with no counter, at that.

I'm afraid that all we may have left is to demand to be left alone as others would have for themselves.

The media had the harm-reduction debate, and they never even called anyone from our side.

We're nearly half way to August, now, and I don't see where J Q Public has even heard from our side.

Our side is way too small to be heard in the big picture. 75% of the US doesn't smoke and has zero interest in learning about "safer smoke". I cant really fault them. It's just not an issue that is viewed as "important". I never expected our voice to sway public. Unfortunately it's not realistic to expect otherwise.

Our battle has to be won in court or get help from people who have the power to change policy. Both of which are already happening but there is no instant gratification in this fight. A multi round cage match with us as the underdogs is all we have.

I'm not a pessimist. Just a realist. Vaping isn't getting banned, just restructured as far as any uninterested bystander is concerned. It really sucks but that's where we are right now and without a majority we're left with lawyers and policy makers to do the real dirty work.

There will come a time when the body of evidence trumps all junk science and propaganda. We're already moving in that direction.

Imho- best case scenario is an injunction with reasonable concessions before before control is finally but firmly held by the Feds and States. No way around taxation and supply chain regulation. Worst case scenario is a major contraction and regs passed as is but ripe for deregulation over the next 5 years.

I know this post will not be well received but I've been down this path in a different but much larger industry not that long ago. The unthinkable was reality faster than I could spell my 3 letter first name.

Even if every industry group and vaper screamed bloody murder at the exact same time, it's not changing handing over control to the Feds and States. It's weird because the primary reason is the popularity and effectivness of ecigs are the same things that are destroying our unregulated industry. We collectively disrupted the wrong folks. They wanted us to go away. They hoped we wouldn't grow and "take away". But we did and here we are.

 

[Qew]

It's too bad there isn't an Erin Brockovich for us, she helped get national attention for the Flint water crisis. We know the government is taking control, but it's the WAY they are doing it that people need to hear about.

 

[crxess]

This just popped up. Vaping teens more apt to move on to regular cigarettes: U.S. study The only good part is Dr. Siegel at the end.

Bull Shirt Study:

Missing Data -Adolescents who reported currently using each product on at least 1 of the past 30 days and who did not report an age at first use were classified as current users (cigarettes:n 53 students; e-cigarettes:n 57students)

Adolescents who reported never having used a product but who did not report whether they had used a product in the past 30 days were classified as never users (cigarettes:n51 student; e-cigarettes:n 52students). Participants who reported not using in the past 30 days and who did not indicate an age at which they had begun using each product were classified as missing (cigarettes:n 53students; e-cigarettes:n 54 students).
Participants were excluded from the current analysis if they were missing
data on ever or current cigarette use (n 53), ever or current e-cigarette use
(n 54), or both (n 56).

Jessica Barrington-Trimis - I am a Postdoctoral Scholar-Research Associate at the University of Southern California (USC) Tobacco Center of Regulatory Science (TCORS). My current research focuses primarily on analyses and manuscripts under development in the USC TCORS, evaluating factors associated with patterns of tobacco product use (with a focus on e-cigarettes) in adolescence.

So they Skewed their testing to fit an intended outcome.

I.E. FDA Funded -Glantz indoctrinated - Propaganda Generator

Psychosocial Factors Associated With Adolescent Electronic Cigarette and Cigarette Use | Articles | Pediatrics
http://pediatrics.aappublications.o...plemental/peds.2015-0639SupplementaryData.pdf

This study was NOT on a National Basis and only included a Small group of So. Cali HS Teens<<<Peer influence may Skew results