Obama Receiving an E-Cig For Valentine’s Day

[Lithium1330]

It is too bad that the devises come out of China as China could careless--but they also should be concerend about a ban--or maybe they have enough of a market right in their own country. I have not scene many posts that referance use of our devices in China, but I imagine there are a lot of users--It looks like an uphill battle all the way and I sure hope that we are not headed down the "Nicotine Water" trail as that was a long and windy one---Sun

They have a HUGE potential market, 320 millions of smokers in China:
BBC News | Health | Smoking set to kill millions in China

The treat of a ban is very real and as for regulation--well what are we all suppose to due in the years that it takes to any kind of approval--go back to Analogs?? That is not being paraniod--that is facing reality and I for one do not what to ever smoke another analog again in my lifetime---Sun

We have alternatives even if e-cigarettes are banned, if nicotine is not hard regulated we can get the nicotine from a lot of sources, maybe it will be more expensive but we can do it, we all agree that vaporizing is better than smoking, well we can vaporize tobacco without e-cigarettes, in the market now is a new generation of vaporizers that don't use batteries, and are every time getting smaller:
I-INHALE

index

Now we know that we can use PG and flavoring to use with the tobacco vaporized, this is in fact more healthier than smoking and a source of nicotine, maybe the cost of that device is high but it dosn't use baterries or atomizers, it uses just butane, maybe it is not as "good looking" as an e-cigarette but it is still a better option than burning tobacco, so, nobody can tell what will happen in the future with e-cigarettes because it depends in A LOT of factors but if nicotine is not hard regulated we can still stay away from analogs and even if nicotine gets hard regulated we can use something else: Lobelia Inflata.

I just want to say that WE DON'T HAVE TO GO BACK TO ANALOGS there are other options.

I'm just wondering, who is winning if we freak out and start to stock a pile on fear?

The best thing we can do is to get KNOWLEDGE, if they WANT to ban it, they WILL ban it, no matter what, of course if A LOT of people use e-cigarettes it will be harder to them to ban them, but still they can do it in a second.

 

[Sun Vaporer]

I whole hardily agree with Lithium that panic is not the answer here and knowledge is–that is why I posted this article in the first place here on the Forum. I can not concur with that we have a viable options if e-cigs are in fact banned for those that use nicotine as: (1) handling and making your own e-liquid is quite a dangerous proposition. As has been reiterated here by many members, it is outright hazardous to make e-liquid containing nicotine outside the spear of a lab by experts that know what they are doing as you will never know the true content of the nicotine; (2) If e-cigs are banned then they become illicit and most do not what any part of that; and (3) the use of tobacco with vaporizers is something that some, if not many of us what nothing to do. So absent making your own non-nicotine e-liquid with the use of a vaporizer there really is no viable alternative for those still wanting to use nicotine without the involvement of tobacco.
As Topical Bob pointed out:
"Look at what happened in Australia as a preview of things to come. Understand first that the FDA doesn't have to prove a thing. It doesn't normally test things, either. It reviews the tests of others seeking to market a drug. All burden of proof is on the maker/marketer/applicant. The FDA considers our e-thingies to be "drug delivery devices" and the form of nicotine to be a "new drug." Nothing has been approved. Notices are being made now that they must be approved.
Start from that point and see what you extrapolate."
And as I stated in toto:

(1)The tax revenue is a Big issue here in the US as there is a lot of revenue for the States in cigarette taxation (2) Big Tobacco still has a lot of clout and Big Pharma has even more clout and do not want to see any lost revenue; (3) Customs will flag the device like white on rice if a ban is instilled; (4) E-Bay will not allow an illicit sales on their site if there is a ban; and (5) In my opinion it is not being a little paranoid when you have clown Suppliers out there doing stupid things like sending Obama an e-cig, another putting up a billboard, and some making false claims. The threat of a ban is very real and as for regulation--well what are we all suppose to due in the years that it takes to any kind of approval--go back to Analogs?? That is not being paranoid--that is facing reality and I for one do not what to ever smoke another analog again in my lifetime."

What I was referring to, in part, was that if a few lone Suppliers are going to employ ignorant tactics like, sending an e-cig to the White House as a gift for Obama; posting huge billboards; and making false and misleading statements about unproven safety–then the plight of the e-cig becomes all the more difficult and the probability of a ban much more realistic. It is unfortunate that a few Suppliers have to jeopardize the plight of the e-cig in the face of the many reputable Suppliers we currently have---Sun

 

[Kaston]

Back to earth with the turkeys and their crushed e-cigs.

That's our Bob!

On another note, anything sent to the President larger that a #10 envelope is thrown away, so he will never get the E-cigar.

 

[Sun Vaporer]

That's our Bob!

On another note, anything sent to the President larger that a #10 envelope is thrown away, so he will never get the E-cigar.

Kaston--I sure hope they pitch it!!! That would be a good thing--Sun

 

[CssReb]

Kaston--I sure hope they pitch it!!! That would be a good thing--Sun

Dumpster diving?

CeeREb--Great idea but seeing how you are closer then I am, I bet you would beat me to it--LOL--Sun

I sure would ;-)

 

[Sun Vaporer]

Dumpster diving?

CeeREb--Great idea but seeing how you are closer then I am, I bet you would beat me to it--LOL--Sun

 

[TribbleTrouble]

Listen, if we separate the equipment from the liquid as far as it is sold and marketed, everything should technically be OK. It will only be OK, though, if the Manufacturers and suppliers stop making any claims about what they are for or what they do, and change the name from "Electronic Cigarette" to "Personal Vaporizer". The less information given about the device, the less issue the FDA should technically have with it. Don't sell them with prefilled carts, sell them with dry balnk carts. Separate the e-liquid from the device, and put all of the FDA scrutiny on the e-liquid alone. That way, we end up getting better quality liquid in the future that is FDA approved, but we never lose our equipment while it gets sorted out with the FDA. I can always find a way to make my own liquid, but I can't easily make my own "Personal Vaporizer". If that approach can work for water pipes in a head shop, it can work for our e-cigs, IMO.

 

[Lithium1330]

(1) handling and making your own e-liquid is quite a dangerous proposition. As has been reiterated here by many members, it is outright hazardous to make e-liquid containing nicotine outside the spear of a lab by experts that know what they are doing as you will never know the true content of the nicotine; (2) If e-cigs are banned then they become illicit and most do not what any part of that; and (3) the use of tobacco with vaporizers is something that some, if not many of us what nothing to do.
Sun

I agree with you in some things, of course at this moment e-cigarettes are great, but at least for me I don't want to be chained to one device with an uncertain future:

1.- Making your own nicotine can be very dangerous but not at the level this has been posted in the forum, if you take a leaf of tobacco and try to extract the nicotine you gonna end with an unknow amount of nicotine for sure, but for example if you know that 1 marlboro red has 1mg of nicotine and you try to extract that nicotine you know for sure that the result can't be more than 1mg, the same goes for patches, they have lets say 34mg, you can't get more than that.

2.- Of course nobody wants to do anything illicit

3.- I don't know how many of us have used a vaporizer for tobacco, and I don't know how many of us know that obtaining nicotine this way eliminates 98% of tar in the tobacco, and if e-cigarettes got banned is NRTs, analogs, quit, vaporizers or die, my choose: vaporizers.

IMO the ban dosn't depend on us, we can try to do our best on this matter by don't do stupid things, but at the very end it all depends on goverments and the monetary interests of big companies, so, I'm just saying vaporizers are my PLAN B if everything falls apart for e-cigarettes I'm not going back to analogs never again.

 

[skullsoup432]

Sorry Lithium if I take your statement wrong, but 320 million Chinese do not pay taxes here in the U.S., If that's what you meant.

I guess the point I was getting at is that if we quit using analogs it would be much better for our health, but the taxation is to raise money, not protect us. I truthfully feel that the U.S. gov't would rather have smokers around, just too much money for them to deny. The same with future generations, politicians do not care about them. That is just a ruse. Sorry to be so negative, but if it walks like a duck...

 

[Lithium1330]

Sorry Lithium if I take your statement wrong, but 320 million Chinese do not pay taxes here in the U.S., If that's what you meant.

Oh no, sorry I didn't meant that my english is not good I mean that chinese manufacturers can be careless of invest money trying to avoid bans in western world because they have a big potential market in their own countrie.

Sorry again.

 

[skullsoup432]

Lithium, no problem, I understand. I recall seeing something about the US tobacco companies making huge profits selling to Asian markets. They do this knowing full well that many small children, I believe this is true, use their American made products. I could be wrong, but I would not put it past some manufacturers.

Also, I am not against taxes completely, or manufacturers making a profit. But these two dealers who have dragged the president into it are just wrong. The almighty dollar should not rule when it comes to people's health. Pretty arrogant statement for a smoker, huh!!! Thanks for reading!

 

[surbitonPete]

Oh no, sorry I didn't meant that my english is not good I mean that chinese manufacturers can be careless of invest money trying to avoid bans in western world because they have a big potential market in their own countrie.

Sorry again.

a countries wealth does not grow from taxing or selling goods to it's own people......it's from selling goods and services abroad.

 

[stephenrowley]

Boy talk about a paranoid bunch. I think you all should stop worrying so much and just enjoy the device or use it to quit smoking so that when it is banned you don't have to smoke.

 

[sherid]

Please view these ads and comment on how e cigs might simply be substituted for where Nicorette now is used in the ad
YouTube - Nicorette ad
YouTube - Introduction to Nicorette Inhalator
Here is another interesting page about BP's involvement with nicotine as a commercial, rather than health campaign. This is one of the many interesting details on the page.
"ATP [Advanced Tobacco Products, Inc./Advanced Therapeutic Products] sold their patented nicotine technology, which forms the basis of the Nicorette/Nicotrol Inhaler, to what is now Pharmacia Corporation, in exchange for product payments of 3% of Pharmacia's net sales. In July, Pharmacia announced it had reacquired the rights to market the Nicotrol Inhaler in North America from McNeil PPC, Inc., a unit of Johnson & Johnson. As a result of the Nicotrol takeback, Pharmacia said it has a renewed interest in consumer advertising as well as the professional detailing of doctors and healthcare providers." ["ATP Announces Fiscal Year Results, Dividend Payments & British Medical Study of the Nicotine Inhaler," Company Press Release, 11/28/2000] NICOTINE WARS--Part III--Pharmaceutical Players

 

[LaceyUnderall]

Please view these ads and comment on how e cigs might simply be substituted for where Nicorette now is used in the ad

First thing: If I wanted to suck on a tampon, I would take one from the bathroom and do so How un-manly is that? Males... weigh in here.

Second thing: Absolutely the e-cig fits in there. There is no doubt that BP is going to be the big battle and not tobacco. Firstly, BT can only wage war from one corner and that is patent infringement. They know that they are now one step behind and with the successful demonization campaign that has been allowed for so long, any attack on any product that gets people off of tobacco will be squashed by the antis. The antis will align with the e-cig to fight of tobacco, then will turn on the e-cig once BT has been squashed. BP is the one we have to be warry of. Even if e-cigs cut into their profit at 1%, we can add up all of those totals they make on their current products... they are going to notice and that will be unacceptable.

 

[Vince1]

Lithium, you and Tribble make a very good point about separation of device from the fluid in sales. Like the I-Inhale device (a "herbal" vaporizer") is legal to be sold but any pot smoker knows what it is really for, just like the bongs in the head shops. Everybody knows these are not for smoking tobacco but they have not been banned yet. This approach could work for ecigs as well.

EDIT- No tampons for me, thank you!

 

[Sun Vaporer]

Listen, if we separate the equipment from the liquid as far as it is sold and marketed, everything should technically be OK. It will only be OK, though, if the Manufacturers and suppliers stop making any claims about what they are for or what they do, and change the name from "Electronic Cigarette" to "Personal Vaporizer". The less information given about the device, the less issue the FDA should technically have with it. Don't sell them with prefilled carts, sell them with dry balnk carts. Separate the e-liquid from the device, and put all of the FDA scrutiny on the e-liquid alone. That way, we end up getting better quality liquid in the future that is FDA approved, but we never lose our equipment while it gets sorted out with the FDA. I can always find a way to make my own liquid, but I can't easily make my own "Personal Vaporizer". If that approach can work for water pipes in a head shop, it can work for our e-cigs, IMO.

TribbleTrouble--I agree with you and the other members that have chimed in here advising the same. A little hard to ban a device that can be used to vape flavor. The nicotine is the "drug" subject to regulation--Sun

 

[TribbleTrouble]

TribbleTrouble--I agree with you and the other members that have chimed in here advising the same. A little hard to ban a device that can be used to vape flavor. The nicotine is the "drug" subject to regulation--Sun

The main problem with that approach is all of the over zealous suppliers out there trying to make a name for themselves by calling out Obama and the rest of the world saying "Our stuff will help you quit smoking". Let the regular users do that for you, and you suppliers just be quiet. Word of mouth is how I found out about e-cigs, not some stupid billboard or web site. I didn't even know about this forum until after I was already two weeks in with my penstyle. Suppliers should focus their marketing on gaining good word of mouth opinion from their customers, and let the satified customers do the rest of the work for them (IMO).

 

[TribbleTrouble]

Boy talk about a paranoid bunch. I think you all should stop worrying so much and just enjoy the device or use it to quit smoking so that when it is banned you don't have to smoke.

How exactly do you market your devices where you live? Is there no concern in South Africa about the government interferring with your freedom to vape? If not, then you are lucky. I just hope they don't take them from us, that's all. I also hope no one else in the business screws it up for all of us. That is where my paranoia comes from.

 

[skullsoup432]

Boy talk about a paranoid bunch. I think you all should stop worrying so much and just enjoy the device or use it to quit smoking so that when it is banned you don't have to smoke.[/quote



Not to be a jerk, but what if that were the attitude before the Boston tea party? "Let them tax us, there is nothing we can do. They are the gov't!" As far as smoking until it is banned, I'll pick on the fast Food restaurants again. Say that the gov't decided to ban hamburgers and fried food because it is unhealthy for you. From now on you get veggie burgers and carrot sticks. Would you still say I'm paranoid, that I should just enjoy the burgers and fries until their banned?

Now let's say that 65% of the people support the ban. In a democracy, you puny little 35% had no choice. Worse yet, you can't even fry hamburgers at home. No, I don't ..... about everything the government does. Say that the cigarettes eventually are acceptable and used. Soon after that, you won't be able to smoke in your car. Not for the health reasons, the safety reasons. People will be dripping and driving! A new law, no? OK, I'm getting carried away.