Mech mods are not electronic cigarettes

[sofarsogood]

Umm guys? Technically OP was correct. A mech mod is an electric cigarette, not an electronic cigarette.

Electric Versus Electronic Systems

In their response to a pending lawsuit the FDA says "electronic cigarettes" need to be regulated like pharmecutical drugs in part because they blow up. That's a lie and a smear and the FDA knows it. It's nobody's business whether people use mechs but I'm not going along with making no distincition. Mech's are risky devices that do blow up and do hurt people and they are NOT "electronic" cigarettes. In the response to the FDA in the pending court case I would call them out for being intentionally misleading about the difference. In court everybody is supposed to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, right?

 

[mcclintock]

"Electric" would have been more appropriate than "electronic" for all e-cigs except perhaps those using ultrasonic vaporization, as those required a circuit and presumably use less power due to lack of heating. The circuits were minimal until much later. Electronic just sounds more modern.

As to the FDA, unless you can get all vapers and dealers to reject mechs, don't worry, they will.

 

[retired1]

In their response to a pending lawsuit the FDA says "electronic cigarettes" need to be regulated like pharmecutical drugs in part because they blow up. That's a lie and a smear and the FDA knows it. It's nobody's business whether people use mechs but I'm not going along with making no distincition. Mech's are risky devices that do blow up and do hurt people and they are NOT "electronic" cigarettes. In the response to the FDA in the pending court case I would call them out for being intentionally misleading about the difference. In court everybody is supposed to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, right?

Considering "electronic cigarettes" is generally used to describe the entire "class", it doesn't split hairs as to whether it has electronic circuitry or not. In this case, the hair splitting would do nothing more than irritate the judge.

Why It's Called An 'E-Cigarette' And 'E-Smoking'

 

[subwayaznm]

At first from the title I thought we(ECF) had been sent an FDA Agent to create a Thread on here. But after reading through; actually some valid points were brought up.

 

[Verb]

The only place I have found a need for this distinction is when driving through a state that has a ban on handheld electronic device. I would be polite and sign the ticket, but in court I would use the distinction between an electromechanical device and an electronic device. Most states have a specific list of devices or specify communications device, but some are general enough to include a regulated vaporizer.


The definition for electronic, of or relating to the movement of electrons, is too general to use in law as it would include living organisms and many other things that were not intended.

 

[sofarsogood]

Considering "electronic cigarettes" is generally used to describe the entire "class", it doesn't split hairs as to whether it has electronic circuitry or not. In this case, the hair splitting would do nothing more than irritate the judge.

Why It's Called An 'E-Cigarette' And 'E-Smoking'

Safety is about splitting hairs or splitting anything else that's relevent to safety. The FDA knows the difference. The consumer product safety ccommission knows the difference. Everybody in the vaping industry knows the difference. The judge is entitled to know the difference. I'm not in favor of either side being allowed to get away with propaganda in court.

 

[dmska]

Since this entire post is based on semantics. I'll point out that mech's don't blow up, the battery does.

 

[retired1]

Again, the term "electronic cigarette" has been used to describe the entire class of e-cigs pretty much since the beginning of time. This would be a valid argument before the judge. Splitting hairs at this stage of the game is pointless.

 

[Verb]

I have read about as many issues with regulated devices as I have mechs. There was a flurry of inappropriate toppers on hybrid 510 mechs a year ago causing issues. But, education has caught up a bit on that. Many booms caused by inserting batteries in a parallel orientation in a regulated series device. Also, regulated devices can short the positive terminal inserting or removing batteries just as easily Or easier than a mech.

Of all the explosion I have read about, I have only encountered one that was caused by too low of a build in an autofire situation. Most are hard shorts and some are caused by a charging board failure.

 

[sofarsogood]

The definition for electronic, of or relating to the movement of electrons, is too general to use in law as it would include living organisms and many other things that were not intended.

The word electronic is not commonly used for any and all movement of electrons. The vaping industry should have been making the distincition for the sake of public safety. That didn't happen so now it's hurting vaping in court and allowing the FDA to say that all vaping devices have the same risk of causing injury.

 

[sofarsogood]

Since this entire post is based on semantics. I'll point out that mech's don't blow up, the battery does.

Batteries vent. Mods with inadequate venting in the case trap the escaping gases and then the case explodes.

 

[dmska]

Batteries vent. Mods with inadequate venting in the case trap the escaping gases and then the case explodes.

the battery is the catalyst. Same thing can happen with a regulated mod.

 

[MMW]

I would also like to add that more often than not the "risky" element is the human, not the device.

I do understand the oriinal post sofarsogood, now that we've gotten off track.

 

[retired1]

I would also like to add that more often than not the "risky" element is the human, not the device.

While this may be true, in today's litigious society, I'm surprised that there haven't been court cases against certain manufacturers. Especially over the design of the fuax hybrids.

 

[sofarsogood]

the battery is the catalyst. Same thing can happen with a regulated mod.

I google ecig and vaping news most every day and pay particular attention to injury accidents. If all the stories about mech mods are removed there are virtually no stories. One thing the stories have in common is zero interest in the cause of the accident so they can paint all ecigs as equally risky. It doesn't have to be that way and it shouldn't be that way. If the consumer product safety commission were looking at this they would be obligated to make the distinctioin between mechs and regulated and publicize it. Public health (aka FDA, etc.) has a different tradition. They can lie and deceive flagrantly and shamelessly if that is what it takes to get the behavior they deem appropriate. Now they do it in court.

 

[skoony]

A mech mod is a electronic cigarette. It has electronic components.
It has a battery,coil and,switch. These make a admittedly simple
electronic circuit.
"Electronics is the science of controlling electric energy."
Electronics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A unicycle is just as much a vehicle as a corvette is. Fortunatly
current regulations and law allows for a distinction of class between
the two in terms of regulatory control. We are now just tobacco
product users. We should have a distinction in class as a whole
apart from combustible tobacco.

Regards
Mike

 

[Troll from behind]

In fact it might became VERY important to not call mech or any mod an electronic cigarrette.
In many regulations the term "electronic cigarrette" is VERY vague because lawmakers still think of things like cigalikes as electronic cigarrette, aka a full device that when filled with liquid and charged gives a vape.
Yeah, WE know better, but in this instance wouldn't it be better NOT to call mechs as electronic cigarrette?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SteveS45]

I wish my "Personal Vaping Devices" were NOT called "electronic Cigarettes" because I no longer smoke and for 40 years I had to use a lighter to have a "smoke!"

 

[Smoke_too_much]

Are you an attorney? If not you might want to consider becoming one. Hopefully you don't take this as an insult. It's meant to be a compliment.

Ha ha ha ! Good one, though how in the world could that ever not be an insult.

I'm not sure who OP is addressing with the suggestion to replace "electronic cigarette" with something referring to a "mech" in stories about explosions but not only would this not be as sensational a news story but the distinction would be entirely lost on the general public. Most vaper's know the difference and what caused the explosion but that's it. Then of course you've got your anti-smoking/vaping crowd who want to blame the problem on vaping so they're not about to change. Then down there on the very bottom you've got your lawyers and they of course are just looking for someone to sue.

 

[SteveS45]

On the topic of sensationalized news accounts many I have seen have nothing to do with the PVD's but a battery venting caused by some rocket scientist who had batteries short out because they were in a pocket unprotected with keys and change.