Intellicig response to HM Government proposals

[Shining Wit]

A little clarification, since I am the manufacturer of the flavouring you're maligning here (Decadent Vapours Absinthe).
Maligning? I was only quoting your observations from a post you made on ECF.


This sounds awfully dramatic, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt,
Thank you....

and assume this unscientific panic-mongering is due to ignorance of the basic chemistry, rather than anything more malicious.
.....for your patronage.....I was merely making relevant observations.

It is a fact of life that many essential oils can do this in strong solutions, and that essential oils are used in most ejuice flavourings (pretty much all fruit/spice flavours, and most tobacco flavours,) and more widely in many food flavourings.
Put Loranns Peppermint concentrate, or citrus oils, or spearmint snus in an HDPE bottle, and they have exactly the same effect (which is why Loranns use glass bottles for all their concentrates.) Make up a 5-10% solution and put that in the same HDPE bottle, and it doesn't - the excipients act as a buffer, and there's no corrosion.

It's exactly the same with the Absinthe - it's a perfectly safe product, made from approved food flavourings, but it contains natural essential oils (fully volatile,) that are incompatible with certain artificial compounds - specifically the material the dropper bottles are made out of. That's all.

I could solve the problem by diluting the concentrate, but that would end up making it weaker than most of my other concentrates, and would feel too much like giving short measure - I'd rather find compatible bottles, or a reformulation that will stabilize the oils to stop them doing this. Absinthe is very high in essential oils (they're what gives the drink its characteristic 'louche',) - higher than any of my other flavours, and that's why it's the one flavour causing this problem. But it's still made entirely from commercially produced, approved food flavouring concentrates.

Food corrosion is nothing new - there's a whole industry out there refining packaging techniques for foods that have a deleterious effect on containers. But are you never going to risk eating lasagna (oh no - it DISSOLVES ALUMINIUM!!! , or salt (Oh no - it EATS METAL!!! EVEN STAINLESS STEEL!!! ), or water (oh no - it CORRODES STEEL PIPES!!! ) Or Vinegar, Mentos, Coca Cola, Baking Soda, Soy sauce, and all the other foodstuffs that can undergo deleterious reactions in contact with the wrong substances?

I would sort of assume, seeing as how you proudly claim to produce the first "Made in UK" ejuice, that you might understand this much chemistry already, but apparently not. Or is it really just an attempt to score points at a time when we surely ought to all be pulling together?
As I said, observations of possible reasons for regulation.

For the record, and speaking purely for myself, I tend towards option 2 actually,
In that case, maybe not selling concentrated wormwood oils to the general public would be a responsible move in the right direction?

though I'd be more enthusiastic about it if the MHRA weren't so obviously biased.

I did mention in an earlier post that I don't mind other suppliers posting here but also that it is courteous to ask. No worries though so long as we keep it civil.
John.

 

[lawnman3]

i just wanted to say i am currently using your e liquid and it dont need anything added to it for flavor ...it is just fine lawnman3

 

[Tinkerbell]

I did mention in an earlier post that I don't mind other suppliers posting here but also that it is courteous to ask. No worries though so long as we keep it civil.
John.

It would seem a little churlish John to openly criticise someone and then expect them to ask permission to respond.

I am a consumer, and because I read well and quickly I am able to follow quite a lot of forum talk. I have followed all of the debates about the MRHA because it effects me and my lifestyle. Like the first series of Big Brother many people seem to forget that people are watching.

I stood up for other causes that effected me in the past and will undoubtably do so again, however the one thing I have learned in all "battles" and campaigns is that as soon as the mud starts slinging no one wins.

This is not an easy subject, I don't think anyone disagrees with a desire to ensure safety for all, however ANY supplier that cannot defend his own liquid by his own track record alone, and feels the need to bring down others makes me very nervous as a consumer. In my experience, those confident in their own abilities rarely put anyone else down, it is seen as an insecurity and I wonder what there is for Intellicig to feel so insecure about? It makes me lose faith.

I am new to vaping, I don't understand, or really care about the personal battles between suppliers, there seem to be some emotional responses on both sides and I imagine there is some personal issue here.

As a customer, I want to be able to buy nicotine liquid, in a safe form, from a supplier - not the chemist, not via my doctor but in a recreational way ,in the same way that I am able to buy toxic cigarettes that would have eventually killed me.

 

[Shining Wit]

It would seem a little churlish John to openly criticise someone and then expect them to ask permission to respond.
Those are ECF rules for suppliers, not mine. Read the Suppliers Rules and you will see that we are not allowed to post in another supplier's forum without express permission. Courtesy costs nothing.

I am a consumer, and because I read well and quickly I am able to follow quite a lot of forum talk. I have followed all of the debates about the MRHA (MHRA) because it effects me and my lifestyle. Like the first series of Big Brother many people seem to forget that people are watching.

I stood up for other causes that effected me in the past and will undoubtably do so again, however the one thing I have learned in all "battles" and campaigns is that as soon as the mud starts slinging no one wins.
This is a debate and I responded to suppliers who were advocating 'no regulation' but were not doing their cause any good with some of their words.

This is not an easy subject, I don't think anyone disagrees with a desire to ensure safety for all, however ANY supplier that cannot defend his own liquid by his own track record alone,
Have you read our laboratory reports? They are freely available.
How many other suppliers do you know who can say that?

and feels the need to bring down others makes me very nervous as a consumer. In my experience, those confident in their own abilities rarely put anyone else down, it is seen as an insecurity and I wonder what there is for Intellicig to feel so insecure about? It makes me lose faith.
We are very secure and our words and actions have helped to raise standards, hopefully more will follow our lead. We have just taken on two University Graduates with degrees in biomolecular science to work in our laboratory at UMIC. They will ensure that our liquid maintains the high standard that we have set and will help to ensure that Intellicig has a secure future.
How many suppliers do you know who have such facilities?

I am new to vaping, I don't understand, or really care about the personal battles between suppliers, there seem to be some emotional responses on both sides and I imagine there is some personal issue here.

As a customer, I want to be able to buy nicotine liquid, in a safe form, from a supplier - not the chemist, not via my doctor but in a recreational way ,in the same way that I am able to buy toxic cigarettes that would have eventually killed me.
Proposed regulation will allow you to buy your liquid from any supplier who is prepared to go through the MA process to prove their products are safe, is that not what you are asking for, safe liquid?

Much of the problem with this issue of tobacco v ecigs stems from the fact that many people believe that they should be classed the same, or regulated in the same manner.
Two reasons why they are not are:
Tobacco addiction has been with us for several hundred years, long before the MHRA or any similar legislative body. It is deeply rooted in world socio-cultural behaviour and , like it or not, has been designated as a 'special' case.
Tobacco makes billions of dollars/pounds/yen etc for some very big companies who inevitably have strong powers of persuasion (referred to by some as corruption) and makes billions for governments throughout the world in tax revenue.
We call it opposition in the 'free market' and have to deal with it if we want to compete.

Thanks
John

 

[Nick O'Teen]

In that case, maybe not selling concentrated wormwood oils to the general public would be a responsible move in the right direction?

Again, the melodrama - the bright red script, the implication that dangerous substances are being purveyed, the air of outraged indignation that somehow public safety is being compromised by an unscrupulous merchant. It isn't.

The wormwood oils are actually a very minor constituent, and not the one that's causing the HDPE corrosion - it's the citrus oils that seem to be primarily responsible.

You can walk into any decent off-license or supermarket and buy a bottle of Absinthe that contains a similar blend of essential oils - including a MUCH higher proportion of wormwood. The levels in the drink are much higher because they can be masked by sugar, but since sugar isn't volatile, the ejuice needs a much lower proportion to provide the pleasantly characteristic bitterness.

Further than that, you can buy pure sage oil from any decent aromatherapy supplier, which has a thujone content of well over 50% (thujone being the supposedly dangerous ingredient derived from the wormwood in absinthe,) as often as not without so much as a child-proof cap or CHIP-compliant label.

Please spare us the outraged indignation - I am perfectly happy to keep it courteous, and indeed would rather not have to spend time posting corrections here when my integrity and the quality of my products are impugned. If you have a beef with other companies, please take it up with them, not me.
I don't slag your products off - don't expect me to just sit by and tolerate my reputation being smeared by ill-informed inaccuracies and innuendos.

I have now spent quite enough time explaining the nature of food container corrosion and general flavour science, so perhaps you could find a more suitable target to vent your spleen on? There is no shortage of fly-by-night suppliers out there reselling cheap Chinese juice in un-childproofed, squeezy bottles who deserve our collective ire for fuelling the fires of restrictive regulation much more (without wishing to brag,) than I do. We really ought to all be pulling together.

 

[Shining Wit]

Again, the melodrama - the bright red script,
A little less childish than
the implication that dangerous substances are being purveyed, the air of outraged indignation that somehow public safety is being compromised by an unscrupulous merchant. It isn't.

The wormwood oils are actually a very minor constituent, and not the one that's causing the HDPE corrosion - it's the citrus oils that seem to be primarily responsible.

You can walk into any decent off-license or supermarket and buy a bottle of Absinthe that contains a similar blend of essential oils - including a MUCH higher proportion of wormwood. The levels in the drink are much higher because they can be masked by sugar, but since sugar isn't volatile, the ejuice needs a much lower proportion to provide the pleasantly characteristic bitterness.

Further than that, you can buy pure sage oil from any decent aromatherapy supplier, which has a thujone content of well over 50% (thujone being the supposedly dangerous ingredient derived from the wormwood in absinthe,) as often as not without so much as a child-proof cap or CHIP-compliant label.

Please spare us the outraged indignation - I am perfectly happy to keep it courteous, and indeed would rather not have to spend time posting corrections here when my integrity and the quality of my products are impugned. If you have a beef with other companies, please take it up with them, not me.
I don't slag your products off - don't expect me to just sit by and tolerate my reputation being smeared by ill-informed inaccuracies and innuendos.

I have now spent quite enough time explaining the nature of food container corrosion and general flavour science, so perhaps you could find a more suitable target to vent your spleen on? There is no shortage of fly-by-night suppliers out there reselling cheap Chinese juice in un-childproofed, squeezy bottles who deserve our collective ire for fuelling the fires of restrictive regulation much more (without wishing to brag,) than I do. We really ought to all be pulling together.

You justify what you sell by comparing it to other products, but still intend to sell the concentrated Absinthe to customers. That is one of the reasons that we will not be 'pulling together' with yourself.
John

 

[monkeyuk]

I agreed with Intellicigs decision to opt for option 2 several pages back, i understand why they are doing it. What i don't understand is john's constant need to big up Intellicig in every answer he gives someone. You come across as totally defensive all the time and dare i say it have a "holier than thou" attitude to other suppliers. We all know how much you are reinvesting in ecigs, we all know how you have 2 new graduates and a space at some shiny lab, thats all we ever hear from Intellicig. You don't come across as a company that listens and responds honestly to people....you are too busy telling everyone how wonderful Intellicig are and that does get a bit tiresome. I love Intellicig products, i think they are great but you don't seem to be doing your company any favours.
If you took the time to answer people honestly they might have a lot more respect for you. I'm sure there are plenty of other suppliers out there like Nick o teen who are really trying to provide the best they can for us, so cut them some slack please?

I appreciate this thread is on your companies space....maybe it should be transfered to the general ecig discussion page and open it up to everyone?

 

[Nick O'Teen]

You justify what you sell by comparing it to other products, but still intend to sell the concentrated Absinthe to customers. That is one of the reasons that we will not be 'pulling together' with yourself.
John

So presumably you think Loranns flavour concentrates should also be banned?
After all, many are just as concentrated as the Decadent Vapours concentrates, just as corrosive of HDPE, similarly made using entirely food-approved ingredients, presumably comply with all relevant hygiene and safety regulations as ours do, and are also legitimately popular around the world.

Or what? Absinthe is somehow different? For all that you want to whip it up into some disgraceful imperilling of public safety (from which, would you have us believe, only you can save the vaping world?) it's just a flavour - a perfectly legal, safe, and widely available flavour. As a flavour concentrate it is nicotine-free, formulated (as are all our products,) in a well-equipped flavour laboratory that complies with all the relevant standards and requirements for the preparation of food products.
It is also entirely outside the remit of any proposed MHRA regulation (which only applies to NCPs, not nicotine-free flavour products,) now or ever, so I really fail to see the relevance of your ill-judged and unfounded attack on the safety of my product and, by implication, my personal integrity.

Whatever happens to the ejuice market over the next few months, be assured that Decadent Vapours will continue selling top quality culinary grade flavour concentrates for many years to come - and that will definitely include the Absinthe as soon as we can resolve the packaging problem.

I don't have to justify myself to you, and I have no interest in whatever political games you want to play or grievances you want to air - but please be aware that I reserve the right to take any legal measures I feel are appropriate to correct and refute factually inaccurate or libellous statements and inuendos that are made about my products, business or integrity.

 

[Lovejoy]

As someone who likes ecopure it is sad to see some of the comments from you, shining wit. The regular attacks on other vendors does nothing to enhance your standing and makes you look rather petty. This is a fight with Government, not with each other, in case you have forgotten.

You may believe your future lies with complying, or trying to comply, with what the MHRA want; others feel differently. That is not a reason to attack others in the sort of cheap way we expect from New Labour. The whole industry needs to rise above that sort of behaviour and show that, as a collective, irrespective of their future directions, that they are responsible companies.


No-one gains from mud slinging, it just gives ammunition to those who oppose the whole e-cig business in general and could be to the detriment of everyone

 

[Shining Wit]

As someone who likes ecopure it is sad to see some of the comments from you, shining wit. The regular attacks on other vendors does nothing to enhance your standing and makes you look rather petty. This is a fight with Government, not with each other, in case you have forgotten.

You may believe your future lies with complying, or trying to comply, with what the MHRA want; others feel differently. That is not a reason to attack others in the sort of cheap way we expect from New Labour. The whole industry needs to rise above that sort of behaviour and show that, as a collective, irrespective of their future directions, that they are responsible companies.


No-one gains from mud slinging, it just gives ammunition to those who oppose the whole e-cig business in general and could be to the detriment of everyone

I expect you have also written to those suppliers who have accused us of deceit if we go with option 2 and those who have declared publicly on video that we have set up false links on the Internet that 'mislead' people to our site instead of theirs and those who accused us of importing ECOpure from China?
You say that this is a fight, but you never thought to ask if I agree with that, which I don't. As far as I am concerned it is an inevitable progression of events that has been predicted by many for over a year. What we have done is called preparation and planning in order to guarantee our future and if others come along criticising us for that and for our choice of direction then yes there will be a response.
We have taken a lot of stick and sometimes I might react seemingly harshly, that is a legacy of a rough upbringing and I apologise if I have caused any offence to those with more delicate dispositions than my own.

It does irk though when we have prepared well while many others just seem to be voicing their shock and indignation as if regulation was never expected. Where is this huge mass of opposition to the government proposals and what are they doing to fight them?

 

[alltah]

Great debate i have not realy followed the forums since last Summer however i am in favour of option 2 and will follow this thread. Imo i would like to know that what what i am vaping is as safe as it possibly can be and a return to smoking is somthing i dont even want to think about. Its been a long time now and i use a 0 nic juice 99% of the time and have only the odd craving for nic when having a drink which is easily satisfied with a very low nic content juice. Lets hope that it all goes our way,

Let me just add that it says uk supplier on my post and yes last year i was however at this time due to a change of circumstance i now just look after a few friends and old clients but who knows what the future will bring. Sorry John, i hope im ok to post

Tim

 

[Shining Wit]

Great debate i have not realy followed the forums since last Summer however i am in favour of option 2 and will follow this thread. Imo i would like to know that what what i am vaping is as safe as it possibly can be and a return to smoking is somthing i dont even want to think about. Its been a long time now and i use a 0 nic juice 99% of the time and have only the odd craving for nic when having a drink which is easily satisfied with a very low nic content juice. Lets hope that it all goes our way,

Let me just add that it says uk supplier on my post and yes last year i was however at this time due to a change of circumstance i now just look after a few friends and old clients but who knows what the future will bring. Sorry John, i hope im ok to post

Tim

Hi Tim, good to see you here. Please drop an email to my work address and let me have a contact number as there might be some business available; we have 200 new retail outlets and that number is increasing every week along with the need to look after them all.
Cheers
John.

 

[Shining Wit]

Little seems to have been written lately regarding the MHRA proposal for regulation.
The 'huge wave' of opposition seems to have broken on the beach and disappeared, unless there is something they're not telling us?
No-one seems to have mentioned that in contrast to the initial 'submissions in writing only' policy of the MHRA regarding MLX 364, they have now announced a Stakeholders meeting in April at which manufacturers and suppliers will be able to put their views forward and ask questions.
This might just be because of six weeks of relentless lobbying and canvassing of politicians by a bunch of folks with the passion to keep ecigs available to the public, rather than some dude in a ridiculous costume making a video accusing government departments of corruption.
It is a positive step forward and an opportunity for the voice of reason to be heard.
John.

 

[hifistud]

Yes, indeed, some of us got our invitations as early as late February after spending much time talking to both the MHRA and various MPs.

 

[Toby]

Hey John - have you got a news update that may lead us to believe that e-liquid (in as many different strengths/flavours/bases as possible) will still be available from as many applicable sources as is reasonably achievable; so that people don't have to resort to smoking tobacco?

People do need hope....

 

[chainvapor]

Originally Posted by deewal comments in blue.
How would option 2 condemn thousands of people to Death?


We are working hard but we don't publish everything we do for obvious reasons. In order to achieve what you want, availability of ecigs, we have to ensure we stay in business. It's called playing the game and hopefully we will continue to be successful.
Cheers.
John.

John, I know you are trying to do the right thing, but lets be honest. If the government "regulates" electronic cigarettes, that mean the price is going to skyrocket! That being the case, I would make an educated guess that only about 5-10% of people looking at the electronic cigarettes would actually buy them. Remember, not everyone who smokes has $150-$200 to lay down for their first kit, and if government has their way, that may be a gross underestimate for the cost of a kit after taxes and fees!! Do I believe the option 2 you are talking about may be the only road to take, unfortunately, but don't expect a whole lot of people on here to jump on board with you and accept this until they absolutely have to. Cigarettes are a much more dangerous substance, that is what your talks with government should be concentrating on. We KNOW FOR A FACT that cigarettes KILL PEOPLE, but there is no proof that e-cigs are harmful and a ton of proof showing otherwise.

 

[chainvapor]

Please put forward a reasonable argument for choosing option 3 without mentioning tobacco or 'standard cigarettes'.
John.

John, this is all about Tobacco and Standard cigarettes. So not using them is not an option. Cigarettes can be bought at any corner store and WE KNOW THEY KILL PEOPLE! Please bring that argument to the table. Otherwise, I would have to start thinking you are just trying to be the first to go along with the government with no regard to e-cigarette users, just to your pocketbook. I mean if government "regulates" e-cigarettes and you have a license to sell them, you are just going to pass the higher costs along to your customers, so no worries for you. I am NOT saying that this is actually your train of thought, but it sure sounds like it. Don't just let the government bend us all over without a fight!! If it comes down to it, don't you think you could ( as well as all of the other vendors ) negotiate a license after the laws are passed. Lets not give up hope until there is none left to be had.

 

[Shining Wit]

[QUOTE=chainvapor;1159304]John, I know you are trying to do the right thing, but lets be honest. If the government "regulates" electronic cigarettes, that mean the price is going to skyrocket!
That is not our intention and our budget reflects that.
That being the case, I would make an educated guess that only about 5-10% of people looking at the electronic cigarettes would actually buy them. Remember, not everyone who smokes has $150-$200 to lay down for their first kit, and if government has their way, that may be a gross underestimate for the cost of a kit after taxes and fees!! Do I believe the option 2 you are talking about may be the only road to take, unfortunately, but don't expect a whole lot of people on here to jump on board with you and accept this until they absolutely have to. Cigarettes are a much more dangerous substance, that is what your talks with government should be concentrating on.
Please don't underestimate us or make assumptions about what we are discussing with the government. We are very thorough.
We KNOW FOR A FACT that cigarettes KILL PEOPLE, but there is no proof that e-cigs are harmful and a ton of proof showing otherwise.
With regard to ecigs, anecdotal evidence and opinion yes, proof no, not in the true scientific context, which is what is required and what we aim to provide.
Using tired rhetoric about tobacco is non-productive in real terms and will not help much in bringing ecigs into the mainstream.
A bunch of people claiming a product is safe is not enough, it has to be proven to be safe in an acceptable manner, just as any other product.......except tobacco of course.
We believe that we have a more realistic chance of ridding the world of tobacco by competing directly with our products on the shelves of shops and pharmacies than we have of tobacco being regulated or banned. There is more than just the financial (revenue) aspect of tobacco in the UK, even though 90% of the price of a pack of cigarettes goes to the Government and, after £5 Billion has been deducted to offset the cost of smoking related diseases, there is still another £5 Billion left to contribute 5.5% of the NHS annual budget. One argument tobacco would put forward is the social impact on employment as there are 5,000 people directly employed by UK tobacco companies and an estimated 80,000 whose income depends on tobacco sales to a lesser or greater degree. If the industry went belly up because sales dwindled and all of those people suffered either loss of jobs or earnings then the Government wouldn't bother as it would not be their fault. Considering the improved margins that ecigs can offer over the few pence a packet from cigarettes the 'belly up' scenario is not as difficult to imagine. Shopkeepers are shopkeepers! The high revenue on cigarettes is supposedly to offset the costs of treating smoking related diseases so it would be difficult to justify raising revenue on a product that promotes a healthier option. Now we are getting the hang of it!;-)

Throw a brick at someone and all they might see is a brief glimpse of "NORI - ACCRINGTON" a split second before it hits them. Throw them something interesting or controversial to read and you might get their attention.[/QUOTE]


[QUOTE=Toby;1159245]Hey John - have you got a news update that may lead us to believe that e-liquid (in as many different strengths/flavours/bases as possible) will still be available from as many applicable sources as is reasonably achievable; so that people don't have to resort to smoking tobacco?

People do need hope.... [
At this stage Toby I would not claim to have any believable news as it is so early in the negotiation stage. However, we are very pleased with the level and quality of support that we have received. It would be logical to expect that if the regulation is passed, in whatever form, that there would have to be controls in place on all products, not just one flavour. That would entail considerable work but it's what we are paid for!;-)
/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=hifistud;1159234]Yes, indeed, some of us got our invitations as early as late February after spending much time talking to both the MHRA and various MPs.
I hope you don't mind me asking, but what role do you have as a Stakeholder? I don't see any clues in your 'title' such as Supplier so I'm naturally curious.[/QUOTE]

There is a way to go yet and the subject is gradually reaching a wider, relevant audience for discussion.
One thing you missed cv regarding pricing is that ecigs could become a prescription NRT.
Give that some deep and serious thought

Cheers.
John.

 

[chainvapor]

Hello John, you make good arguments and I do understand what you are saying. I just do not like the government telling me what I can and can't do not matter whether something is harmful to me or not. Just put warning labels on these thing (like everything else we purchase) and be done with it. I do not need "Big Brother" to run my life. I am perfectly capable of making my own decisions. Anyway, I understand why you are going forward with what you believe, and you are entitled to do whatever you feel is needed to continue to do business. But as I said earlier, I do not believe in government regulation because I believe people need to think for themselves. Government is not needed here, and actually not needed in many instances where they stick their nose in. Example: Seat belts in cars. Now I agree with child restraints because a child has to depend on their parents which sometimes may not be a good thing. But adults should have the choice of whether or not they want to protect themselves in the event of a crash. This should not be a government decision. So again, if we are adults, why do we need regulation. Just put warning labels on everything and let the ADULTS choose whether to take a chance on something or not. Thank you for listening and I wish you the best of luck in all of your future business!

 

[Shining Wit]

Government is not needed here, and actually not needed in many instances where they stick their nose in. Example: Seat belts in cars. Now I agree with child restraints because a child has to depend on their parents which sometimes may not be a good thing. But adults should have the choice of whether or not they want to protect themselves in the event of a crash.

So what do you tell the child safely strapped in a car while her parent is lying on the bonnet of the car dead? Dramatic yes, but it makes the point.
Why should anyone have to drag bodies out of cars just because the occupants wanted to excercise their freedom?
Sometimes people do need protecting from themselves.
My Big Brother used to watch out for me and I appreciate it.
Cheers
John.