You know I do a D-mn good job at leaving the government alone, why can't they extend me the same courtesy.
FDA No more free samples? Well...
- Thread starter AgentAnia
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
0mg liquid is the key. There was a conference call at 3:00 pm on Thursday and Mr. Zeller was asked about 0mg liquid a couple of times and his response was that without nicotine, it was not a tobacco product.
hoog
When I first read this, I thought it would work. But then I realized that there are some probs that really have more to do with the nature of the statutory framework and the scope of potential regulation than anything else ...
1) If the flavoring is "intended for use" in a "finished tobacco product" then it becomes a component. And therefore it's subject to the same component regulation as vaping hardware. This would be especially true if the customer got pre-measured vials (otherwise
they'd have to deal with a syringe, etc.). The reason that 0% e-liquid slides through the statutory loopholes is that it's not "intended for use in a finished tobacco product."
2) Obviously the nic % of the resulting e-liquid can't be any greater than the unflavored nic. So for ex., if you want flavored nic. that's 2%, your unflavored mixer has to be greater than 2%. I've played with some flavors that are so concentrated as to essentially have no impact whasoever in ths regard, such as TFA menthol or VZ espresso. But there are others which have to be added to at least 10% to have any impact at all - citrus for ex. Some of the more subtle ones like creme de menthe might have to be as high as 20%. If the customer is only allowed to handle unflavored nic. that maxes out at say 2%, then they can't possibly get creme de menthe which is higher than 1.6%. That seems like a relatively minor practical issue, though. It would be much less of a prob if customers could be trusted to (and were legally permitted to) handle higher nic. %.
I don't recall hearing about a restriction on nic level. In fact, the issue of unflavored nic doesn't seem to be addressed - and I'm not complaining. I just have to wonder what else they have in store.
I'm not confident flavors will be allowed either. It seems the FDA is required to have authority over ecigs (deeming) before they can restrict flavors. So this doesn't preclude them from restricting flavored eliquids as soon as this is finalized.
How's that for cynical?
Greg Conley:
Zeller:
I hope people are keeping track of all these interviews going on right now from Zeller, Blu, Llorand, Reynolds, etc. because once in a while there's a nugget of good information of what they intend to do.
I know Blu considers this to help level the playing field with what they have to go through vs. the current marketplace (anyone else think Blu has been victimized by your local b&m?).
I'm not confident flavors will be allowed either. It seems the FDA is required to have authority over ecigs (deeming) before they can restrict flavors. So this doesn't preclude them from restricting flavored eliquids as soon as this is finalized.
How's that for cynical?
Greg Conley:
Zeller:
I hope people are keeping track of all these interviews going on right now from Zeller, Blu, Llorand, Reynolds, etc. because once in a while there's a nugget of good information of what they intend to do.
I know Blu considers this to help level the playing field with what they have to go through vs. the current marketplace (anyone else think Blu has been victimized by your local b&m?).
Last edited:
I'm not confident anyone can define what a "flavor" really is?
Think about it... before calling something a flavor, one needs to compare it to something that isn't flavored. i.e., "plain". That would be what? Just PG/VG? Or maybe just "tobacco" flavoring is deemed as the new "plain" in the e-juice arena. So what the hell is tobacco flavored e-juice when it has no tobacco in it? (excluding NET blends of course).
Maybe to comply with all this... the FDA will force us to actually vape some real tobacco so it fits with the regulations.
Added: And speaking of frivolous regulation... why in god's name are the letters {MODERATED} censored in a forum for adults? Holy crap ECF... it ain't 1957 anymore.
Last edited by a moderator:
KODIAK™;12979774 said:I'm not confident anyone can define what a "flavor" really is?
Think about it... before calling something a flavor, one needs to compare it to something that isn't flavored. i.e., "plain". That would be what? Just PG/VG? Or maybe just "tobacco" flavoring is deemed as the new "plain" in the e-juice arena. So what the hell is tobacco flavored e-juice when it has no tobacco in it? (excluding NET blends of course).
Maybe to comply with all this... the FDA will force us to actually vape some real tobacco so it fits with the regulations.
Added: And speaking of frivolous regulation... why in god's name are the letters {MODERATED} censored in a forum for adults? Holy crap ECF... it ain't 1957 anymore.
Because, this is a work- and family-friendly forum. Those are the rules set forth.
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/ecf-forum-rules/51178-forum-rules.html
9. Flaming, trolling, other misconduct
a. These are not permitted -
- Flaming (insults).
- Criticising or complaining about a Moderator, or how the site is run, except via PM (private message).
- Discussion or mention of illegal/illicit drugs or sexual content.
- Posting of vulgar videos.
- Obscene or vulgar language.
[*]Trying to place offensive text in a post by evading the forum's built-in word censor, using symbols or alternative letters for example. - Multiple identities/accounts - this also applies to Facebookers. Each member is allowed only one account on the ECF Forums.
- Improper solicitation of goods, services, or monies from suppliers or other members. ECF is a "no begging zone".
- Trolling (includes but is not restricted to:
- Flooding the board with comments coming from a single point of view in multiple posts.
- Deliberately posting something which is against our forum rules.
- Posting something deliberately inflammatory - either to start a "flame war" or simply to cause difficulties for the Moderators.
- Posting snide comments about another member.
- Posting repeated criticism of Moderators or their moderation activities.
- Engaging in behaviour which is disruptive to the general operation of the Forum.
- Comments that insult people on the basis of their sexual orientation, religion, race, nationality, or country of origin.
The answer is simple:
Learn to DIY!!!
Except for the Tobacco flavors, which will probably still be okay, most of the other flavorings have legitimate uses in the Candy Industry...
So what are they gonna do?? Shut down companies like LorAnn, Flavor Art, et al???
Nope... The answer is to become as self sufficient as we can, and that includes learning to build our own coils, too!!
Learn to DIY!!!
Except for the Tobacco flavors, which will probably still be okay, most of the other flavorings have legitimate uses in the Candy Industry...
So what are they gonna do?? Shut down companies like LorAnn, Flavor Art, et al???
Nope... The answer is to become as self sufficient as we can, and that includes learning to build our own coils, too!!
The answer is simple:
Learn to DIY!!!
Except for the Tobacco flavors, which will probably still be okay, most of the other flavorings have legitimate uses in the Candy Industry...
So what are they gonna do?? Shut down companies like LorAnn, Flavor Art, et al???
Nope... The answer is to become as self sufficient as we can, and that includes learning to build our own coils, too!!
Let me give you my take on this.
Even though I have been a very vocal vapocalypse prepper for the better part of the last year, this is only a single person solution to the mess we are in. Yes I can can get myself set up well enough to vape for the rest of my life. All it take is some research and money. That is doable.
The real issue is what about all those smoker who will not have the option of vaping because this legislation shuts it down cold? Is it right to doom them? I would postulate many of us would say no. We have to fight this legislation tooth and nail. If not for ourselves then for them.
I agree with some of what you said, but when you say "we", what are you doing to help??
Are you a member of CASAA?? Do you belong to their Facebook group (We are CASAA) and join in any of the discussions there??
Do you follow the announcements of all the "Calls to Action" to see if there is anything happening in your area??
Or to help out another State or City with their fight??
We just lost a big battle here in the City of Los Angeles, even though there were people writing letters, attending the hearings, etc. - and there has been talk of trying for a State-wide BAN on online sales!!
I got an email from a vendor in Ohio who is calling it quits because they are trying to impose a 45% TAX on the wholesale price of vaping products...
We ALL need to do our part, and have our voices heard!!
The single most important thing anyone can do right now is to share your story here: E-cigarette User Testimonials
This way we can tell the naysayers, who think/say it doesn't help people get off of the Tobacco cigs, that they couldn't be more wrong!!
(and worrying about no more 'free samples' should be the least of our problems!!)
Good idea, but give it back to 'The Cause'... like helping out CASAA with the donations...
I agree with some of what you said, but when you say "we", what are you doing to help??
Are you a member of CASAA?? Do you belong to their Facebook group (We are CASAA) and join in any of the discussions there??
Do you follow the announcements of all the "Calls to Action" to see if there is anything happening in your area??
Or to help out another State or City with their fight??
We just lost a big battle here in the City of Los Angeles, even though there were people writing letters, attending the hearings, etc. - and there has been talk of trying for a State-wide BAN on online sales!!
I got an email from a vendor in Ohio who is calling it quits because they are trying to impose a 45% TAX on the wholesale price of vaping products...
We ALL need to do our part, and have our voices heard!!
The single most important thing anyone can do right now is to share your story here: E-cigarette User Testimonials
This way we can tell the naysayers, who think/say it doesn't help people get off of the Tobacco cigs, that they couldn't be more wrong!!
(and worrying about no more 'free samples' should be the least of our problems!!)
Before you take me to school please read http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/fda-regulations/556486-answer-what-do-i-do-now-question.html which I posted days ago. Yes I have been involved for quite awhile tyvm. Do you seriously think I would use WE if I did not include myself. I find your post insulting frankly.
Your intention might have been good. Making it personal not so much.
Here is something you can ALL do... I just got this in an email:
CASAA: FDA regulation of e-cigarettes: huge costs, little or no benefit, says CASAA
I just got this in an email:CASAA: FDA regulation of e-cigarettes: huge costs, little or no benefit, says CASAA
CASAA: FDA regulation of e-cigarettes: huge costs, little or no benefit, says CASAA
It appears that CASAA has come to the conclusion that hardware (equipment) is also affected:
Some folks had taken the position that only hardware that's shipped with nicotine in it, or as part of a kit that contained nicotine would be affected. (Along w/ nic-containing e-liquid, obviously.)
Granted, this language doesn't specficially indicate whether CASAA has determined that MODs/APVs/EGO batteries and separate (non-fillable) attys would be affected, or whether things like replacement coils would be. But it makes it clear that RDAs, cart[O]s, and tank[O]s are, since these are all "refillable devices" (CASAA's phrase).
It's hard see how the "component or part of a tobacco product" language of the statute could apply only to RDAs, cart[O]s and tank[O]s and somehow be inapplicable to special-purpose battery-containing devices, i.e. MODs/APVs/EGO batteries, or separate attys (not RDAs).
I look forward to a subsequent analysis from CASAA that makes it clear that every type of equipment unique to vaping will be affected under the "component or part" of a "tobacco product" because it is (to quote Zeller) "intended or expected to be used as part of a finished tobacco product."
(As distinct from an accessory. You don't have to have an EGO carrying case, or wear your Provari tee shirt when you vape.)
That means that even those DIY'rs with a freezer full of high-concentration nic. will be affected: lose your mech mod five years from now - and it just might be time to start buying flashlights and boxes of altoids. And a sottering iron (etc.) if you don't already have one.
It also may yield more topics for questions.
It appears that CASAA has come to the conclusion that hardware (equipment) is also affected:
Some folks had taken the position that only hardware that's shipped with nicotine in it, or as part of a kit that contained nicotine would be affected. (Along w/ nic-containing e-liquid, obviously.)
Granted, this language doesn't specficially indicate whether CASAA has determined that MODs/APVs/EGO batteries and separate (non-fillable) attys would be affected, or whether things like replacement coils would be. But it makes it clear that RDAs, cart[O]s, and tank[O]s are, since these are all "refillable devices" (CASAA's phrase).
It's hard see how the "component or part of a tobacco product" language of the statute could apply only to RDAs, cart[O]s and tank[O]s and somehow be inapplicable to special-purpose battery-containing devices, i.e. MODs/APVs/EGO batteries, or separate attys (not RDAs).
I look forward to a subsequent analysis from CASAA that makes it clear that every type of equipment unique to vaping will be affected under the "component or part" of a "tobacco product" because it is (to quote Zeller) "intended or expected to be used as part of a finished tobacco product."
(As distinct from an accessory. You don't have to have an EGO carrying case, or wear your Provari tee shirt when you vape.)
That means that even those DIY'rs with a freezer full of high-concentration nic. will be affected: lose your mech mod five years from now - and it just might be time to start buying flashlights and boxes of altoids. And a sottering iron (etc.) if you don't already have one.
It also may yield more topics for questions.
Last edited:
I see the No-Free samples rule as Not related to in store TASTING of juices.
I believe what they are going after are free give aways of cigarettes that used to happen at events....giving something away to take home and try, or give away to someone else. Something like one of those commercials with a hot girl getting all dressed up at rock concert, then ultimately putting on a Grim Reaper mask, picking up a sickle, and then handing out free Cigarettes.
In store tasting...is just tasting, the patron does not walk away with a sample in hand. The last Vape shack I went had you pay for the silicon protector tube, for 50 cents. It was a solid reusable silicon tip, sealed individually in plastic, not just like an endcap to cart with a hole in it, so it was actually worth the 50 cents.
If you are actually going to be walking away with a juice sample in store, a minimal charge seems easy, if not, what they need to be doing in the first place.
If online, like Mt Baker Vapor, its already tied to the price, you have to be over $15 to get the sample. But adding a charge of anything under a dollar seems like a complete solution under all conditions
I think the 18+, the product labeling, and the no free samples.....are OK with just about everyone.
I believe what they are going after are free give aways of cigarettes that used to happen at events....giving something away to take home and try, or give away to someone else. Something like one of those commercials with a hot girl getting all dressed up at rock concert, then ultimately putting on a Grim Reaper mask, picking up a sickle, and then handing out free Cigarettes.
In store tasting...is just tasting, the patron does not walk away with a sample in hand. The last Vape shack I went had you pay for the silicon protector tube, for 50 cents. It was a solid reusable silicon tip, sealed individually in plastic, not just like an endcap to cart with a hole in it, so it was actually worth the 50 cents.
If you are actually going to be walking away with a juice sample in store, a minimal charge seems easy, if not, what they need to be doing in the first place.
If online, like Mt Baker Vapor, its already tied to the price, you have to be over $15 to get the sample. But adding a charge of anything under a dollar seems like a complete solution under all conditions
I think the 18+, the product labeling, and the no free samples.....are OK with just about everyone.
In case you missed this from my OP:
To my mind, this statement clearly indicates that FDA does, in fact, consider "no free samples" to include in-store sampling. But I guess each of us is free to interpret this statement differently...
Put me on the "not OK with me" list. No wishful thinking allowed at Agent HQ.
You are right.....I missed reading that.
The picture of that store is pretty nice sampling area, much nicer to not need to have to ask, so far my locals have you ask, they hand you one, and then over and over, except you think you are taking too long. I would go to that shop in the picture.
I bought the 50 cent premium silicon tip protector, and I think that would be a work around, if the request of comments.... does not fix it. Like entry into a salad bar.
Regardless, in store sampling is the single biggest advantage BM have over online. I got several bottle of juice waiting to trade some day, until then....they be a steeping, maybe they will fix themselves if I just don't look at them.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
