I got an email from the Green Party who gets my vote this election.

[girlsaint]

While we sincerely feel for those in the natural health industry, and sincerely pray that a much better balance between regulatory authority & civil liberties will be introduced in future (to fix the inherent imbalance between those things in C-36's present form)...

...I must repeat, e-cigs & e-juice with nic are not marketed as "health products" and do not make any therapeutic claims. These are two fundamental prerequisites for classifying anything as a "health product" - so e-cigs & e-juice are not health products. Health Canada (bizarrely) says they are. And when they do that, they're lying.

When specifically asked in court "why" it is that they say that...they're going to look incredibly foolish, and have no credible answer whatsoever. It will be a prime example of how the agency, left unchecked, cannot be trusted to exercise its authority honestly, or legally. Unchecked power inevitably leads to politicization & corruption...it leads to the abuse of those least able to defend themselves. And it always comes in on the wings of alleged good intentions.

We're all for appropriate regulatory powers - but only when there are checks & balances & reins in place to keep the agencies honest. But yeah...vapers, relax. Our stuff does not fall under "health products" - and it does not pose any "reasonable expectation of danger to human health or safety."

Remember, the exact same nicotine, at comparable levels...is all over the place - in deadly tobacco & ineffective NRT products. Attack the nicotine, and you attack big pharma & big tobacco. Furthermore, the nicotine itself is immune to any such attack, since countless studies have shown that at the levels found in tobacco, NRT, or e-juice...the nicotine itself poses no more of a risk than drinking caffeinated coffe would. And we already have laws re: nicotine, which describe the forms under which nicotine is exempted from Schedule F of the Canadian Food & Drug regulations. The e-juice you vape is already exempted, and we can prove it. Again, Health Canada is lying when they say it isn't exempted.

And again, when specifically asked "why" in court...they're going to look like complete idiots. It's a very nice thing to know the law is on our side.

This is the key to all of this. HC WANTS us to apply for their approval, create panic in the streets, and make some kind of admission that eCigs are being marketed as quit smoking devices. That way they can regulate it. For me, I am still "smoking", I am just choosing a healthier alternative, and HC is trying to go around the law by calling eCigs something else in hopes that they can convince Canadians that they have a right to stop or regulate this. Rachel is right. They are abusing their power and breaking the law as it stands now.

Oh, and by the way it does not make me feel any better that the new bill allows for search of my garage without a warrant either. House, okay, I see where it is written that they need a warrant, but barns and outbuildings are not houses.

 

[lelly]

I got a reply from the Pirate Party, seems its only the smaller party like this one and the Green Party that actually acknowledge that every vote counts and take the time to address people's issues. This is his reply,

I've contacted Health Canada today and I was told that they'll have the inspector call me back. I have several questions in mind that I would like to verify with them. What is the basis of their decision? Is it safety related or just bureaucratic approval process? I can understand that liquid nicotine could pose a hazard and their bulletin mentioned about harm to children. But there are lots of household items that poses hazard to children also. Nicotine poisoning was also mentioned and I wonder what number they are basing the poisoning risk on.

I would also like to hear from them if there are any pending application to market the product here in Canada. Their bulletin mentioned they are "providing information to interested stakeholders on how to apply for the appropriate market authorizations". If there are or if someone were to apply for one, what hurdle would they have to go through to get approval.

I'll let you know once I hear back from them.

I sent him some extra info because my first email was a bit short and to the point. When, or should I say "if" HC calls him, he will have a bit better understanding about what the history is regarding the issue. Major props to him for going above and beyond. Hopefully he can get some answers for us!!!

 

[TallGrass]

I'll give them credit for responding but...

Thank you very much for your thorough detailing of the health benefits of vaping.
It certainly appears to be safer than cigarette smocking and would offer some protection to passive smokers.
The Green Party considers that ......... should be legalized. We believe that this measure would remove the criminal element from the ......... trade and allow the government to control and tax the use of ..........
From your description of vaping it appears that it is a safer option than smoking, and therfore the Green Party would consider working towards the legalization of e-cigarettes.

Its always the same thing with these green candidates. I'm of the mind that the e-cig market should have a regulatory structure to protect people but to let the Green party get their hands on this would be game over. A 30ml bottle would end up costing $85 and mixing your own? Forget about that... only for those licenced by the government.

 

[IanK1968]

I dont think it would be $85 but whatever it would be is better then it being banned and totally wiped out of Canada. I dont want to go back to smoking, I have a wife and 4 kids, I would pay anything to have e-juice legalized and sold and see my kids grow up and get married.

 

[lelly]

No matter which way this thing goes, prices will go up. If it goes black market, vendors will charge more because of the apparant risk involved, US companies won't want to take the risk shipping here. If it goes medical device, the pharmaceutical companies will charge a fortune, and if it gets classified as a tobacco product, the government will probably double the price in taxes, and that will probably include taxing juice imported from the states/china.

Does anyone else wonder what BP's role in all of this? Any chance they are already in the research and development stages of creating their own incase the market swings their way? If these do get classified as medical devices, the parent companies of NicoDerm and Nicorette would monopolize the market, wouldn't you think they are already trying to get a head start? No point, just thinking outloud, lol.

 

[Can_supplier]

Unfortunately it seem that the only responses we are getting are the candidates blowing hot air (you can decide from which end)

I contacted my local green and asked them about the issue.. No response.. Clearly there is not policy from any party on this, and any candidate is just saying what they feel will sell, and not representing the policy of their party when they speak. That is one of the roots of what is often viewed as broken election promises.

This is a good exercise to increase awareness of the issue. The big 3 parties do not want to discuss this, but they will end up hearing the rumblings through the grapevine, from us.

I wouldn't change my vote over any answer given.

 

[Can_supplier]

Does anyone else wonder what BP's role in all of this? Any chance they are already in the research and development stages of creating their own incase the market swings their way? If these do get classified as medical devices, the parent companies of NicoDerm and Nicorette would monopolize the market, wouldn't you think they are already trying to get a head start? No point, just thinking outloud, lol.

BP has already done their research, they are happy serving the market with their products that don't work. Makes for repeat customers. Increase the nicotine in the inhaler, and you basically have the same thing.. They have know that before e-cigs were even invented. They want this to go away.

The sad thing is if done right, the government could get their tax, and I'll tell you prices would DECREASE. Open this thing up so it is legal, it would allow us suppliers to invest in our companies, so we can supply the market more efficiently and through increased volume and reach, decrease the margin on the products, while still maintaining a modest profit any business requires. Of course that will never happen.

 

[IanK1968]

If BP or BT could get there hands on this they will, but if they know or think this has a success rate of 90% getting people to quit smoking, imagine how much BP and BT will be out. The stockholders will go poor. The government will be out millions in tax money. Smoking and smoking cessation products is a cash cow BT, BP, and the government will fight tooth and nail to protect. If there were independent studies done that conclusively prove e-cigs are a healthier alternative that HC, BT and BP cant refute, they will have to legalize e-cigs and they dont want that neither. So they will not conduct studies, not run any wet lab experiments, or pay for any such studies. We need independent wet labs to conduct a study on e-cigs that will not be swayed by BT, BP and the government.

 

[lelly]

Unfortunately it seem that the only responses we are getting are the candidates blowing hot air (you can decide from which end)

I contacted my local green and asked them about the issue.. No response.. Clearly there is not policy from any party on this, and any candidate is just saying what they feel will sell, and not representing the policy of their party when they speak. That is one of the roots of what is often viewed as broken election promises.

This is a good exercise to increase awareness of the issue. The big 3 parties do not want to discuss this, but they will end up hearing the rumblings through the grapevine, from us.

I wouldn't change my vote over any answer given.

Exactly right. When I was trying to find the contact info for my candidates, I couldn't find one so I emailed the party instead. I got this response:

As a party, we do not have a stance on this issue, however, our Candidates are expected to form their own platform based on their constituents feelings on issues.

What riding are you in, as I can put you in touch with your candidate if we have one running in your area.

How the heck do expect to get anything achieved as a party when all your candidates have different opinions of different issues. I am no expert on politics, but should all of the candidates within a party have the same platforms on the same issues???

 

[IanK1968]

LOL welcome to politics, we dont take a stance because we dont want BT and BP to stop paying for our handsome spiffs.

 

[AlbertaClipper]

We need independent wet labs to conduct a study on e-cigs that will not be swayed by BT, BP and the government.

The thing is, the National Vapors Club has hired labs to do studies and those studies have been pooh pooh'd. But which unaffiliated group is gonna just up and test if neither side sponsors them to?? Damned if you do and damned if you don't.

 

[lelly]

BP has already done their research, they are happy serving the market with their products that don't work. Makes for repeat customers. Increase the nicotine in the inhaler, and you basically have the same thing.. They have know that before e-cigs were even invented. They want this to go away.

I am not familiar with BP's inhalers....are they flavored, does the inhale feel similar to an analog, do the create visible smoke, can they be used long term....these are they main reasons why PV's work for me. I guess if BP took control of this, the intent wouldn't be for a long term replacement, but a way to wean people off of nicotine? Can't BP endorse a harm reduction product or it has to be a cure all? But for those of us who wanted to use it long term, we could? Or we would need a persciption to buy it and couldn't self-regulate, or would it be OTC like the patch/gum? I don't see how there wouldn't be the potential for returning customers? I am not fighting for things to go this way, I am just trying to understand the implications if they did.

 

[IanK1968]

Such on a straw, its the same as the inhalers. They are absolutely useless.

 

[Can_supplier]

I am not familiar with BP's inhalers....are they flavored, does the inhale feel similar to an analog, do the create visible smoke, can they be used long term....these are they main reasons why PV's work for me. .

No visible smoke, and it is like sucking on a straw. However the main thing we CRAVE is the nicotine. There is simply not enough in them.

Here is an example. The gum. Doesn't calm the cravings worth a darn.. Take a big wad of chewing tobacco, and I promise you it will cure your worse craving (and make you teeth fall out, so only an option if you are ok with that). Reason.. Level of nicotine.

Again why? If you use their product to quit, you will never buy it again. If you fail and try again 10 times, it increase their sales and profits 10 times.

 

[IanK1968]

when I tried the inhaler for me it was like sucking a straw, I guess each person is different. I failed miserably with all the smoking cessations out there, but 5 weeks 1 day smoke free thanks to e-cigs.

 

[lelly]

The sad thing is if done right, the government could get their tax, and I'll tell you prices would DECREASE. Open this thing up so it is legal, it would allow us suppliers to invest in our companies, so we can supply the market more efficiently and through increased volume and reach, decrease the margin on the products, while still maintaining a modest profit any business requires. Of course that will never happen.

Just curious what you mean by "done right"? Obviously this outcome would be the best case scenario for everyone, gov't gets their money, vendors stay in business, vapers can have high quality products for cheap prices and most importantly, we can all keep vaping without feeling like criminals. What course of action would lead to this outcome? I think alot of us are emailing/writing/phoning people, trying to get the word out, without really knowing what direction they are trying to push this thing.

 

[IanK1968]

done right by reclassifying e-cigs as a tobacco product, sold it in stores and taxed the crap out of it.

 

[AlbertaClipper]

I wonder what nasty pictures we'd put on ejuice warning labels? I can't think of anything.

 

[IanK1968]

skull and crossbow, hazardous material

 

[Can_supplier]

Just curious what you mean by "done right"? Obviously this outcome would be the best case scenario for everyone, gov't gets their money, vendors stay in business, vapers can have high quality products for cheap prices and most importantly, we can all keep vaping without feeling like criminals. What course of action would lead to this outcome? I think alot of us are emailing/writing/phoning people, trying to get the word out, without really knowing what direction they are trying to push this thing.

Done right is just what you stated.

What course of action would we need? A miracle and nothing less. Would involve a complete 180 in our thinking as a socitey. Something like putting the greater good of the people over making an extra million on top of the 100 million, to increase the share price half a percent of some BP company, with the full support of our government. Sad eh?