For some reason I get the feeling that all these lawsuits are just ways to keep people away from electronic cigs. The more negative attention they get, the less people will buy them. I can't help but think some kind of scandal is going on. I hate this, I want to be able to be healthy in peace!
Oh, I do NOT freaking believe it!!!!!
- Thread starter leaford
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Now this I think is true, the nannies will keep finding reasons to come after eni by any means possible. The real motivation is still tax revenue and control so I wouldnt hold your breath for these Aholes leaving us alone.
these people that keeping attacking us are just making themselves look like idiots . I disagree with smokeverywhere when they are saying this is a cigarette , no it is not . you light i cigarette on fire and inhale and exhale smoke . to me this a smokeless tobacco product if anything . I myself pass out cards from v4l and let smokers and nonsmokers know what it is and how it has worked for me . most nonsmokers agree that they would rather be around this than smoking and that it is better than smoking . I also let them know it comes in 0mg nicotine that i strive to use one day so i can be free of nicotine completely . i was introduced to smoking at age 8 . smoked since age 12 , used to by at 7-11 at that age . i am now close to 37 , so have been smoking 1 pack a day for around 24 years . if they ban e-cigs they should also ban patches and gums as well due to they introduce nicotine in an unsafe manner IMO .
Well here is a link to a speech that one of my favorite authors gave on research and theories in the gov. and scientific comm. and it touches on smoking and how sceince is bowing to the masses and...... well you form your own opinion. It is kinda long but very interesting.
MichaelCrichton.com | Aliens Cause Global Warming
This artcle just shows that sceince and research throw stuff out there and have no proof and want us as people to think it is true.
MichaelCrichton.com | Aliens Cause Global Warming
This artcle just shows that sceince and research throw stuff out there and have no proof and want us as people to think it is true.
Last edited:
Numerous independent studies conducted.
Some preliminary results back from labs. We should see substantial results starting to come back in forty to seventy-five years.
The question, of course, is "tested" for what, specifically? If you're looking for "does it cause cancer", you're looking at fifty years and billions of dollars.
If you're looking for "does it contain xyz" - the industry has already "been there, done that"
Don't kid yourself - this has nothing to do with any lab results. Your favorite imaginary deity could come down from on-high and bless the freakin' industry as a whole and it'd mean bupkiss.
It's power and money and lobby. Forgive my redundancy.
Last edited:
That's absolutely right...because if it truly WAS about our safety, they would have already banned analogs...I wonder who they think they're kidding?
I always said all they care about are their darn tax money! They no the analogs cause cancer yet they won't ban it and there are no good alternatives except ecig in my opinion.. Bunch of BS man. I really hope the government stays out of this.. Pack of analogs in NJ area is up to 8+. Just insanity! They blame the rising tax on smokes due to health care costs. I don't buy it.. If ecig safety is proven including evidence that it really helps us to kick the cancer sticks then what else is left...
You have to remember it’s not just the cigarette company’s it’s going to hurt. It’s the health care industry too. They lose money to fund there cancer research (billions there), you are not going to the doctors as much for health reasons caused by smoking so doctors are losing money. Pharmaceutical companies can’t sell you their chantix and the like and they don’t like that they didn’t come up with the idea first.
Its kind of like the music and movie industry when people was copying songs and movies it cut into their profits they sued everyone even kids!!! But know that you can download songs and movies and they get their cut they are happy and the lawsuits stopped and now its legal as long as you give them their share whether they deserve it or not.
Its kind of like the music and movie industry when people was copying songs and movies it cut into their profits they sued everyone even kids!!! But know that you can download songs and movies and they get their cut they are happy and the lawsuits stopped and now its legal as long as you give them their share whether they deserve it or not.
Well look who started this..Jerry Brown, who's the idiot that re-elected him? He was the worst governer ever and now he's back? Where's Linda Ronstadt?
It occurred to me that I can kind of draw a parallel here with e-cig acceptance and AIDS. Remember when AIDS became a big deal, and they told everyone to abstain, use condoms, don't share needles, yada yada? Well, that didn't work. So they eventually passed out free condoms and clean needles.
Here we are with everyone all anti-smoking, so we have patches and gum and inhalers and gosh, they don't seem to work very well. Less people smoke now, and more quit and try to quit every year, but it seems like a losing battle. Well guess what? People ARE able to quit with e-cigs. So why not let us have them, even encourage us to use them? If this country really wants to see an end to smoking, we need some support with this, right? Let's get cigarettes out of the mainstream, off the shelves of every corner store, and make them really hard to acquire, and make e-cigs available everywhere and MUCH cheaper than cigarettes. Going a step further, you could even charge next to nothing for 0mg juice, and have a progressively higher price for increasing amounts of nic.
</soapbox>
Here we are with everyone all anti-smoking, so we have patches and gum and inhalers and gosh, they don't seem to work very well. Less people smoke now, and more quit and try to quit every year, but it seems like a losing battle. Well guess what? People ARE able to quit with e-cigs. So why not let us have them, even encourage us to use them? If this country really wants to see an end to smoking, we need some support with this, right? Let's get cigarettes out of the mainstream, off the shelves of every corner store, and make them really hard to acquire, and make e-cigs available everywhere and MUCH cheaper than cigarettes. Going a step further, you could even charge next to nothing for 0mg juice, and have a progressively higher price for increasing amounts of nic.
</soapbox>
think about this , If they label it as an aid to quit smoking instead of a tobacco product then health insurance should cover it . I am assuming that health insurance covers stuff like nicotine patches . we just need it to become an aid to quit smoking that is nonprescription . this may just be another one of my crazy ideas though ...
Ahhhh yes adrenalynn, I was hoping you would chime in.
My emphasis is on does it contain xyz. Sure the industry has already done this. But how often. The FDA has done a great job of preventing lead based products manufactured in China from entering our country. And the Chinese have said " OK, no lead no problem, we give them americans some Cadmium." So the chinese stop making products with a dangerous metal and replaced it with a heavy metal even more dangerous and more toxic.
This is why i say independant labs should be testing this stuff constantly. You never know when that manufacturing co. is going to replace an ingredient or manufactured part with something cheaper and of less quality.
As former smokers i believe that most of us didnt really care about the health effects caused by smoking. We believe that vaping is healthier for us because we can "feel" the results instantly. But we are consuming the products made by the e-cig industry and as such quality control testing should be done on a regular basis.
And the cost is nothing to send liquid, batteries, and empty carts to a lab and ask them to verify that they are made with XYZ and there have been no additions to the specifications in the manufacturing process. To not do this is foolish on the e-cig industries part. Most of the company's out there are just resellers. V4L and a few others have taken it a step further and "manufacture" their own product and as such should use due diligence and do the research and testing to make sure that the products that they are manufacturing are "safe" as best as they can be.
Haveing said all that i believe im going to open up a couple more carts and vape away!!
The scary thing is that I heard that Jerry Brown is running for Gov again... I so wish Arnie would stay but I understand why he doesn't want the job anymore. Gonna have to investigate the repubs candidate position on Ecigs.
I am fine with warning labels on my packages if it will save V4L any potential lawsuits. Ridiculous I know as I am fairly sure that the air in CA contains cancer causing agents.
I am fine with warning labels on my packages if it will save V4L any potential lawsuits. Ridiculous I know as I am fairly sure that the air in CA contains cancer causing agents.
>> My emphasis is on does it contain xyz.
Ok - specifically which "xyz"? Specifically.
Because you can't test for _everything_, or even _everything_ hazardous.
>> the cost is nothing
I think you and I define "nothing" differently. $0.30/unit? Plus freight to and from, plus the rest of the food chain and the delays? So our $15 battery is now $45. Is that "nothing" to you? How about to the rest of the people you're committing to that? If I change my BOM $0.50 by the time it hits retail it's at least a $25 burden.
And is there a good reason we should be testing something like "e-cigarettes" instead of say... Baby food? Medication? Supplements? Food supplies?
Why should e-cigarettes bear a multi-billion-dollar burden, but baby food, medication, supplements, and food supplies should not?
The best thing we can do is just ban all manufacture of everything and move back into caves. Solves all the problems. Our life-spans drop back into the teens and there's nothing for us to worry about - well, outside of wild animals and angry gods.
Ok - specifically which "xyz"? Specifically.
Because you can't test for _everything_, or even _everything_ hazardous.
>> the cost is nothing
I think you and I define "nothing" differently. $0.30/unit? Plus freight to and from, plus the rest of the food chain and the delays? So our $15 battery is now $45. Is that "nothing" to you? How about to the rest of the people you're committing to that? If I change my BOM $0.50 by the time it hits retail it's at least a $25 burden.
And is there a good reason we should be testing something like "e-cigarettes" instead of say... Baby food? Medication? Supplements? Food supplies?
Why should e-cigarettes bear a multi-billion-dollar burden, but baby food, medication, supplements, and food supplies should not?
The best thing we can do is just ban all manufacture of everything and move back into caves. Solves all the problems. Our life-spans drop back into the teens and there's nothing for us to worry about - well, outside of wild animals and angry gods.
Last edited:
I'm afraid this isn't over by a long shot. With the economy like it is state goverments are looking for easy targets to tax. Part of an article in the St Petersburg times
When Florida's new $1 tax on cigarettes takes effect in about three weeks, it should discourage at least marginal and cost-conscious smokers from lighting up as often and dissuade youngsters from getting hooked in the first place.
At least in theory.
One unintended consequence might be to encourage folks to try what I must admit is a weird concept to me:
The electronic cigarette.
I don't think big tobacco has as much pull as people want to believe. How ever the tax money is a big time investment for the state. . Florida got 11+ billion on their tobacco settlement in 1997. In 2010 the state received $1,538.0 million off tobacco while spending $65.8 million on anti smoking and prevention. As far as I know none of that money is spent on sick smokers. It they are the drain on the system as is clamed I'd think the money should go there.
I really don't see how they are going to let e-ciggs pass through. Either they will ban it to keep the analog money flowing or tax it heavily
When Florida's new $1 tax on cigarettes takes effect in about three weeks, it should discourage at least marginal and cost-conscious smokers from lighting up as often and dissuade youngsters from getting hooked in the first place.
At least in theory.
One unintended consequence might be to encourage folks to try what I must admit is a weird concept to me:
The electronic cigarette.
I don't think big tobacco has as much pull as people want to believe. How ever the tax money is a big time investment for the state. . Florida got 11+ billion on their tobacco settlement in 1997. In 2010 the state received $1,538.0 million off tobacco while spending $65.8 million on anti smoking and prevention. As far as I know none of that money is spent on sick smokers. It they are the drain on the system as is clamed I'd think the money should go there.
I really don't see how they are going to let e-ciggs pass through. Either they will ban it to keep the analog money flowing or tax it heavily
Last edited:
Shouldn't we also test cigarettes for deadly toxins? Like Arsenic? Cyanide? Lead? Radio-active isotopes?
Oh - never mind. Don't need to. They're all acknowledged to contain all of those...
Oh - never mind. Don't need to. They're all acknowledged to contain all of those...
I just typed up a very professional letter to my representative. Thanks for the link.
You have made my point ! We know the dangers of smoking and choose to do it anyway.
Can we say the same for vaping?
Really dumb question that I'm more than sure I could find the answer for if I really looked for it. Is the ecig community, as in us, doing anything to combat this type of idiocy? Because if we are, if there's someone we can write to or something, I'd really like to do that. They already took my cloves, I'm NOT letting them take my ecigs over greed.
And in 50-150 years, we'll be able to adequately answer your question.
You can conduct every test known to man (at an expense of hundreds of millions of dollars), you can model every possible model (at an expense of billions), but it means absolutely _nothing_, as has been demonstrated repeatedly.
Even in clinical studies of tens of thousands conducted over dozens of years, we keep getting conflicting "drink wine!" "no, don't drink wine!" "vitamin C supplement is a requirement!" "no, wait, vitamin C depletes calcium and leads to osteoporosis!", etc, so-on, ad naseum...
So, I kick it back. Shouldn't we test _every single jar_ of baby food we import? Wouldn't you agree that protecting your babies is more important than protecting a life-long smoker that has been poisoning themselves with arsenic, methane gas, heavy metals, and radio-active isotopes for decades? It's domestic and guaranteed to kill you, effectively...
And let's just forget the imports. Shouldn't we be banning automobiles? I mean, they spew tremendously toxic gasses and account for faaaar more deaths than cigarettes, let alone e-cigarettes which have caused exactly _zero_.
And while we're at it, shouldn't we ban water? Think about the deaths from water. The number of ways it can kill you is staggering.
And ultimately, shouldn't we ban breathing? It all comes down to breathing leading to death. Or cut-out the middleman and ban cellular mitosis...
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
