Only in FDA offices.
Man, would i love to be a fly on the wall observing what would take place on a normal work day after that, lol
Ecigs have been banned?
- Thread starter Jman8
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Man, would i love to be a fly on the wall observing what would take place on a normal work day after that, lol
Yeah, funny how OP disappears when it's mentioned that our loving caring nannies....sorry...I meant governments.... have no problem approving the 1000's of chemicals in cigarettes including arsenic and MOAI's - both of which guarantee you're going to have significant withdrawal if you ever try to quit them.
But, but, but... They are the FDA! They regulate cigarettes so they must be safe.
So did she go? Us paranoid addictive addicts? Anything saying ECigs Banned will definitely get attention here and that's point. Lots of people are lassiez faire. If a group who wants to ban eCigs can rock the boat with blatant lies then why oh why are we supposed perfect and always say the right thing the exact right way ALL the time? or be misconstrued as paranoid addictive addicts or whatever inflammatory remark she originally posted. Should I say provocative? It doesn't ring of that higher level
Yes, I have to wonder about the OP's intent/agenda, if there was one (but that's just me, lol)
This is not a perfect world...as long as Humankind is here, it never will be.
Human beings are not automatons that can be easily(if at all) programmed to be perfect, there is no such thing.
All of the things that Humans were addicted to 200 years ago, they are still addicted to, in some form or fashion and it doesn't make any difference whether the substance is legal or illegal, regulated or not back then or now.
And if she feels misunderstood should have stated what she wanted to state absolutely incontestably concisely exactly verifiably in a perfect substantiated manner....with links
If the OP doesn't see the writing on the wall, doesn't mean it isn't there.
FDA will likely not "ban" ecigs. I would bet dollars to donuts that they will be ending the sale of nicotine juice on the internet in these United States, and likely banning sale of flavored ejuices (such as the vanilla cherry coke flavored juice of the OP), limiting nicotine content, and likely the sale of all nicotine juices outside of cartomizer type delivery devices (no more buying 50ml of 24mg to put in the device of your choice).
Of course, the FDA hasn't yet told us exactly what they will do (that is coming in April I believe?), but really, what do you expect them to do?
It shouldn't take a rocket surgeon to figure it out.
FDA will likely not "ban" ecigs. I would bet dollars to donuts that they will be ending the sale of nicotine juice on the internet in these United States, and likely banning sale of flavored ejuices (such as the vanilla cherry coke flavored juice of the OP), limiting nicotine content, and likely the sale of all nicotine juices outside of cartomizer type delivery devices (no more buying 50ml of 24mg to put in the device of your choice).
Of course, the FDA hasn't yet told us exactly what they will do (that is coming in April I believe?), but really, what do you expect them to do?
It shouldn't take a rocket surgeon to figure it out.
LOL What I really mean is, vaping is not a tobacco product IMO. Nicotine is an alkaloid. Caffeine is an alkaloid. Calling vaping a tobacco product is like saying Pepsi is coffee.
I am posting this on behalf of Kristin (at her request) because she can not post in the New Members forum
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FDA issued a statement in July 2009 that showed its prejudice against e-cigarettes (and its lack of concern for the health and well-being of consumers who use them) by greatly exaggerating and sensationalizing the significance of findings in lab tests of 18 samples of two brands of e-cigarettes. Misinformation, exaggeration and lies about e-cigarettes remain on the site today.
FDA and Public Health Experts Warn About Electronic Cigarettes
In 2008, the FDA attempted to ban electronic cigarettes by claiming that they were "unapproved drug treatments." They began seizing product at customs. Two e-cigarette companies sued to get the FDA to release their products and stop seizing products. They argued that the "intended use" of e-cigarettes is not a treatment for nicotine addiction but as an alternative to smoking traditional cigarettes. The judge agreed and ruled in 2010 the FDA could not treat e-cigarettes as an unapproved drug treatment without specific theraputic claims. The judge suggested that the recent passage of FSPTCA would allow the FDA to regulate e-cigarettes as a "tobacco product." The category of "tobacco product" includes any products made or derived from tobacco for human consumption. So, the FDA has power to regulate any e-cigarettes that contain tobacco-sourced nicotine as "tobacco products."
http://casaa.org/uploads/SE-vs-FDA-Opinion.pdf
In January 2013, the FDA issued notice of intent to propose "deeming" regulation by April, 2013 (to apply Chapter IX of FSPTCA to e-cigarettes, cigars, pipe tobacco, shisha/hookah and other tobacco products not currently subject to Chapter IX regulations) "and to specify additional restrictions."
Regulation of E-Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products
To quote CASAA President Elaine Keller on the above FDA "deeming regulations":
So, while there is no announced "intended ban" on e-cigarettes, FDA actions could easily result in a "de facto ban" by making it nearly impossible for e-cigarette companies to sell their products in the US. Based on previous action by the FDA regarding electronic cigarettes; and that the FDA is currently considering allowing NRT products to be used in a similar fashion; and that the FDA gets it's funding from payments made by the pharmaceutical companies for drug approvals, there is every reason to suspect that the FDA is prejudiced against e-cigarettes and still intends to either remove them entirely from the market or render them so ineffective as to decimate the market.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FDA issued a statement in July 2009 that showed its prejudice against e-cigarettes (and its lack of concern for the health and well-being of consumers who use them) by greatly exaggerating and sensationalizing the significance of findings in lab tests of 18 samples of two brands of e-cigarettes. Misinformation, exaggeration and lies about e-cigarettes remain on the site today.
FDA and Public Health Experts Warn About Electronic Cigarettes
In 2008, the FDA attempted to ban electronic cigarettes by claiming that they were "unapproved drug treatments." They began seizing product at customs. Two e-cigarette companies sued to get the FDA to release their products and stop seizing products. They argued that the "intended use" of e-cigarettes is not a treatment for nicotine addiction but as an alternative to smoking traditional cigarettes. The judge agreed and ruled in 2010 the FDA could not treat e-cigarettes as an unapproved drug treatment without specific theraputic claims. The judge suggested that the recent passage of FSPTCA would allow the FDA to regulate e-cigarettes as a "tobacco product." The category of "tobacco product" includes any products made or derived from tobacco for human consumption. So, the FDA has power to regulate any e-cigarettes that contain tobacco-sourced nicotine as "tobacco products."
http://casaa.org/uploads/SE-vs-FDA-Opinion.pdf
In January 2013, the FDA issued notice of intent to propose "deeming" regulation by April, 2013 (to apply Chapter IX of FSPTCA to e-cigarettes, cigars, pipe tobacco, shisha/hookah and other tobacco products not currently subject to Chapter IX regulations) "and to specify additional restrictions."
Regulation of E-Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products
To quote CASAA President Elaine Keller on the above FDA "deeming regulations":
So, while there is no announced "intended ban" on e-cigarettes, FDA actions could easily result in a "de facto ban" by making it nearly impossible for e-cigarette companies to sell their products in the US. Based on previous action by the FDA regarding electronic cigarettes; and that the FDA is currently considering allowing NRT products to be used in a similar fashion; and that the FDA gets it's funding from payments made by the pharmaceutical companies for drug approvals, there is every reason to suspect that the FDA is prejudiced against e-cigarettes and still intends to either remove them entirely from the market or render them so ineffective as to decimate the market.
Aww don't be like that. This thread became a pretty lively discussion on the issue, not much more you can ask for. You can't hit enter with the assumption that's all it takes to win people over. Discussion is the goal, and it's been met. A recurring request is one of links, but man, this very place is a testament to the studies we refer to: a searchable forum. If your goal was persuasion then accessing the info we all have here, linking what you want and systematically listing your points was probably the best option. Nobody is disregarding you, this thread is 10+ pages long, and nobody is getting personal on you. Seems like a win.
I know one thing...
If the FDA bottlenecks our access to the Tobacco Cos. for e-liq and delivery systems (putting a lot of our juice vendors and maybe more out of business) I will figure out a way to vape without them.
It may be VG without nic, but I will find a way.
If BT suceeds in doing something like that they will be in trouble because those in the know won't go near 'em (potential lost customers/revenue)
Anyway..after all of the adulterants that were found to be in tobacco, I couldn't bring myself to trust the integrity of any e-liq product they made.
If the FDA bottlenecks our access to the Tobacco Cos. for e-liq and delivery systems (putting a lot of our juice vendors and maybe more out of business) I will figure out a way to vape without them.
It may be VG without nic, but I will find a way.
If BT suceeds in doing something like that they will be in trouble because those in the know won't go near 'em (potential lost customers/revenue)
Anyway..after all of the adulterants that were found to be in tobacco, I couldn't bring myself to trust the integrity of any e-liq product they made.
Last edited:
Some people have gotten a little personal.
It's okay, I'm a big boy. Not a she. But that did humor me.
I would've strongly preferred to discuss the matter where all the other legislation discussions are found rather than in newbie section. And didn't anticipate a 10 page discussion on the matter here in intro post.
I guess I'll amend earlier statement to say I'll welcome that discussion here if forum mods/admin permit it, but am very willing to have the discussion elsewhere on the forum. Either/or (or both).
It's okay, I'm a big boy. Not a she. But that did humor me.
I would've strongly preferred to discuss the matter where all the other legislation discussions are found rather than in newbie section. And didn't anticipate a 10 page discussion on the matter here in intro post.
I guess I'll amend earlier statement to say I'll welcome that discussion here if forum mods/admin permit it, but am very willing to have the discussion elsewhere on the forum. Either/or (or both).
Thank you DC2, and thank you Kristen.
You know, I wonder if companies like NJoy and Blu didn't see the writing on the wall long before this, simply because they never walked very far away from their original e-cig designs. I mean, it's pretty obvious that a big chunk of the market goes toward the e-Go style batteries and updated atomizers, but these companies just keep churning out the same design year after year, practically the same design available in 07.
You know, I wonder if companies like NJoy and Blu didn't see the writing on the wall long before this, simply because they never walked very far away from their original e-cig designs. I mean, it's pretty obvious that a big chunk of the market goes toward the e-Go style batteries and updated atomizers, but these companies just keep churning out the same design year after year, practically the same design available in 07.
Well put sir...but it's like buying milk at the petrol station...you CAN, but if you want a better selection you'd be better at the grocers. Where am I going with this?
Yes that could be true but it could also be because most people who are starting out want something about the size of a ciggy, too.
But there is also the trade issue with the Chinese, who are right now making the majority of the larger form factors (as well as the ciggy-sized)..they aren't going to take having to give up that amount of business lying down.
- Status
Similar threads
