Fda news release

[stevo_tdo]

Reading this news gave me pause in my e-smoking and put me on the think. Then I realized quickly, before this news I considered this switch from cigs to e-cigs to be a use at my own risk situation. Upon further review of how this news changes my prospective on e-cigs, I have decided, well, im using e-cigs at my own risk.

I quit being mad at the FDA and used rational thought instead of emotion in recent weeks, ive also posted not long ago in a different thread that I wish they would do testing without banning these but that would be dreaming on my part. Well, look at the bright side. the good news is they ARE testing these instead of an all-out ban at this time and some of us should be happier about this than we are. They are even doing that study as to weather these are an effective way to quit smoking. Getting bad news is part of the process, and knowing what is in the juice is not a bad thing.

I think there should be widespread testing of e-juice by all the companies, and those that are found to contain bad toxins should recall ALL of their juice and replace it with non-toxin containing juice. That would be responsible business practice, as has been done with other products. It would be prohibitively expensive, but the stakes are very high here. My 2 cents

Agreed, they should of had solid testing done (in the us) from the beginning

 

[insidetrax]

I have read almost 50 pages of comments and I am inpressed with the comments. All this is well and good, but no matter how much is said in this forum, there is verry little said here that will reach the general public.

Like many of you, I was approached by others who I have told how e-cigs were much safer than analog cigarettes. They saw the FDA report on TV and wanted to tell me that what I was doing was dangerous. Of course I tried to set them straight in the fact that there was no way e-cigs were more dangerous than analogs.

Anyway, unless there is a massive public relations campaign to get an opposing view to the media, we are fighting a losing battle. It seems that some of the suppliers and retailers, along with the ECA, should prepare a PR campaign, visit with media representatives and try to get the other side of the story out to the public.

I am a fairly new vaper and a first time poster and I appreciate be part of such a group.

 

[SharonLM]

Welcome insidetrak.

 

[CoderGuy]

What is this thing about the law changing on Sunday? I'm going to order more juice now.

That has to do with a new law in Washington state, a mini-PACT Act that makes it illegal to order any tobacco product online, by phone, or by mail.

CoderGuy

 

[SharonLM]

That has to do with a new law in Washington state, a mini-PACT Act that makes it illegal to order any tobacco product online, by phone, or by mail.

CoderGuy

CoderGuy, do you have a link? Please know I'm not questioning you, I just want to be able to read what this new law has to say.

Thanks for any help!

 

[CoderGuy]

CoderGuy, do you have a link? Please know I'm not questioning you, I just want to be able to read what this new law has to say.

Thanks for any help!

No problem, just go back to this post in this thread, there is a link to the PDF

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/e-cigarette-news/28130-fda-news-release-14.html#post436428

CoderGuy

 

[insidetrax]

Just found this on NJOY's web - njoythefreedom.com

FDA’s STUDY DESIGN HAS OMMISSIONS AND SCIENTIFIC INCONSISTANCIES.
Phoenix, (July 24, 2009) “We at NJOY are having independent third party analytical and toxicology experts conduct a scientific analysis the FDA’s “Evaluation of e-Cigarettes.” The preliminary results of this analysis indicate that the study itself does not confirm a risk to health from using NJOY’s products, and identify very low levels of constituents that are found in FDA approved products themselves. In addition, there are omissions with respect to the FDA’s design and scientific inconsistencies and potentially misleading omissions with regards to FDA’s qualitative (rather than quantitative) presentation of the study results. We are continuing to work with the experts to finalize the review and expect to have more information available on Wednesday, July 29th.”

I had to retype it as I was unable to copy, so please excuse any mistakes.

 

[Hex]

Washington does have some pretty strict rules, I believe they also make it illegal for their natives to visit gambling sites (I could be wrong though).

Back on topic, as a distributor of electronic cigarettes when I first heard about this new while on vacation my stomach dropped to the floor, but the more I read into it, it seems alot of this negative attention is towards SA, which somehow overflowed to the rest of the e-smoking community. Diethylene glycol was only found in SA's cartridges, but it does make me wonder if my products are being exposed to these same shortcuts that SA has been exposed to.

 

[SharonLM]

No problem, just go back to this post in this thread, there is a link to the PDF

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/e-cigarette-news/28130-fda-news-release-14.html#post436428

CoderGuy

Thanks CoderGuy

 

[legalsea]

Reading this news gave me pause in my e-smoking and put me on the think. Then I realized quickly, before this news I considered this switch from cigs to e-cigs to be a use at my own risk situation. Upon further review of how this news changes my prospective on e-cigs, I have decided, well, im using e-cigs at my own risk.

I quit being mad at the FDA and used rational thought instead of emotion in recent weeks, ive also posted not long ago in a different thread that I wish they would do testing without banning these but that would be dreaming on my part. Well, look at the bright side. the good news is they ARE testing these instead of an all-out ban at this time and some of us should be happier about this than we are. They are even doing that study as to weather these are an effective way to quit smoking. Getting bad news is part of the process, and knowing what is in the juice is not a bad thing.

I think there should be widespread testing of e-juice by all the companies, and those that are found to contain bad toxins should recall ALL of their juice and replace it with non-toxin containing juice. That would be responsible business practice, as has been done with other products. It would be prohibitively expensive, but the stakes are very high here. My 2 cents

I agree. I also think that anytime a 'news person' reports how e-cigaettes are 'unsafe' they should pull out a real cigarrette, puff on it, and say "This is much safer'.

 

[cutiemax]

The Danish government just like our own FDA said that e-cigs were a new drug device and not a tobacco product. The Danish e-cig manufacturer put a small amount of smokelss tobacco in their cartridges which is noncombustable and are now able to legally sell their products. Not saying this is acceptable for our FDA and will work but is still an interesting point.

 

[TheIllustratedMan]

I'm pretty sure the Nicotine Water people tried that and it didn't fly, so that may be a no-go.

Besides, I'm not sure that I want MORE tobacco in my PV.

 

[Sun Vaporer]

I'm pretty sure the Nicotine Water people tried that and it didn't fly, so that may be a no-go.

Besides, I'm not sure that I want MORE tobacco in my PV.

That is correct Illustrated---Nicolite actually put tobacco particals of tobacco in the original product to do an end run around and it failed.

Now we have Johnson Creek way ahead of the curve with a new formula that contains no tobacco ingredients at all and furthermore using synthetic nicotine---so they are more interested in looking forward and anticipating regulation taking a totally different position then SE or NJOY that it is not a tobacco product in anticipation of FDA regulating.

Sun

 

[harmony gardens]

I just wonder if there is a formula that the FDA will approve, or if the powers against harm reduction are just too powerful to ever allow such a thing.

All of us are addicted to nicotine, and are seeking a safer more acceptable way to deal with our addiction. We're the last braves out on the plains, as they try to round us up and end our culture for good, in much the same way the Native Americans were herded onto reservations.

IMHO, it's really a cultural thing. We need to accept that the real battle is whether smoking culture will be allowed to live on in the form of the electronic cigarette, or if they will succeed in burying it with us.

I ask this,,, can't we share the land? If there is a safer way to carry on smoking culture, there's really no need to eliminate it. If we can put a man on the moon, we can solve the problem of lowering the dangers of nicotine consumption, and make it safe.

Speaking of that, I was taken back to my youth while watching the historic footage of the moon landing, and man taking his first steps on a different rock in the solar system. It struck me watching these nicotine addicts guiding man into history, what's at stake. Did anyone notice that mission control was filled with second hand smoke?? There are those who want to eliminate cigarettes from view, imagine them editing the films of mission control, to not show how these brilliant people turned to nicotine as a stress relief?? I get it,,,,, do they???

I think we need to draw a line in the sand right here. If they are intent on destroying smoking culture taking nicotine down with it, we have to take a stand. You can't tell me that it's not possible to formulate juice and the devices in a way that will make it safe. Is the FDA going to stand in the way of that process, and not allow it??

 

[DC2]

FDA’s STUDY DESIGN HAS OMMISSIONS AND SCIENTIFIC INCONSISTANCIES.
Phoenix, (July 24, 2009) “We at NJOY are having independent third party analytical and toxicology experts conduct a scientific analysis the FDA’s “Evaluation of e-Cigarettes.” The preliminary results of this analysis indicate that the study itself does not confirm a risk to health from using NJOY’s products, and identify very low levels of constituents that are found in FDA approved products themselves. In addition, there are omissions with respect to the FDA’s design and scientific inconsistencies and potentially misleading omissions with regards to FDA’s qualitative (rather than quantitative) presentation of the study results.

I didn't need any toxicology or analytical experts to tell me that.
That was more than obvious to anybody with any kind of scientific background.

I guess the media doesn't have many of those types on their payroll.

 

[edlogic]

I didn't need any toxicology or analytical experts to tell me that.
That was more than obvious to anybody with any kind of scientific background.

I guess the media doesn't have many of those types on their payroll.

I think, you are correct, SIR!

 

[CArtVapr]

I've done a search on - e-cigs being safe, and find news channels with their damaging reports. I also see that very few people have left comments, more people need to start leaving comments I believe. Here's just one

FDA: electronic cigarettes aren't safe - KDVR

 

[Kate51]

I wrote. Wanna see it?

Nice going! You must have really researched that video report, for heaven's sake I haven't heard that much crap since the Iraq war started.
First, I was a heavy smoker, for 44 years. The last few years I smoked 2-3 packs every day. I stopped, from day one, using an e-cig.
Intro: e-cigs. I did some research of my own. First, went to:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/e-cigarette-news/28130-fda-news-release.html

Then I bought my first e-cig, an NPro. I received it on March 9th this year.
It's a battery, an atomizer that uses a liquid cartridge to create a water vapor.
In that cartridge is Water, propylene glycol, which is also used in many other things besides anti-freeze, such as tooth paste, medical preparations, and in nearly everything one eats, such as ice cream, cool whip, etc. It is NOT a hazardous substance, at all. Has been deemed that since back in the 1940's. "Fog" machines at rock concerts uses the same liquid. And then in the cartridge, there is nicotine.
The amount of nicotine used is controlled by the user, can range anywhere between 0 to 24mg/ml of "juice". This is not something offered by any tobacco cigarette on the market. But since nicotine comes from tobacco leaves, yes, colorless, odorless, addictive, toxic in high concentrations, but also trace amounts of carcinogens that is also in the tobacco plant, derived from the very soil of our food comes from. Along with trace amounts of metals. So that chemical that the FDA called "hazardous"?
It is also in cigarettes, and what they tested was 3 parts per billion in the e-cig.
Does that sound a little suspicious to you, that's all they found??? So why the bluster over that? Because some companies who manufacture their juice with PEG, which is polyethylene Glycol (PEG), is NOT used in all juices, it was in 1 cartridge out of the 19 that they tested. All others used propylene Glycol (PG), or some use Vegetable Glycerine (VG). So why the wouldn't you look at that with suspicion over that bluster?
Because big Pharma and Big Tobacco are generating 100's of Millions of Dollars every year to protect their own "nicotine" delivery systems. That's why. They could have used REAL TOBACCO CIGARETTES as a comparison test, so why didn't they? Because, they already know how many killing chemicals are in those, and wouldn't want to make a REAL comparison with e-cigs!! So they used the BIG PHARMA Nicotrol, a stop smoking flim-flam that has about a 95% failure rate in smoking stopping. Good choice, right? And IT contains nicotine, also!!
But yet, real cigarettes are not banned from being sold on every street corner the world over!! Because they are also TAXABLE. Yes, that is a biggie.
My feeling? When they Ban cigarettes, they can ban e-cigs. That will be understandable. Until then, I am using mine, realizing that now I can breath, smell, no more coughing, sinus infections, no more swollen face and dark circles under my eyes, no more broken capillaries in my face, no more cigarette stink on me, foul smells in my house, second-hand smoke in my grandkids, and about 4000 less chemicals and toxins and carcinogens in my body. I think I'm going to live, thanks to e-cigs.
Now, you go find the REST OF THE STORY. I dare you. Shame on you all for that "news".

Regards,
Kathy XXXXXXX
Argyle, Wisconsin

EDIT: Sorry, may be some slightly "off" mis-statements in there, but I get so angry I don't care, let them do their own research if they want to go off on me for that. It's just disgusting!

 

[Kent C]

Quote:
Originally Posted by CoderGuy
That has to do with a new law in Washington state, a mini-PACT Act that makes it illegal to order any tobacco product online, by phone, or by mail.

CoderGuy

CoderGuy, do you have a link? Please know I'm not questioning you, I just want to be able to read what this new law has to say.

Thanks for any help!

CoderGuy, do you have a link? Please know I'm not questioning you, I just want to be able to read what this new law has to say.

Thanks for any help!

Something to consider:

A lawyer friend pointed out that the new revision, of course points to earlier legislation that defines 'tobacco product' in the definitions of the law that this law amends. The earlier law:

MISCELLANEOUS STATUTES PERTAINING TO


11) "Tobacco product" means a product that contains tobacco and is intended for human consumption.

And while the wording in the amendment say 'product of tobacco' it doesn't redefine the earlier legal definition. They of course could change that but as it is written, ejuice does not contain "tobacco" which obviously has a different identity than 'nicotine'.

A state could, eg. ban the sale of digitalis and yet allow the sale of 'foxglove' the plant that contains it. Here something that 'contains tobacco' is regulated but not nicotine or they would have defined 'tobacco product' differently. Perhaps they will but so far they haven't.

Now how the executive agency carries out the law, as we have seen at the federal level time and again, is something entirely different.

 

[TropicalBob]

Not one word of praise for Harmony's lucid and well-written post? This is about the best thing I've read here in a few months. Congratulations on an intelligent commentary, with which I fully agree. He got it right:

All of us are addicted to nicotine, and are seeking a safer more acceptable way to deal with our addiction. We're the last braves out on the plains, as they try to round us up and end our culture for good, in much the same way the Native Americans were herded onto reservations.

IMHO, it's really a cultural thing. We need to accept that the real battle is whether smoking culture will be allowed to live on in the form of the electronic cigarette, or if they will succeed in burying it with us.

I ask this,,, can't we share the land? If there is a safer way to carry on smoking culture, there's really no need to eliminate it. If we can put a man on the moon, we can solve the problem of lowering the dangers of nicotine consumption, and make it safe.

And now, back to the regularly scheduled rants...