IMPORTANT CORRECTION :
Actually,
my 10 nanogram ecig is replacing 7 to 15 11,000 nanogram Marlboros !!!!
It's late, sorry, going to sleep now.
Nearing disaster in New York - please take action NOW to prevent e-cigarette ban.
- Thread starter Oliver
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
-
- Tags
- halo revolution totally wicked
- Status
IMPORTANT CORRECTION :
Actually,
my 10 nanogram ecig is replacing 7 to 15 11,000 nanogram Marlboros !!!!
It's late, sorry, going to sleep now.
Non taken. Apparently either I wasn't clear and/or my intent was confused. I figured this would start a riot, but, let me put it in undisputable bullet format:
1. There are no SUBSTANTIAL studies or trials to the effects of vaporizing the VG, PG, nicotine, or numerous other UNKNOWN chemicals
2. There are no LONG-TERM studies, since the product hasn't even been around that long.
3. There is ZERO quality control in the sale, production, manufacturing, or customization of JUICE
4. Arguing that it is SAFER than cigarettes is tantamount to saying that drinking beer is SAFER than drinking liquor. Just because it's LESS detrimental (Based on current evidence) does not make it HARMLESS
All studies will reflect findings in accordance to who gains to PROFIT from it. Being legal currently, us as addicts, and vendors of e-cig products are profitting.
Now, this is just me being OBJECTIVE. As for me personally...
I vape, and will continue to do so if banned
I smoke and will continue to do so until I want to stop
I eat fast food
I screw fast women
I drink Patron
I occassionally recreate with other narcotic stimulants
I PERSONALLY don't care whether it's harmful or not. I PERSONALLY don't want it to be banned. My only point was that it doesn't suprise me, and it's probably valid that MORE research and longer duration research IS warranted. As well as some form of control on the liquid. I assume this regulatory board which you speak of will be comprised of the same group that is profitting off our addiction? Based on the mass amounts of research that has been accumulated?
Now, apologies to all offended...Vape on. I know I will.
Side Note. If any vendors need an investment partner get ahold of me
1. There are no SUBSTANTIAL studies or trials to the effects of vaporizing the VG, PG, nicotine, or numerous other UNKNOWN chemicals
2. There are no LONG-TERM studies, since the product hasn't even been around that long.
3. There is ZERO quality control in the sale, production, manufacturing, or customization of JUICE
4. Arguing that it is SAFER than cigarettes is tantamount to saying that drinking beer is SAFER than drinking liquor. Just because it's LESS detrimental (Based on current evidence) does not make it HARMLESS
All studies will reflect findings in accordance to who gains to PROFIT from it. Being legal currently, us as addicts, and vendors of e-cig products are profitting.
Now, this is just me being OBJECTIVE. As for me personally...
I vape, and will continue to do so if banned
I smoke and will continue to do so until I want to stop
I eat fast food
I screw fast women
I drink Patron
I occassionally recreate with other narcotic stimulants
I PERSONALLY don't care whether it's harmful or not. I PERSONALLY don't want it to be banned. My only point was that it doesn't suprise me, and it's probably valid that MORE research and longer duration research IS warranted. As well as some form of control on the liquid. I assume this regulatory board which you speak of will be comprised of the same group that is profitting off our addiction? Based on the mass amounts of research that has been accumulated?
Now, apologies to all offended...Vape on. I know I will.
Side Note. If any vendors need an investment partner get ahold of me
Who says anyone is offended? I just don't agree with you.
1. The health New Zealand study IS substantial, not to mention the real life "study" that has shown improved health and no significant side effects in 5 years of use.
2. Since when does the FDA require long-term studies before approving products? It's usually based on short clinical trials, in a completely NON-real world environment and then released upon the public. Look at Chantix. It's only after it hit the market and real-world side effects were discovered that warnings were issued - yet the product has remained on the market in spite of the severe side effects and DEATHS. Why are ecigs - which are meant to only be reduced harm - held to a higher standard, especially when there have been no illness or injuries reported?
Hundreds of diet pills are put on the market and they only get pulled when someone actually reports a problem (i.e. fen-fen) yet ecigs get pulled even when no one complains and nothing of significance is found in them to cause concern?
3. Agreed and I answered to that.
4. No one ever claimed that ecis are harmless. As a REDUCED HARM product, they are meant to be less hazardous - that is their PURPOSE. A better example than your's would be comparing cola to diet cola. Both contain caffeine - an addictive, yet relatively harmless substance - but one doesn't contain the sugar/fructose and therefore reduces your health risks of obesity and tooth decay. But neither one is exactly health food.
You cannot lose sight of the fact that the consumers of this product would otherwise be SMOKING. You can't compare these to using NRTs (although they are shown to be comparable risk) or not smoking at all. Take away ecigs and the majority of users would go right back to tobacco cigarettes (which WERE making them sick and killing them) and not quitting.
1. The health New Zealand study IS substantial, not to mention the real life "study" that has shown improved health and no significant side effects in 5 years of use.
2. Since when does the FDA require long-term studies before approving products? It's usually based on short clinical trials, in a completely NON-real world environment and then released upon the public. Look at Chantix. It's only after it hit the market and real-world side effects were discovered that warnings were issued - yet the product has remained on the market in spite of the severe side effects and DEATHS. Why are ecigs - which are meant to only be reduced harm - held to a higher standard, especially when there have been no illness or injuries reported?
Hundreds of diet pills are put on the market and they only get pulled when someone actually reports a problem (i.e. fen-fen) yet ecigs get pulled even when no one complains and nothing of significance is found in them to cause concern?
3. Agreed and I answered to that.
4. No one ever claimed that ecis are harmless. As a REDUCED HARM product, they are meant to be less hazardous - that is their PURPOSE. A better example than your's would be comparing cola to diet cola. Both contain caffeine - an addictive, yet relatively harmless substance - but one doesn't contain the sugar/fructose and therefore reduces your health risks of obesity and tooth decay. But neither one is exactly health food.
You cannot lose sight of the fact that the consumers of this product would otherwise be SMOKING. You can't compare these to using NRTs (although they are shown to be comparable risk) or not smoking at all. Take away ecigs and the majority of users would go right back to tobacco cigarettes (which WERE making them sick and killing them) and not quitting.
Last edited:
And to take this further, even some hospitals have officially stated that they will allow vaping on and inside hospital grounds.
Now I've seen a ton of articles relating to this but most come from E-Cigarette specific news sites. However, here is the link to a medical press release/news/blog that covered the story. Seeing as the site covers all medical news, it's easier to accept the claims as being authentic.
Tampa hospital allows use of electronic cigarettes
Now I've seen a ton of articles relating to this but most come from E-Cigarette specific news sites. However, here is the link to a medical press release/news/blog that covered the story. Seeing as the site covers all medical news, it's easier to accept the claims as being authentic.
Tampa hospital allows use of electronic cigarettes
Last edited:
Forgive the term but lets call a spade a spade. Bottom line is the Tobacco industry has the FDA in their back pocket else tobacco cigarettes wouldve been outlawed years ago. They and NYS stand to lose billions of dollars in cigarette revenue and state taxes if they cannot find a quick way to gain control of the ever growing E-cig business. The easiest way is to feed a bunch of unassuming legislators a bunch of misinformation and have them ban e-cigs until they can figure out how to make money off them.
This is NOT about the safety of the US public, it is always about the almighty dollar. dont ever forget that.
This is NOT about the safety of the US public, it is always about the almighty dollar. dont ever forget that.
You do not understand, no matter what you may think you do.
The progressives are in charge now. The rights and liberties guarenteed by the Constitution of the United States no longer apply. The government WILL dictate what you can and cannot do. You should enjoy your above list of what you do... cause I am betting by the time this congress gets voted out in November, some of those items will be deemed illegal.
You forgot to mention big pharmaceuticals companies..... The could lose the same $$$ if not more.
Jay
1. I meant substantial as in quantity
2. I never said they should be FDA studies, I just would like to see some long-term studies myself
3. Agreed and I answered to that.
4. You're right, that would be a better analogy, except we still don't know what the effects of vaping these chemicals
I GET IT. I do, I just get both sides is all. However you choose to handle your addiction is up to you. I believe in VERY little govt. control.
I feel we should be able to eat some Fen-Phen, go to a bar and do blow off of strippers and then pay to take them home. There are no victims in those "crimes". Don't think I'm some lobbyist, or taking a moral high-ground here.
I'm sure e-cigs will stand to make many people lose a ton of money, and others to profit a ton. That's how it goes in the drug-trade. Some of the companies are already making millions of dollars. Anyway. Good luck all with the fight against the goverment. Weed doesn't kill anyone and it was banned. I just think if they have their sights set on this, it's only a matter of time.
Jay, no matter what the outcome, I know I speak for many New York vapers when I say thank you, to you and Yvilla for taking the time to go to Albany and attempt to inform those who may have a say in the outcome of this bill. Thanks again.
Actually it would be prudent for every American E-Cigarette user to give thanks, and not just those in New York.
Each possible ban is a direct threat to all of us as a whole. This being due to the fact that any state-wide ban could easily lead to a domino effect throughout the United States.
And this is something that I hope everybody understands. There may very well be people thinking, "Oh I don't live in New York so it's no skin off my back."
Everybody needs to try and do what they can to help the situation regardless of their geographic location.
So with that, I also want to thank those that made the trip to Albany.
No clue about the bill being vetoed or just never making it to the senate floor.
Users can still buy from out of state but no one in NYS can import / distribute or sell the devices.
A friend of mine told me they said the fine might be 10,000 per offense.
Once it passes in NYS it will not take long for the rest of the country to follow suite. Then we will be left with ordering overseas but we all know the FDA will not let that happen.
Jay
IF it passes.
Yes... if....
My bad!
Also here is a message I got from my Senator, Senator Alesi.
Just got it today...
Jay
Seems like he didn't
At least he replied though, which is more than many other politicians have bothered to do.
At least he replied though, which is more than many other politicians have bothered to do.
...
my 10 nanogram ecig is replacing 7 to 15 11,000 nanogram Marlboros !!!!
It's late, sorry, going to sleep now.
The question now would be how many grams my Marlboro has; I noticed most of the chart is ng/g. ?
So while a gram is about what my carto should hold (correct?), how many grams are in a Marlboro?
Can anyone tell me please? We need to get all the facts in perfect order in preparation for the Senate of NY's scrutiny.
______________________________________________________________________________
It's incomprehensible to me whi Alesi is alarmed by the fact that the FDA has not approved the ecigs yet. I would say a reply addressing this is called for.
Senator Jim Alesi:
What do you all think?
Why has the FDA not approved my switching from Marloboros to ecigs ? !!!
While you answer, I post another thought: If it passes, (and so far it has had unanimous support--as well as an URGE from the ALA of NY that I have witnessed,) not only will it cause problems worldwide, but within NY itself, it would only be a matter of time before vehicles or people caught with 3 or 4 batteries and cartos could be sentenced for intent to distibute, don't you think?
Last edited:
I take it he didn't look at any of the info that explains the FDA statement?
Well this letter is dated the 29th and we did not get him the info packet until this past week so this is a old letter.
Plus the lady at his office in Albany assured me I get a meeting with him at his district office very soon.
Jay
I heard back from one of the senators. At least he refers to e-cigs as "less hazardous alternatives to cigarette smoking."
It looks like it's to big to post. Here's the link:
Chuck Miro Jr :: Senator Thompson reply picture by Poeia - Photobucket
It looks like it's to big to post. Here's the link:
Chuck Miro Jr :: Senator Thompson reply picture by Poeia - Photobucket
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked