EVENT ALERT - Court Hearing on E-Cigarettes [8/17] // Ruling Could Determine Fate of Controversial Nicotine Product
- Thread starter malyden
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Those ASHoles are at it again.
That Banzhoff dude, or whatever his name is, has supplanted Bruce Henderson and Mark Aguirre as the leading ASHole known to man. And if you don't live in San Diego, just trust me on this one.
That Banzhoff dude, or whatever his name is, has supplanted Bruce Henderson and Mark Aguirre as the leading ASHole known to man. And if you don't live in San Diego, just trust me on this one.
"Since at least one company is already adding ...... to its e-cigarettes, "it would seem that the manufacturers or sellers would be free to add to e-cigarettes whatever other drugs (such as ......, ......,, mood-elevating or other anti-depression medications they wished, provided only that the e-cigarettes also contained and dispensed some amount of nicotine derived from tobacco. This is true because no other agency would have jurisdiction to regulate them."
"A new report says that e-cigarettes contain an amount of nicotine which could be lethal to young children, especially since, as the FDA has suggested: "It was stated that parents may want to tell their children and teenagers that these products are not safe to use. Of particular concern to parents is that e-cigarettes are sold without any legal age restrictions, and are available in different flavors (such as chocolate, strawberry and mint) which may appeal to young people. In addition, the devices do not contain any health warnings comparable to nicotine replacement products or conventional cigarettes."
A major blow indeed and so well calculated by ASH. ASH's Brief to Judge Leon is a real winner--where is the ECA's???????
See http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...erywhere-v-fda-daily-docket-sheet-update.html
Sun
"A new report says that e-cigarettes contain an amount of nicotine which could be lethal to young children, especially since, as the FDA has suggested: "It was stated that parents may want to tell their children and teenagers that these products are not safe to use. Of particular concern to parents is that e-cigarettes are sold without any legal age restrictions, and are available in different flavors (such as chocolate, strawberry and mint) which may appeal to young people. In addition, the devices do not contain any health warnings comparable to nicotine replacement products or conventional cigarettes."
A major blow indeed and so well calculated by ASH. ASH's Brief to Judge Leon is a real winner--where is the ECA's???????
See http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...erywhere-v-fda-daily-docket-sheet-update.html
Sun
OK, soooo, this still is not over until sometime in September when the final ruling comes, right? Just making sure because I have a $450 order to make that goings to be going out next week.
guinea pigs - I was a Marlboro guinea pig for 23 years - and they knew those would kill me.......why and who is worried about me now .....and how much $ is involved?
Last edited:
Thanks SUN!!! I seriously do not know what we would do here without you and your legal expertise, you ROCK!!! 
EDIT: What do you mean by "To Close"? Like ordering to late?
EDIT: What do you mean by "To Close"? Like ordering to late?
Last edited:
Who is ASH? and, why would they be so concerned with this issue? Seems a little fishy too me... as in probably Philip Morris in disguise! Why would an anti smoking group be so against the E-cig idea? Something aint right here guys....
We need a little illustration of ASH ripping an e-cig out of our mouths and offering us an analog.. That is what they stand for now. That should be their new logo.
"Recently ASH wrote to PayPal, advising the company that providing payment for e-cigarettes appears to be aiding and abetting the sale of these illegal products by providing payment vehicles to Internet sites which are selling them."
Illegal products? How can they be illegal as there has yet to be a formal ruling?
Big tobbaco spends $100000 a day to lobby in D.C. So they obviously have some major pull in Washington. They know that even if they get the FDA to regulate e-cigs it's just as good as a ban seeing as how the 1 billion dollars needed for testing would bankrupt any e-cig company.
And as far as ...... being added, where's the proof? And even if it was, I'd gladly take my chances with it over carbon monoxide.
These bureaucratic .......s can spin just about anything. *
Illegal products? How can they be illegal as there has yet to be a formal ruling?
Big tobbaco spends $100000 a day to lobby in D.C. So they obviously have some major pull in Washington. They know that even if they get the FDA to regulate e-cigs it's just as good as a ban seeing as how the 1 billion dollars needed for testing would bankrupt any e-cig company.
And as far as ...... being added, where's the proof? And even if it was, I'd gladly take my chances with it over carbon monoxide.
These bureaucratic .......s can spin just about anything. *
Last edited:
Who is their "Spin Doctor" anyway. We need to get one of them. When I read these things I get more and more angry at being treated like some kind of idot that cannot make an informed decision for myself. I do not have a problem, and would actually like to know if there is something in the juice used that is not being reported, but do not lie to me with a straight face and tell me that "E-cigs are not safer than cigarettes." Might be nice if they mentioned why it was added to anti-freeze. I have a 4 inch thick PDR on my desk and everything in it is lethal and approved by the FDA. Of course real chocolate has arsenic in it, but they have not banned that yet. I am sure the judge is very intelligent and will be able to sort all of this out, it just makes me wonder if they put things like this forward that it may actually sway the decision to the FDA and all the lies. Somebody has to be able to see through all this.
I agree, slyk. I have no problem with regulation. It's just this broad, blanket ban that leads me to believe there's more to this than health concerns.
Not intervene? ASH present a number of allegations in their submission. There are asking for the court to allow the brief on trust.
If the Judge were to allow this (and just by filing it is an intervention and attempt to sway the court, however 'helpful) could ASH be asked to come to court to substantiate the many allegations they have made? Would that be what they want?
On reading the ASH material, they rely on a number of FDA statements. Surely the FDA can speak for themselves?
----
No joke. I highly doubt ASH has done any testing themselves. Their entry is hearsay.
This isn't just about "big tobacco." It was noticeable when laws against smoking began, that I speculated that the drug industry wanted to get in on the dollars. Not long after, various drugs came out to replace smoking (not only nicotine patches and such, but "mind drugs" as well.)
The "legal" drug cartel has even more funds to push than the tobacco folks. The price increases of cigarettes is substantially taxes. In reading the actual bills that were being pushed, much of the funds were intended to be spent "researching" mind-drugs on infants. (The ad campaigns to voters were that the funds were to be used for anti-smoking directed at kids. That was a drop in the bucket. Sneaky devils, aren't they?)
The main reason I decided to try e-cigs is that it was a BIG protest against yet another tax hit on cigarettes going someplace other than where it was being touted.
So keep your eyes open, write to your "leaders". The drug companies just want a cut of the pie. They won't likely rest until everything has a tag on it that goes to them. Listen to the drug ads on TV - not the "pitch" but the warnings and side effects. Most of the side effects are much worse than the "ill" the drug is promoted to handle. The drug industry is a multi-multi-multi billion dollar outfit. Do we really think that a bunch of thugs dreamed up the processes to manufacture street drugs? Yeah, I can see it now.
Big bucks against our little crowd of e-cig folks. When I found this forum, I was really suprised at how big a group this was - globally. Clearly, it's big enough to put a dent in someone corporate pocket books!
Makes ya feel like we are boot-leggers in the prohibition era, doesn't it?
The "legal" drug cartel has even more funds to push than the tobacco folks. The price increases of cigarettes is substantially taxes. In reading the actual bills that were being pushed, much of the funds were intended to be spent "researching" mind-drugs on infants. (The ad campaigns to voters were that the funds were to be used for anti-smoking directed at kids. That was a drop in the bucket. Sneaky devils, aren't they?)
The main reason I decided to try e-cigs is that it was a BIG protest against yet another tax hit on cigarettes going someplace other than where it was being touted.
So keep your eyes open, write to your "leaders". The drug companies just want a cut of the pie. They won't likely rest until everything has a tag on it that goes to them. Listen to the drug ads on TV - not the "pitch" but the warnings and side effects. Most of the side effects are much worse than the "ill" the drug is promoted to handle. The drug industry is a multi-multi-multi billion dollar outfit. Do we really think that a bunch of thugs dreamed up the processes to manufacture street drugs? Yeah, I can see it now.
Big bucks against our little crowd of e-cig folks. When I found this forum, I was really suprised at how big a group this was - globally. Clearly, it's big enough to put a dent in someone corporate pocket books!
Makes ya feel like we are boot-leggers in the prohibition era, doesn't it?
I saw the add about someone offeriing ...... in the e-liquid. It sure doesn't help our cause when irresponsible fly by night manufacturers out to make a buck offer such products. It reflects poorly on our cause and puts e-cigarettes in a very tenuous position to defend our cause. Unforunately, in many ways, we have many within our industry to blame, not just the anti's and the FDA.
David
David
Just remember, guys - ASH is trolling THIS website for some of its source material - in the ASH warning, they cited us as the link....
And, unfortunately, the rat fiends are using the ...... thing pretty much as a rallying cry -
We need to be careful, people - this site could be the downfall of e-cigs - any information (or mis-information) posted should be considered public information, and easily obtained by those arrayed against us.
And, unfortunately, the rat fiends are using the ...... thing pretty much as a rallying cry -
We need to be careful, people - this site could be the downfall of e-cigs - any information (or mis-information) posted should be considered public information, and easily obtained by those arrayed against us.
I'm sure you're right, Vicks. I hope if these people read this thread, that they get a sence of how frustrating it is to have people who should be helping us digging in against us.
ASH PEOPLE, open your eyes!! If there is even remotest possibility that something could be 99% safer than cigarettes,,, fight with us to make it happen!!
Thank you
ASH PEOPLE, open your eyes!! If there is even remotest possibility that something could be 99% safer than cigarettes,,, fight with us to make it happen!!
Thank you
He's the Jack Thompson of the smoking world. Hopefully, he'll get disbarred too. That would be sweet
This is not a valid argument and doesn’t even make sense. If someone is dispensing prescription drugs without a prescription, that in itself is a crime and is already punishable.
Its like saying applesauce has the potential to have medications added, so let’s outlaw applesauce. Lotion could possibly contain transdermal drugs, so no more Nivea. Potentially lethal amounts of electricity come into our homes…wow that could take anyone out. I have heard that bongs have the potential for misuse, but they’re ok because they’re labeled ‘for tobacco use only’. Whew, sure glad they have that label on there…I’ll bet it has saved millions of lives.
Name one substance that does not have the potential to be lethal. Too much water can kill you. People have died because the FDA has failed to protect our food chain, but I think that green onions and hamburgers are still available.
I always go back to the caffeine energy drinks. Kids HAVE died from those, but because they contain B vitamins, they’re exempt from regulation. I still say throwing a handful of vitamins into a liquid that just happens to contain nicotine (ala caffeine) would solve half the problem. Then, if I just found it impossible to swallow those big, giant vitamins pills, how could they withhold the only ‘device’ that allows me to receive my government established RDA?
Then we’d need Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton to protect our civil rights.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
