Not an aid to quitting smoking? Seriously?

[Parallx]

I have no doubt in my mind, as many of us have discovered, these devices *ARE* in reality a good way to quit analogs. No study or governmental guideline is going to change the fact that I, as well as almost a dozen of my friends and coworkers have QUIT using e-cigs.

Sadly, this is not enough to be able to advertise as such. My method of quitting may be different from yours. Other factors may have influenced the success rate. Inhaled flavorings may cause some horrible health consequences for all of us in 20 years. Noone knows.

I'm taking the risk, as are many of us, as our good sense tells us that without the burning material, and tar, and carbon monoxide, the e-cig is *most likely* safer than real cigs.

Until an accredited group can release an official report proclaiming this to the world in such a way that the FDA and other regulating bodies can rely upon, we *MUST* do what is required to continue to sell and use these devices.

In the 60's, ... was thought to hold great potential in psychological problems and therapy, as well as alcoholism. The drug found other uses and was widely used without approval before it's legality was determined. Once made illegal, no further testing was done, or allowed to be done.

Many other substances and products shared this same fate. The hand of regulation and the road to legitimacy is not always one that has a favorable outcome. In this country, we have the freedom to do anything they let us do. Every time something is regulated, or a law is passed, we're a little less free than before.

 

[ApOsTle51]

I am working on it... trying to figure it all out... it is rather confusing.

But they do list:

The water used is 26 USP grade purified water. Each 240 ml bottle contains a Homeopathic dilution of 6x of the proprietary processed nicotine molecule.

this made me understand homeopathy a little better :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWE1tH93G9U

 

[LaceyUnderall]

this made me understand homeopathy a little better :

Thank you... That was very helpful in understanding dilution. I would think that the dilution of the nicotine would have to be 1X or 2X which he says they never use... so I will investigate what in the homeopathic world has a 1X or 2X dilution.

But again, thank you! You have been extremely helpful...

 

[Cage]

6X dilution of 1 molecule...
Is that what that means?

 

[LaceyUnderall]

yes. I think.

(i was asked to not take chemistry II in high school... so the fact that I am even trying to wrap my head around this is amazing)

 

[Lithium1330]

I worry too about the government getting involved with this whole e-cigarette phenomenon. The puritans will ban anything that resembles drug use. For some reason all recreational drug use is considered immoral. I've never understood this and I never will. It's as if they think pleasure should be banned.

Whatever. They can outlaw sales of e-cigs and liquid but in order to stop vaping they would have to stop the sale of tobacco (or anything else containing nicotine), vegetable glycerin, propylene glycol, (and probably other chemicals) and anything that produces heat. Oh, and batteries and/or electricity.

They can't stop it. In the USA they have already lost the battle against pot, they will lose this one too.

You are so right.

 

[New Year quitter]

Interesting, thanks for that.

Reading that, it would seem to indicate that simple statements from customers as to their experiences with an e-cig would be permissable. It talks about substantiation, but if the retailer is making no direct claim, then the testimonials cannot be considered substantiation (i.e. it seems to be talking about using testimonials as substantiation for claims made by manufacturers/retailers).

It also talks about the opinions in the testimonial needing to be, "supported, where necessary, with independent evidence of their accuracy." First question would be what constitutes a situation where support is necessary. The wording clearly allows for cases where it is not necessary. Also, what level of support would be considered adequate. Secondly, a testimonial is an opinion as even defined here -- opinions, are, by definition, not always able to be supported:



It finishes talking about making claims based on the testimonial. But again, if no claims are made and only the testimonial is published I don't see how this applies.

The code seems to focus on claims made based upon testimonials as it specifically talks about substantiation. It seems much less clear in situations where no claims are made by the persons with vested interests.

I wonder how a "guestbook" type of feature would be viewed where customers simply left feedback about their experiences with the devices.

Allowing people to post their unsolicited and uncoerced opinions on a product and not making any claims based upon that feedback would seem to steer clear of anything prohibited by those guidelines.

Disclaimer: Don't act on marketing advice you read on the internet.

How substantial is the FACT that I haven't even thought about cigarettes in the last six weeks?

Not an attack on you, but these laws are clearly stupid.

 

[providence]

Yes... that was a vicious attack. However, enter NicoLite Smoke Free Choice

Yeah, but wasn't it a few years between the FDA pulling those products and their reappearance? And that look like an awfully low amoung of nicotine.

 

[providence]

Not an attack on you, but these laws are clearly stupid.

Yes and no. I mean I do kind of like the fact that a company can't make health or safety claims without being able to back them up.

 

[LaceyUnderall]

Yeah, but wasn't it a few years between the FDA pulling those products and their reappearance? And that look like an awfully low amoung of nicotine.

Yes.... and it does look like a low amount of nicotine... from what the video apostle posted. We would definitely have to be in the 1X or 2X category... so I will keep looking into that. I am not done with this idea yet... I am going to exhaust every possible avenue within it to make damn sure it won't work... What else is there at this point? Pharm or Tobacco... and neither are good for us...

 

[TropicalBob]

Laws that protect consumers from unscrupulous sellers are hardly stupid. Some regulations might be implemented in a fashion you personally don't like, but they are essential for the benefit of us all. False claims to sell any product are unacceptable, and how are consumers to know better unless an agency for our protection steps in and says "Prove it".

The present selling of e-devices and liquid offers you no assurance of any kind -- from a health or safety or honesty standpoint. That's unacceptable to any thinking person.

It took six years to get nicotine water back on the market. And I bet it's a shadow of what it once was. I'll only know that for sure when we find out how much nicotine is in that little $3 bottle of water. Looks like a liquid placebo to me.

 

[New Year quitter]

Laws that protect consumers from unscrupulous sellers are hardly stupid. Some regulations might be implemented in a fashion you personally don't like, but they are essential for the benefit of us all. False claims to sell any product are unacceptable, and how are consumers to know better unless an agency for our protection steps in and says "Prove it".

The present selling of e-devices and liquid offers you no assurance of any kind -- from a health or safety or honesty standpoint. That's unacceptable to any thinking person.

It took six years to get nicotine water back on the market. And I bet it's a shadow of what it once was. I'll only know that for sure when we find out how much nicotine is in that little $3 bottle of water. Looks like a liquid placebo to me.

You should try living in England, our health and safety laws are like something out of a Kafka novel.

 

[LaceyUnderall]

Laws that protect consumers from unscrupulous sellers are hardly stupid. Some regulations might be implemented in a fashion you personally don't like, but they are essential for the benefit of us all. False claims to sell any product are unacceptable, and how are consumers to know better unless an agency for our protection steps in and says "Prove it".

The present selling of e-devices and liquid offers you no assurance of any kind -- from a health or safety or honesty standpoint. That's unacceptable to any thinking person.

It took six years to get nicotine water back on the market. And I bet it's a shadow of what it once was. I'll only know that for sure when we find out how much nicotine is in that little $3 bottle of water. Looks like a liquid placebo to me.

I agree... it probably is a ridiculously low amount... According to the video (the guy reminded me between a cross of Red Green and the head guy from Jurassic Park), all homeopathic meds are low amounts... but, like I said... I am willing to spend the time to exhaust any avenue for the good of us all... if I lost my e-cig tomorrow... I am not quite sure what I would do.

 

[New Year quitter]

Laws that protect consumers from unscrupulous sellers are hardly stupid. Some regulations might be implemented in a fashion you personally don't like, but they are essential for the benefit of us all. False claims to sell any product are unacceptable, and how are consumers to know better unless an agency for our protection steps in and says "Prove it".

The present selling of e-devices and liquid offers you no assurance of any kind -- from a health or safety or honesty standpoint. That's unacceptable to any thinking person.

It took six years to get nicotine water back on the market. And I bet it's a shadow of what it once was. I'll only know that for sure when we find out how much nicotine is in that little $3 bottle of water. Looks like a liquid placebo to me.

You should try living in England, our health and safety laws are like something out of a Kafka novel.
Plus all this talk about protecting consumers, are we dumb little sheepies that need goading from one tadpole-thought to the next? We are supposed to be adults for Christ's sake.
It's like when the tobacco companies were sued for harming people, it was a despicable decision. Everyone bloody knew that smoking was bad for them, even King James I of England said as much back in the 1620's.
People choose to smoke and have to live or die with the consequences and to make companies responsible for the bad decisions we make turns us all into the nanny state's children.

 

[LaceyUnderall]

You should try living in England, our health and safety laws are like something out of a Kafka novel.
Plus all this talk about protecting consumers, are we dumb little sheepies that need goading from one tadpole-thought to the next? We are supposed to be adults for Christ's sake.
It's like when the tobacco companies were sued for harming people, it was a despicable decision. Everyone bloody knew that smoking was bad for them, even King James I of England said as much back in the 1620's.
People choose to smoke and have to live or die with the consequences and to make companies responsible for the bad decisions we make turns us all into the nanny state's children.

But there are some who follow sheepishly... and those followers are the ones who insist that if they follow like sheep, we all should follow like sheep.

 

[TropicalBob]

Would you really argue for abolishing the consumer protection agencies? Really? Free market free-for-all? I would not want to live in such a country. No civilized nation will revert to that sorry state.

Keep at it, Lacey. Your route might well be the only way e-liquid could be marketed without FDA involvement. I think most people here can see that is coming.

 

[devonschmoker]

I think we are forgetting about the possible political ramifications to any politician or government agency that would pass a ruling against any possible smoking cession aid. This can easily be spun as either a vote for big tobacco or in the case of an agency a ruling to help big tobacco keep dealing death. (Couldn't you just see that as a Fox Headline?) If a large list enough list of people who quit by using an e-cig was publicly released in the face of a ban it could force the spin in our favor. What would be even better would be research from lets say a major medical university. I am currently trying to figure out how to convince OHSU to do this research. I am sure that they would love the idea as they are very anti tobacco.

 

[LaceyUnderall]

I think we are forgetting about the possible political ramifications to any politician or government agency that would pass a ruling against any possible smoking cession aid. This can easily be spun as either a vote for big tobacco or in the case of an agency a ruling to help big tobacco keep dealing death. (Couldn't you just see that as a Fox Headline?) If a large list enough list of people who quit by using an e-cig was publicly released in the face of a ban it could force the spin in our favor. What would be even better would be research from lets say a major medical university. I am currently trying to figure out how to convince OHSU to do this research. I am sure that they would love the idea as they are very anti tobacco.

Maybe this is something for RTV... Some kind of petition where e-cig users can "sign" their names... We can just keep an ongoing list until it is needed... Riddle/Lithium what do you think???

 

[surbitonPete]

If there were lot's of decent, honest, people in government who are genuinely interested in our health....then we wouldn't really have much to worry about.....It's a sad reflection on education and humanity that few of us think there is much chance of that.

 

[New Year quitter]

Would you really argue for abolishing the consumer protection agencies? Really? Free market free-for-all? I would not want to live in such a country. No civilized nation will revert to that sorry state.

Keep at it, Lacey. Your route might well be the only way e-liquid could be marketed without FDA involvement. I think most people here can see that is coming.

Would you argue for a bureaucratic nightmarish world where people cannot make there own informed choices and have to be told how to sleep, eat, p*ss and ...., all under the watchful eye of Nanny?
See, now I'm doing what you did, implying that you believe in something preposterous by creating a statement you never made and asking you if you support it.