- Status
I had to google "PIF" as it pertains to vaping *giggles*.... but now I'm all savvy. What a lovely idea, and a nice way to waste not. But all I currently have to PIF in return is about 4mls of PG 555, which I'll need to get me through the weekend.... and to be honest, I kind of feel like I'd be cheating someone. (I mean, I really.... REALLY do not like this stuff *laughing* Then again, tastes vary! It seems to be one of the flavors that's been around a while, and it doesn't stay that way by getting bad reviews and sitting on shelves, right?)
Earlier was a scream--thx for letting me know about it.
Your most welcome, and there was (i think) a dictionary somewhere on the form with the more popular definitions so you do not need to Google though maybe one of the ops can sneak in here and post the link to it?
A PIF does not have to right away and once you are on your feet and going strong, when you see someone struggling then just pass the good will forward
Was good to see you there and who knows maybe you will want to do a show? *nudge nudge*. After seeing what you started with, i think you are well on your way to being a vaping jedi in as little as a month...
Well heck, I don't think I'm too far out, ~1hour? No car so can't go there but I have a bit of juice I can let go if you're really in a bind and can make it here.
I'm normally so good at staying on topic...
ed**
I'm with a few folks, we need more studies and such. Approved flavouring =/= safe to vape. We're all taking a risk, granted what we are pretty sure a very low risk, by choosing to vape. Yum, melted drip tips, that must be good to inhale! See, with BT, and BP, they have MONEY to do the studies that are required. JH doesnt, CEV doesn't, Canvape doesn't, and if they did do you really think they're going to take all that money to get studies done so that they can...continue to sell their products like they already do?
BT/BP need to because they want mass market, they want them on TV, Magazines, Billboards, in corner stores, you name it. That kind of exposure requires it. They don't want to make enough to pay the rent and take a nice vacation twice a year...they want billions.
They'll never control chinese production either, somebody will always step up and manufacture for less.
Last edited:
Actually, HC claims it's the long term effects of inhaling nicotine that they don't have information on. They don't restrict the e-cigs without nicotine. They are openly available in many places. I agree that there may be surprises from inhaling Pg, VG, or flavorings; but HC is not concerned about them!
My question to HC would be,"If you don't know the long term effects of inhaling nicotine; what the h@ll have you been doing for the last 50 years?"
Last edited:
Oh! Me too me too! Except I'm in BC's Fraser Valley, so no competition to you Oriana
Ah Cool! The description I found indicated you need to offer your PIF within a half hour of accepting another. If I can TBA-PIF (lol), then I'm sooooo down with that idea!A PIF does not have to right away and once you are on your feet and going strong, when you see someone struggling then just pass the good will forward
May the force be with me! lol... I dunno that I have anything that interesting to offer show-wise... and I always run the slim risk of having to abandon cam to look after my wee man. Unless I could start late.... but that's problematic.... an 8:00 or 8:15pm PST start gets pretty crazy late for the east coasters.... maybe I could do something for the insomniacs lol....
You ROCK... and I do appreciate that soooo much, but I think I'll make it through the weekend. If my Monday order doesn't show up though, I'll be looking for you
Good point, and as I don't want to attract any more negative attention from mods, I'll ask verrrry quietly: what's the protocol for "meandering"? I mean, asides always crop up in any conversation or thread, so what do you do with those? Let 'er fly? Bite yer tongue? Start a new thread? Hunt through years of posts to see if anyone one else in the history of time ever said or asked something similar and dredge that thread up from the dead to tack your comment on to page 857 where the folks you were talking to in the first place will probably not see it anyway? Different forums seem to have subtley different etiquette on the finer points, so I want to know how we roll here....
And to finally wind my way back to topic... my stance is simple. As long as Health Canada doesn't want to demand clear labelling on products containing Frankenfood (aka GMOs), they can eat my shorts when it comes to the e-cig issue. If all the research showing how damaging GMOs are can be tossed out the window and it can be fed to Canadians without even their knowledge or approval, then I should certainly be allowed to "roll the dice" with e-cigs in favor of the proven death sticks I can buy at a gas station. This "concern for public safety" is a very subjective and selective thing. I'm dead certain it's more a concern with how to get hands on what's in the public's wallets. While I have no issue with the average Joe occupying a desk at HC (I'm sure they're 95% good people who mean well), they don't steer the ship, they just keep the engine running.
Just my 2c....
Last edited:
Just watching The Fifth Estate, one of their Whistleblower episodes, about scientists fired from HC for telling the truth about corrupt practices.
To quote from Amazon on a book written by one of the scientists:
http://www.amazon.ca/Corrupt-Core-Memoirs-Health-Whistleblower/dp/097319457X
To quote from Amazon on a book written by one of the scientists:
http://www.amazon.ca/Corrupt-Core-Memoirs-Health-Whistleblower/dp/097319457X
I'm not surprised.... sounds very interesting. Thanks for the info.
This is a technicality on the vendors' part, not on HC, though. The reason nic-free ecigs are available is because PG has existed on the market for years (and is in many other consumer products), and because of existent law it can't suddenly be pulled and regulated as a drug because it would have ramifications across the industry. They do warn that inhaled PG can be an "irritant", though. At least, that's what the email I received said...
I know this is a distastful metaphor, but it's akin to people huffing gasoline, or Whippits. HC can't suddenly pull spray-paint off the market because some people abuse it. They're able to control nicotine availability, and they did so. Then the vendors got around it by marketing completely nic-free.
HC doesn't really have the means to do extensive testing, though. They're a regulatory body, and are not responsible for doing human test trails. Blame BigPharma or the completely closed-system prohibitive expense ethical-review-boards-from-hell of current medical research if you want, not the gov't body whose job it is to parse the information and make decisions based on what other people have discovered.
I guess my point is that HC doesn't hate us. Really. They are not pro-smoking anti-vaping. They're doing the best they can with incomplete information. As it stands, I think they're doing a pretty good job at keeping potentially dangerous things under the radar while still allowing moderately easy-access for those who are willing to do the legwork.
Last edited:
I do not agree with this "They are not pro-smoking anti-vaping. They're doing the best they can with incomplete information. As it stands, I think they're doing a pretty good job at keeping potentially dangerous things under the radar while still allowing moderately easy-access for those who are willing to do the legwork"
The information is not incomplete. They have a stance on Harm Reduction; and that is ; they will not agree to it regardless of what the science suggests. They are the same ones, that still think that SNUS is NOT safer then traditional cigarettes. They have done a great job on keeping the product off the shelfs- when it could have saved lives. They continue to place a health warnings that clearly says this is not a safer alternative,- FALSE.
They have banned any and all E CIGS that use nicotine. - They say the product safety has not been established. That is also not true. From what we know already, nothing outside of addiction is a safety issue. They are 100% NOT pro vaping. They have placed this ban into place while they continue to say we dont know.- That is the mantra from 1960 when CEOS said we don't know that smoking kills people.- So lets wait until that is proven.- That lead to millions of deaths. They do not want any dialogue with us; and by the amount of websites that are being threatened to shut down, does not lead me to that belief.
They continue to deny this product is safer. The question is NOT is it safe? Its how safer is it. There are thousands or creditable sources that proof the majority quit tobacco when using E CIGS and the health issue which has been debated in the USA - on which every case was lost by the FDA on this is because there is no data that shows risks- outside of addiction.
HC stance is WRONG. Its going to cost millions of life's that could be saved- Had people been able to access E CIGS. The lets wait for 30 years mantra is not good policy. Its deadly. Do not think HC is about Health. Its about Big Pharama that spends billions on the patch and gum- on which 95% fail. Its about approving anti smoking drugs that end up with horror able results like suicide.- That is who they are protecting.
The safety of our product is out there. Anyone can easily find it. I disagree with HC position 100%. They are the reasons today millions will die in this country because of there refusal to accept the facts. I want nothing to do with them. I want them out of my ECIG and out of E LIQUID. - They are NOT what you want.
Where do they say that? Very little science out there exists on vaping, and what does is barely out of peer review.
No they haven't. Smoke NV, J&J, all those 808s that they sell at Rexall, Shoppers, Sheffield & Sons, etc, they will all happily take nicotine juice/cartos.
Really? What about diacetyl? What about the hundreds of other compounds used in flavouring? What about the effects of inhaling burnt filler or wick or melted driptip?
I continued to respond for you point for point, but I don't think it's worth it. You have a bug up your nose about HC, but it's for the wrong reasons. Be mad at Big Tobacco, be mad at Big Pharma, be mad at Big Academia for hot getting the resaerch put through fast enough. Heck, be mad at yourself for not being rich enough to conduct your own research.
Blaming the regulatory body is misplaced. It's like blaming the gas station attendant because the pump won't accept your credit card, or because they won't let your 6-year-old buy beer.
"Actually, HC claims it's the long term effects of inhaling nicotine that they don't have information on. They don't restrict the e-cigs without nicotine. They are openly available in many places. I agree that there may be surprises from inhaling Pg, VG, or flavorings; but HC is not concerned about them!"
And that note from HC is not true either. HC approved the use of Nicotine Inhalers- so that is 100% false. They have also approved for over 30 years or longer gum and patches that of course use Nicotine. so NR has in fact been studied for over 30 years- and that data shown no risk in stroke, heart issues or others.- So its 100% totally False.
And that note from HC is not true either. HC approved the use of Nicotine Inhalers- so that is 100% false. They have also approved for over 30 years or longer gum and patches that of course use Nicotine. so NR has in fact been studied for over 30 years- and that data shown no risk in stroke, heart issues or others.- So its 100% totally False.
I will say though, its not HC position to test products, - That is not the mandate. So to agree with HC- I would only agree on that fact.
Nicotine Inhalers, Nicotine Gum, Nicotine Patches have all been approved for short term use.
If e-cigs were recommended to be used for 3 months only, then it would be easy to do an evaluation of the health effects after 3 months use. How can the long term effects be evaluated in the short term?
My Fiance is a respiratory therapist, and when I showed her Health Canada's official response in '07 she was stunned. It's pretty terrible. I hope they don't screw this one up, but time can only tell.
I did however see an article on E-cigarette teen popularity prompts concerns - Ottawa - CBC News
and after reading the comments and laughing somewhat I was pretty disappointed at not only the integrity of the article, but a seemingly obvious attempt to make e-cigs look like a bad product in general.
Also, comments are disabled on the article haha I guess they had to stop all those intelligent people from making them look like fools.
I did however see an article on E-cigarette teen popularity prompts concerns - Ottawa - CBC News
and after reading the comments and laughing somewhat I was pretty disappointed at not only the integrity of the article, but a seemingly obvious attempt to make e-cigs look like a bad product in general.
Also, comments are disabled on the article haha I guess they had to stop all those intelligent people from making them look like fools.
Your totally correct I do. HC stand is clear- They are not going to allow recreational use of our product.- This has nothing to do big Tobacco either, NRT has been around for over 30 years or more. The long term science is out there, so to say or suggest that we do not know what that is not true. I just saw a study on this- which in effect showed no risk
HC messed up a perfect opportunity for safer SNUS- and requires that product to carry huge warnings on clearly say this product is not safer then cigarettes, and lobbied hard to ensure its not on shelfs. - so a population that could be using something safer- is put in to the same category as smoking- Another error in judgement.- Error in science, and this has been studied in Sweden for over 20 years or longer.
HC will never ever agree to vaping, and I can tell you by the amount of sites they are trying to shut down recently,- They are stepping up the war against us.- HC is not about safety, its about money for the gum, and patch.- all of which do not work. We already know the success rate is like 5% at best.
Do I think we need regulatory on our products? Sure. Burning wicks, and others- yeah I agree to a point- But no matter what when you compare that- to the 4,000 deadly chemicals in cigarettes, its a small issue. HC mandate is pretty clear. I cannot wait to see what they come up with next- I can say I am open minded on HC ?- I am, but I am not holding my breath. We know the FDA got entangled in this issue and ended up in court- on which its lost countless cases. i 100% agree on standards; the same ones that tobacco uses, meaning a full list of acceptable safe flavours, and those that are not are banned.- For that I do agree. I agree on product control 100%
HC so far- has been to stay out of our face.- That is were they belong. I know that the NSRA- ( Non- SMoking Rights Association Of Canada) did a balanced approach to this issue- So lets see what HC will come up with. They need to opened minded, and look at data.
I could be totally wrong- but lets see what they come up it. Regulation is going to happen, but what?
What I will agree with with HC does not allow health claims, so that is a good thing- That forces regulation for the better, so with that yes I agree- 100% on it. I agree regulation is coming our way, and I hope its in the correct way.
Last edited:
I know we've pretty well talked this subject out, but just for interests sake, these somewhat related issues keep things in perspective:
Cancer Cured In Canada, But Big Pharma Says NO WAY! - YouTube
Cancer Cured In Canada, But Big Pharma Says NO WAY! - YouTube
Yup.... it's insidious. I'd go so far as to say evil. How else can you explain continuing to push horrific, painful, invasive treatments that harm as much as help when simple, cheap, non-damaging, proven alternatives exist? It's simple. Chemo is very very VERY lucrative.
Another treatment that has shown amazing results involves "aytch-eee-emme-pee" resin oils (all the weirdness there just to evade getting picked up be search engines on that forbidden topic). They've made drugs based on the active ingredients, but in practice, they are not nearly as effective as the simple whole tinctures and oils. But those capsules are patentable and.... (you guessed it).... EXPENSIVE.
*sigh*.... this topic just makes my blood boil.... thanks for sharing though Oriana.... better that we talk about this stuff and get informed...
- Status
Similar threads
