New FDA policy conflicts with itself and vaping

[beckdg]

If nicotine isn't removed in the extraction process then why would they be claiming that the nicotine level in the RL is 20-25% lower than it would be in the raw materials?

It's not an extraction process.

I never claimed nicotine wasn't lost.

But nicotine isn't extracted and isolated either.

If one were to use this process to add nic, they wouldn't even get a clean WTA let alone a clean nic to add in later.

After the pulp is made, they're simply evaporating water.

What's left is EVERYTHING left over from the plant, NOT nicotine ONLY.

Guns don't kill people, virgins do! -Jim Jeffries

 

[listopencil]

It's not an extraction process. I never claimed nicotine wasn't lost. But nicotine isn't extracted and isolated either. If one were to use this process to add nic, they wouldn't even get a clean WTA let alone a clean nic to add in later. After the pulp is made, they're simply evaporating water. What's left is EVERYTHING left over from the plant, NOT nicotine ONLY.

Guns don't kill people, virgins do! -Jim Jeffries

They called it an extraction process. In the video. And it wouldn't have to be only nicotine.

 

[Tonee N]

It sounds like BT spends too much time and effort to make a cig. They should switch to making hotdogs, easypeasy!


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

 

[beckdg]

They called it an extraction process. In the video. And it wouldn't have to be only nicotine.

You're moving the goal posts.

To "add nicotine" is to add nicotine. Period.

Sorry, I meant it's not nicotine extraction. It's pulp extraction if anything.

To add that concoction is to introduce a whole host of other issues to overcome.

And there's still the issue of waste byproduct and reoccurring additional cost...

Above and beyond the cost of other methods outlined before.

It's still not logical a super power industry would continue to incur such additional unneeded cost in this day and age.

The additional nic present has been studied and explained by those that are educated and intelligent enough.

They add enough dangerous chemicals to focus on.

Additionally, the least effective way to increase addiction seems one not worth the effort.

The conspiracy theory and paranoia aren't necessary.

Guns don't kill people, virgins do! -Jim Jeffries

 

[listopencil]

You're moving the goal posts. To "add nicotine" is to add nicotine. Period. Sorry, I meant it's not nicotine extraction. It's pulp extraction if anything. To add that concoction is to introduce a whole host of other issues to overcome. And there's still the issue of waste byproduct and reoccurring additional cost... Above and beyond the cost of other methods outlined before. It's still not logical a super power industry would continue to incur such additional unneeded cost in this day and age. The additional nic present has been studied and explained by those that are educated and intelligent enough. They add enough dangerous chemicals to focus on. Additionally, the least effective way to increase addiction seems one not worth the effort. The conspiracy theory and paranoia aren't necessary.

Guns don't kill people, virgins do! -Jim Jeffries

There aren't any goal posts to move. If they are removing nicotine from their tobacco and then adding it back in at a later point, then it is possible that they are increasing the nicotine level in their tobacco.

 

[Zakillah]

The main way to control Nic output of a cigarette isnt light or strong tobacco (or sprayed on Nic), but how "stuffed" a cig is, what kind of paper is used and how much ventilation there is in the filter.
You can go from super strong to ultra light adjusting only these parameters. There is no reason that I can see to spray tobacco with Nic.

Nicotine is already limited to 1mg/Cig here in Europe. "Ultra lights" were not a BT invention to trick people (look here, less Nic, its less dangerous!), it was demanded by politics, stupid as it is.
Lowering Nic will do nothing but make people smoke more, drag harder and inhale deeper. Good job.

 

[beckdg]

There aren't any goal posts to move. If they are removing nicotine from their tobacco and then adding it back in at a later point, then it is possible that they are increasing the nicotine level in their tobacco.

They're not removing nicotine and adding it.

They're making a pulp out of less desirable parts and adding back what they lose in the water later.

Nicotine just happens to be one thing that soaks out in the water.

Any salt will.

Guns don't kill people, virgins do! -Jim Jeffries

 

[listopencil]

They're not removing nicotine and adding it.They're making a pulp out of less desirable parts and adding back what they lose in the water later. Nicotine just happens to be one thing that soaks out in the water. Any salt will.

Guns don't kill people, virgins do! -Jim Jeffries

That's what they say they are doing. Adding back in the same stuff that was removed. Unfortunately they have shown a historic tendency to lie about important things so I have no reason to believe them.

 

[beckdg]

That's what they say they are doing. Adding back in the same stuff that was removed. Unfortunately they have shown a historic tendency to lie about important things so I have no reason to believe them.

So you don't believe them when they say they're saving money not wasting product?

Seriously?

That doesn't relate directly to them wasting product to increase a substance that won't result in the increased addiction you claim they're doing it for.

Maybe look a bit more into the other chemicals that are cheaper to obtain, actually obtain the results you're ascribing to this imaginary practice and require less work that we know they're adding.

Take it from somebody who vapes 50mg @ .2 ohm and still went through probably 6 weeks of major withdrawal.

Nicotine isn't the nasty addiction monster you think it is.

Guns don't kill people, virgins do! -Jim Jeffries

 

[beckdg]

I can't believe someone's blind paranoia actually convinced me to defend BT.

Guns don't kill people, virgins do! -Jim Jeffries

 

[Tonee N]

You're not paraniod if someone is trying to kill you.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

 

[listopencil]

So you don't believe them when they say they're saving money not wasting product? Seriously? That doesn't relate directly to them wasting product to increase a substance that won't result in the increased addiction you claim they're doing it for. Maybe look a bit more into the other chemicals that are cheaper to obtain, actually obtain the results you're ascribing to this imaginary practice and require less work that we know they're adding. Take it from somebody who vapes 50mg @ .2 ohm and still went through probably 6 weeks of major withdrawal. Nicotine isn't the nasty addiction monster you think it is.

Guns don't kill people, virgins do! -Jim Jeffries

Why would I believe at face value anything they say about addiction or how their product is made? And I don't disagree that there is more than simply nicotine factoring into cigarette addiction. Of course your buddies at Philip Morris say differently...

This is currently on their website. I captured the url so you can check for yourself.

 

[listopencil]

I can't believe someone's blind paranoia actually convinced me to defend BT.

Guns don't kill people, virgins do! -Jim Jeffries

I can't believe you would trust a company that consistently lies to you.

 

[Tonee N]

Govt doesn't consistanly lie either. [emoji6]

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

 

[beckdg]

You're not paraniod if someone is trying to kill you.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

However you are paranoid if someone's obviously trying to do it with a needle and you can't stop looking for a gun.

Guns don't kill people, virgins do! -Jim Jeffries

 

[beckdg]

Why would I believe at face value anything they say about addiction or how their product is made? And I don't disagree that there is more than simply nicotine factoring into cigarette addiction. Of course your buddies at Philip Morris say differently...

This is currently on their website. I captured the url so you can check for yourself.

Guns don't kill people, virgins do! -Jim Jeffries

 

[beckdg]

I can't believe you would trust a company that consistently lies to you.

Guns don't kill people, virgins do! -Jim Jeffries

 

[ENAUD]

Stumbled upon this little bit of food for thought:

The pharma industry goal:
A world-wide
nicotine monopoly
There is no longer any doubt about the pharmaceutical intent of the attacks on tobacco: They want the world monopoly on nicotine. Therefore the corporations create long-term financial relationships with doctors, experts and anti-tobacco activists, who they believe can be used to achieve this goal.

The attack on tobacco dates back to the introduction of Nicorette in the 1980s, if not earlier. But it has been done partially hidden from the public due to the successful pharmaceutical strategy of parading “health” and clean white medical gowns in front of them in order to control the media.

The goal is no longer hidden however: When the TPSAC Committee was founded in 2010 with a total of four pharma-sponsored experts, GlaxoSmithKline immediately went to the FDA and urged them to remove all tobacco industry smokeless products from the US market – including the Swedish snus. This probably led to the suit that the two tobacco companies filed against the FDA.

It is also clear that the pharmaceutical giants are puppet-masters of the opposition to another competing nicotine product: The harmless nicotine E-cigarette, which has been banned in many places, also in Denmark. The E-cigarette has been a threat to the pharmaceutical nicotine profits, since it succeeded in taking half of the Nicorette market in 2012. It only made matters worse for the pharma corporations when the tobacco industry began to buy E-cigarette companies.

The most significant cause of these strange E-cigarette bans is the fact that the leading experts, who have called the authorities to ban E-cigarettes, in many cases, have received generous donations from Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline and other pharmaceutical companies in the nicotine market.

It was also Big Pharma’s very successful media and lobbying campaigns that led the EU Commission to make very restrictive rules for the sale of e-cigarettes, and to continue the senseless European ban on snus in the so-called EU tobacco products directive.

From here:Anti-smoking experts paid by Big Pharma

So about that whole reduced nicotine in cigs and the FDA is going to promote vaping thing...let's see how they proceed...

 

[Eskie]

Stumbled upon this little bit of food for thought:
From here:Anti-smoking experts paid by Big Pharma

So about that whole reduced nicotine in cigs and the FDA is going to promote vaping thing...let's see how they proceed...

The issue I have with that article is it's a blog post written by someone named Klaus K., reposted and partially translated by the blog's owner, Frank Davis. It is hard to form an opinion on something from such a post, especially when the author won't even identify themselves, at least for me to.

The whole BP thing certainly appears as if they will receive some monetary benefit from more smokers trying to quit, but those NRT products are now generic, OTC "drugs" that bring in nowhere near the revenue they did when first released some 20 or 30 years ago by now? Zyban/Wellbutrin is also off patent with generics on the market, and isn't a huge hit with users to stop smoking. Pfizer is about the only one with a brand name drug still out there, Chantix.

OTOH, BT is already making the transition they know is coming as their combustible tobacco products are used less by buying and releasing stuff like cigalikes (Vuse, Blu) and iQOS products. BT is trying very hard to limit any lost revenue by having these things in their pocket.

 

[mikepetro]

That's what they say they are doing. Adding back in the same stuff that was removed. Unfortunately they have shown a historic tendency to lie about important things so I have no reason to believe them.

Back in 2001 I did a software installation at a RJR factory in Richmond VA. I personally worked on a machine where they took tobacco scraps and turned them into a pulp then paper, then shredded the paper to mix with leaf in their cheaper brands. The juices that were created in the process were sent to reservoir at the end of the paper machine and simply sprayed back on to the paper. Excess water was evaporated but nothing was added. They took great care NOT to manipulate the nicotine levels, apparently it was a hot button regulatory issue. They were very conscious about making sure the extract was sprayed back onto the paper in a 1:1 ratio vs what was extracted in the pulping process. I watched the process very closely as the PLC software I was installing is what controlled the whole process.

They were NOT manipulating nic, of that I am certain.