Diacetyl Free - Does it Matter?

Status
Not open for further replies.

zoiDman

My -0^10 = Nothing at All*
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 16, 2010
41,617
1
84,722
So-Cal
I will try to explain it once again, foundation, the the brick and motor of what your claim
is based upon. With out proper foundation there can be no claim. Wait there's more.
We are no where close to the not introduced as evidence phase.
If you don't understand the legal hurdles that's ok. I only have a rudimentary understanding.
Harm or likely hood of harm has to be proved. Without that they have nothing.
mike

Hey Mike. You might be Right on the Money.

And the Law Firm with some of the Biggest and Brightest "Rain Making" who put this Suit together May be Wrong. And the Two Lawyers I showed a Copy of the Complaint maybe be Wrong.

And this Suit may get Tossed Out. So Why don't we let things Play Out a Little. And see how things go.
 

zoiDman

My -0^10 = Nothing at All*
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 16, 2010
41,617
1
84,722
So-Cal
If the substance in question was water a class action suit would look silly, so to suggest that the heart of this suit isn't about the claims that DA & AP are harmful is a bit naive.

Just a Simple Question.

Was Anyone Physically Harmed by wearing Sketchers in this Lawsuit?

Skechers Will Pay $40 Million to Settle FTC Charges That It Deceived Consumers with Ads for "Toning Shoes" | Federal Trade Commission

Or was it that some Shoe Company Claimed something that Wasn't True?
 

YoursTruli

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
May 27, 2012
4,406
14,895
Ohio
Threads like this one always make me think of this post...

Oh no! Another health question concerning some juices

"Electronic cigarette timeline

2009
E-cigarettes start to become popular
The general idea is that they are a safer replacement for cigarettes
100 flavors available

2010
UK consumer statistics research report says about 50% of smokers have heard of ecigs, 6% have tried them, 3% use them [those numbers sound a bit high to me, but what do I know]
Now ecigs are seen as a viable replacement - but also a whole new gig
Hot new flavors are fun
1,000 flavors available

2011
Ecigs are a major new industry
tobacco use drops
Mega-hot flavors available for those with asbestos lungs
5,000 flavors available

2012
Ecigs are a mainstream 'smoking' product
Reynolds and Morris shares crash
Big Pharma hysterical, nobody needs NRTs any more
Kamikaze vapers use cinammon + chilli + PGA e-liquid
10,000 flavors available

2013
Reynolds, Morris release Marlboro and Winston E-Cigs
Pfizer release Nicotroll inhaler (looks remarkably like an e-cig)
Everybody happy
15,000 super-hot flavors available including cinammon + gasoline, and chilli & kerosene
Still not hot enough for some vapers

2014
Circus fire eaters complain they are being put out of work by vapers
Hundreds of vapers need lung transplants
FDA bans all but 3 flavors as kids might like them (all flavors still available on the web of course)
Vapers' favorite is now cinammon + battery acid + napalm + a touch of menthol - it's lovely

2015
Harm reduction device sought to replace the ecig

:)


rolygate,Jan 28, 2011"

hrmmmm

0011.gif
 
Last edited:

Jman8

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Jan 15, 2013
6,419
12,928
Wisconsin
I just don't see Everything as ANTZ Driven. And No. I don't see this as an "ANTZ-friendly" legal Team.

I think Lumping everyone into ANTZ's just because you Don't Agree with what they Say or Do is Kinda One Dimensional.

Thank God I'm not doing the latter.

I observe you didn't respond to one of my questions. If you don't see this as an ANTZ-friendly legal team, then really nothing to debate with you. In my mind, you are supporting ANTZ propaganda. The NJOY suit doesn't get any play from you and all other points I raise are met with straw man fallacies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: skoony

Jman8

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Jan 15, 2013
6,419
12,928
Wisconsin
Just a Simple Question.

Was Anyone Physically Harmed by wearing Sketchers in this Lawsuit?

Skechers Will Pay $40 Million to Settle FTC Charges That It Deceived Consumers with Ads for "Toning Shoes" | Federal Trade Commission

Or was it that some Shoe Company Claimed something that Wasn't True?

Well it wasn't the straw man question you first raised.

The NJOY suit isn't about physical harm, so safe to say not all false advertising claims are on the same topic.

But at least with Skechers suit and NJOY, people could point to actual advertising if say it came up on a discussion forum about where the false claims were being advertised.
 
  • Like
Reactions: skoony
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread