That's great!! They all should be doing at least that. We'll see who's in this for the long haul!
FDA Letter to ECA?
- Thread starter Vocalek
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
That's great!! They all should be doing at least that. We'll see who's in this for the long haul!
Cozzicon, I agree with you 100%!! Twenty years ago I took a tainted supplement that caused me to have a disabling illness. This product caused 47 deaths and over 1500 injuries because of bacteria in the manufacturing process. These people died a painful, quick death and the ones that survived were left with a lifetime of misery. I want to know the conditions in which my eLiquid is manufactured. I also don't trust that some of the eLiquid vendors are using sterile environments or USP ingredients and this makes me nervous given my history. When an accident happens it will be harder to say that e-cigs are safer than smoking. This is for our own good and you said it quite well. Thank you.
Regarding the vendor donations, Cignot was not the only one. Remember to frequent these vendors:
IVAQS Project
IVAQS Project
Great Video you bring up points that a lot of people dont think about. I believe the middle ground with the FDA is where it will go. Personally i think juice makers need to held to a standard to make it safe. We all should know by now the if just left do make it or produce something with no regulation there will be a few vendors that will put the dollar over the heath of customers. I learned really quick about it by getting a bad batch from my first supplier. Not really heath wise but it will kill a atomizer with a quickness. I got really picky after that and have just switched to making my own juice. I find it funny also that some people absolutely 100% distrust the FDA and in turn put 100% trust into the people making the juice and PV's. So i am all for the middle ground i don't want the FDA to ban it but i wouldn't mind them holding the juice makers to a Standard for everyone's safety.
Hey Java,
Thanks for the props.
As an aside I have also become very exacting as to which juice suppliers I will use. I've avoided naming them in the context of my commentary for obvious reasons- with one exception.
But the amount of garbage in my atties has gone down since switching to my preferred vendors. The amount of gunk at the bottom of my alcohol bath is significantly less.
And I have one juice which is a menthol that will kill an atty in 48 hours.
Things that make you go "Hmmmm".
Coz, thanks for the video, I think your perspective is on target. I also agree with you and GoodDog regarding the quaility of e-juices. Since I started using only DIY I have not lost a single atty and that includes LV atties. I also find them to be fairly free of gunk in alcohol baths. Makes you wonder doesn't it.
I for sure think it is safe to say not all juice is created equal. I for sure noticed a difference in performance of my PV when i switched off the cheap juice. Sure it was 1/3 cheaper then most places but you got wonder what they do to it, to be able to sell it at those prices.
Well I have heard of higher quality controls in China and I have recently become acquainted with a vendor that is very serious about enforcing that; I guess a person has to pick their vendors very carefully in today's market...
Last edited:
I hadn't thought of this before now, but since vaping only my DIY (over 4 months) I no longer have to clean my attys. Not only have I never lost one since but they don't get gunked up. That IS very interesting!
I am glad you guys are talking about this. It confirms to me that the difference i am seeing is not just in my mind. ( i am not crazy ) I had no problems out of the juice i got from my last supplier he uses nothing but the purest flavorings, pg,vg and nic NO Water . Even so I just switched to making my own. Glad i did not only is it fun you can get the juice exactly the way you like it. But i am also a guy that would rather spend the time making my own bread then just buying a loaf in the store. So it is worth it to me.
I clicked on a link to ECA provided by poster # 2 and it took me to a website titled ECA: Electronic Cigarette Association. It looks entirely different from ECA's current site so I don't know if this is an "old" ECA website page or a "copycat" (also I've read in several threads where the ECA is now defunct-obviously the FDA is not aware of that) What is disturbing is that when you click on a link (in the toolbar) entitled blogs:ECA articles, it takes you to a page that contains at least five or six links to articles/ads about "quitting smoking with e-cigarettes" where the titles themselves state that and also make other unsubstantiated health claims. This cannot be at all helpful, especially if this is a genuine part of the ECA. Even if this is a fraud (copycat) it is not good as there are many who are against us and looking for any/all ammunition to use against the industry and this technology and would gladly try and use this as "evidence" that this is what the industry is involved in concerning their marketing. Does anyone know anything about this particular link? and what's up with this particular website?
Last edited:
Well, through a WHOIS search, I found that the ECA - Electronic Cigarette Association domain (electroniccigaretteassociation.org) is owned by Instead LLC, and the contact is James Watt, who is the owner of Instead Electronic Cigarettes (e-cig.org) and was (is?) the ECA Vice Chair according to this blog entry on his site:
Interview with James Watt, Electronic Cigarette Association Vice Chair | The Electronic Cigarette & E-Cigarettes by Instead
Interestingly, that blog post has a link to an entirely different ECA website:
Electronic Cigarette Association
...and that domain (ecassoc.org) is registered through a proxy, so the ownership info of that site is private, though it would be reasonable to assume that it is the same as above.
Also, that same e-cig.org blog has a recent entry discussing the five warning letters sent out by the FDA:
FDA Letter To 5 Electronic Cigarette Companies | The Electronic Cigarette & E-Cigarettes by Instead
..where they discuss their opinions on the merits of each warning letter, one of the comments is:
"This is obviously a claim that e-cigs can help the user quit smoking and the FDA is right, in this case" (in reference to the letter to E-CigaretteDirect)
Interview with James Watt, Electronic Cigarette Association Vice Chair | The Electronic Cigarette & E-Cigarettes by Instead
Interestingly, that blog post has a link to an entirely different ECA website:
Electronic Cigarette Association
...and that domain (ecassoc.org) is registered through a proxy, so the ownership info of that site is private, though it would be reasonable to assume that it is the same as above.
Also, that same e-cig.org blog has a recent entry discussing the five warning letters sent out by the FDA:
FDA Letter To 5 Electronic Cigarette Companies | The Electronic Cigarette & E-Cigarettes by Instead
..where they discuss their opinions on the merits of each warning letter, one of the comments is:
"This is obviously a claim that e-cigs can help the user quit smoking and the FDA is right, in this case" (in reference to the letter to E-CigaretteDirect)
Last edited:
And here are the requirements to become an ECA member, according to the ecassoc.org ECA site:
All ECA Members must abide by these regulations:
(A) they do not make claims to consumers concerning, but not limited to, health
benefits, improved safety, or smoking cessation from the use of electronic cigarette products;
(B) they do not create, promote, or sell products with flavors using the terms “ice cream”, “candy”, “licorice”, or “bubble gum”;
(C) the bottles of electronic cigarette liquid they create, promote, or sell have childproof caps on them;
(D) the products they create, promote, or sell include all ECA sponsored warnings;
(E) the cartridges or bottles of electronic cigarette liquid they create, promote, or sell contain a maximum 24 mg/ml of nicotine;
(F) the bottles of electronic cigarette liquid containing nicotine they create, promote, or sell are no larger than 30 ml;
(G) each product they create, promote, or sell containing nicotine includes a warning about the risks associated with nicotine use;
(H) online vendors must verify to reasonable certainty that their customers are of legal smoking age; and
(I) retail vendors must verify that their customers are of legal smoking age by inspecting the customer’s state-issued photo identification.
*The ECA is going through some structural changes. More information about ECA membership will be available on this page in the coming days.
ECA Membership | Electronic Cigarette Association
All ECA Members must abide by these regulations:
(A) they do not make claims to consumers concerning, but not limited to, health
benefits, improved safety, or smoking cessation from the use of electronic cigarette products;
(B) they do not create, promote, or sell products with flavors using the terms “ice cream”, “candy”, “licorice”, or “bubble gum”;
(C) the bottles of electronic cigarette liquid they create, promote, or sell have childproof caps on them;
(D) the products they create, promote, or sell include all ECA sponsored warnings;
(E) the cartridges or bottles of electronic cigarette liquid they create, promote, or sell contain a maximum 24 mg/ml of nicotine;
(F) the bottles of electronic cigarette liquid containing nicotine they create, promote, or sell are no larger than 30 ml;
(G) each product they create, promote, or sell containing nicotine includes a warning about the risks associated with nicotine use;
(H) online vendors must verify to reasonable certainty that their customers are of legal smoking age; and
(I) retail vendors must verify that their customers are of legal smoking age by inspecting the customer’s state-issued photo identification.
*The ECA is going through some structural changes. More information about ECA membership will be available on this page in the coming days.
ECA Membership | Electronic Cigarette Association
Last edited:
I guess they have their reasons for them, but some of those rules are utterly ridiculous.
According to those rules, an ECA member is not allowed to DIY himself or herself a 50ml bottle of e-liquid?
As I said... utterly ridiculous.
According to those rules, an ECA member is not allowed to DIY himself or herself a 50ml bottle of e-liquid?
As I said... utterly ridiculous.
The ECA was set up for suppliers/manufacturers. It was a trade organization that was willing to take any help from consumers because at that time, there wasn't a CASAA.
As far as 30ml bottles being the largest a member could sell... this didn't have anything to do with squashing the diy market... which in my humble opinion, the diy market will be the downfall of liquid sold in bottles. (it takes one person, mixing improperly and the entire industry will be blamed.)
What it was meant for is that to date, there is still no study, scientific report, nothing, that proves even a 30ml bottle with or without nicotine, digested by adult, child or animal, wouldn't kill them. So... there's the reasoning for that. It was one of those rules that was implemented with the intention of removing or changing upon scientific data that could be confirmed.
The other reason was when the first round of FDA stoppages happened (March 2009, shortly after the Drs. episode), there was suspicion that some suppliers might have been getting this and that from here and there, as many diy consumers do, and mixing stuff to sell, in their basements/garages/etc and frankly, that's unsanitary and gross. If you can't sell homemade cookies in mass quantities out of your kitchen, then you shouldn't be able to do it with eliquid.
The ECA is in fact disbanded. I am not going into any other details regarding comments on "gossip" because no amount of truth will set some people free :0)
As far as 30ml bottles being the largest a member could sell... this didn't have anything to do with squashing the diy market... which in my humble opinion, the diy market will be the downfall of liquid sold in bottles. (it takes one person, mixing improperly and the entire industry will be blamed.)
What it was meant for is that to date, there is still no study, scientific report, nothing, that proves even a 30ml bottle with or without nicotine, digested by adult, child or animal, wouldn't kill them. So... there's the reasoning for that. It was one of those rules that was implemented with the intention of removing or changing upon scientific data that could be confirmed.
The other reason was when the first round of FDA stoppages happened (March 2009, shortly after the Drs. episode), there was suspicion that some suppliers might have been getting this and that from here and there, as many diy consumers do, and mixing stuff to sell, in their basements/garages/etc and frankly, that's unsanitary and gross. If you can't sell homemade cookies in mass quantities out of your kitchen, then you shouldn't be able to do it with eliquid.
The ECA is in fact disbanded. I am not going into any other details regarding comments on "gossip" because no amount of truth will set some people free :0)
- Status
Similar threads
