Our Member, Frubbish to give ABC TV News Interview on E-Cigs Tomorrow - Let’s Wish Frubbish Luck!!

[Kitabz]

Here's the full clip... it's going to be a few minutes until it's converted to flash.

Link to vid: e-cig news clip I'm in

Please don't laugh at me, lol... Apparently my atomizer was flooded and was producing wimpy vapor, lol.

You guys did great!

That was a very reasonable report all things considered.

If I were a smoker who didn't already know about these things and lived in that city, tomorrow I'd be down at the store they showed looking to buy one.

I think you're going to get at least four different reactions to this report:

1) Smokers are going to be intrigued/interested because they're going to think "it can't be worse than smoking and it might be healthier and/or cheaper"
2) Non-smokers are instinctively going to dislike e-cigs because it looks like smoking and as the lady on the video said "the only safe cigarette is the one you don't smoke"
3) e-cig enthusiasts/evangelists are going to dislike the report because it doesn't ramp them up (nor should it IMHO)
4) Realists are going to be content with the representation given

 

[RjG]

Thanks for posting the video

It was a bit biased... but I expected that. All in all, I think that piece will (probably inadvertantly) attract MORE curious 1st time e-smokers.

 

[TropicalBob]

Illegal? Rita Chappelle is the voice of the FDA. When she speaks, it is the FDA speaking. She doesn't give personal opinions in her job as FDA press spokesperson. Her recent quote was heard 'round the world. Google it and you'll find it. What she said, repeated umpteen times in news reports was this:

"It is illegal to sell or market them, and the FDA is looking into this,'' said Rita Chappelle, an agency spokeswoman.

She was addressing e-cigarettes. There's no "fudge factor" here. No "if they're falsely advertised" factor. The e-cigarette "is illegal to sell or market". Can't get much blunter than that. You want her to phone you?

That quote, not disputed after wide publication, is the reason any reporter would call our devices "illegal." And it's not just liquid on the chopping block, no matter how much you'd like to rationalize about vaporizers. She wasn't even referring to liquid with that direct statement. She was speaking of e-cigs. The devices will be banned, as well as the liquid, because their purpose to deliver an unapproved drug cocktail to users.

A screwdriver can be used as an icepick, but that doesn't make it one. An e-cig is a drug delivery device, from its inception to today's reality.

Face the fact that our devices are endangered. Can't say we haven't been warned ...

 

[LaceyUnderall]

TB- Took your advice and googled for Rita and well... here is a great article from CNN... FDA hazy on e-cigarettes' safety - CNN.com

And an even better video from Dr. Sanjay Gupta... FDA hazy on e-cigarettes' safety - CNN.com

Now these are pretty balanced reports.

From this CNN article: "The idea that that e-cigs may be a good tobacco smoke alternative in the future could hold true, the FDA and WHO acknowledged, but proof of the product's safety must come first."

As a supplier, I do not disagree that safety must come to the forefront, but to outright ban something that keeps people off of a product that has been proven as unsafe, and that is a tobacco cigarette, is simply ridiculous and I just don't think they will be able to get away with it. They don't have any law that gives them the right to ban them that I can find. Can you send me a link to a law? I keep asking for it around here and I just can't seem to get anyone to send it to me. It is so weird that my request continues to go unanswered.

 

[RjG]

Doom, doom, doom... T.B. You are definitely the ECF king of doom.

That's why electric "herbal vaporizers" are banned too, because it's really for illicit drug use.
...oh, no...wait, they aren't

That's why bongs are banned too, because we all know what they're for.
...oh no, wait. They call them tobacco water pipes now. Nope, they aren't either.

Hookahs , all those strange little things made of glass. gee, yup. Those are now "tobacco or herb vaporizers" Yep, they're OK too.

This requires a relatively simple literature change, on the device packaging, on the website that sells it, and in the instruction book. And a couple of yummy green tea zero nic carts included in the box. Herbal vaporizer. Absolutely NO DIFFERENT than the way any OTHER "herbal vaporizer" is marketed today.

An "e-cigarette" is definitely endangered. In name only. This isn't a difficult one to get around.... and all you have to do is wake up and look online, or downtown whatever city you live in at the local "head/hemp shop". You WILL notice that nothing is marketed with annotation to "weed". All that junk is labelled, marketed, and sold as "herbal/tobacco". And that makes it legal.

I challenge you to look at all that perfectly legal, relabeled drug paraphernalia and tell me how blatantly obvious stuff that like CAN be relabeled, and an e-cig can NOT.

 

[Kate]

Maybe you could ask the FDA directly Lacey and put this to rest.

 

[LaceyUnderall]

Maybe you could ask the FDA directly Lacey and put this to rest.

We are working through all of the proper channels.

 

[Kate]

What do you mean, it's a simple matter of asking them their position.

 

[LaceyUnderall]

Kate - The next step for the suppliers is to get together and determine how the FDA needs to be approached and who we need to contact. Calling aimlessly, sending emails, etc only forces them into a position with little or no review.

This will be a topic of discussion at the Association meeting in Chicago and we will all do what is best for the industry as a group.

Either way, there are still those who are so sure the ecig will be banned and all I am asking for is a link to a law that backs up their position. If I could prove myself wrong, I would gladly do it. I could then spend more time in real life and not on the Internet researching this cause. But I can't. I can point to lots of things, and I have, that prove me more right than wrong... but others can't seem to do the same.

 

[chokmah]

Well I will take your opinions of it as I sadly still cant play it. I even downloaded it into a temp file and it still wont play.. It even brings up my real player and lists it but wont play.. Sorry guys.. I am sure you both did great though and thank you for taking the time to do this interview..

 

[bizzyb0t]

Well I will take your opinions of it as I sadly still cant play it. I even downloaded it into a temp file and it still wont play.. It even brings up my real player and lists it but wont play.. Sorry guys.. I am sure you both did great though and thank you for taking the time to do this interview..

Do the videos from YouTube work for you? I can upload it to YouTube, if that'll work. I only chose Blip.tv because the quality of the flash file is much better in lower resolutions and their servers are less overloaded, which means faster streaming.

I'll upload to YouTube... that way I can also embed the vid within a post as well.

 

[Kate]

Lacey, they have turned back shipments of vaping goods because they don't have new drug approval. That sounds like a clear ban to me, what more proof do you need? Nobody here is likely to be able to cite the legislation that gives the FDA permission to police vaping specifically. They have classed electronic cigarettes and eliquid as new drugs so it's their jurisdiction.

You could challenge the classification I suppose. Personally, as far as eliquid is concerned I think you are fighting a losing battle, it's already banned.

Enforcement is another matter.

 

[chokmah]

Do the videos from YouTube work for you? I can upload it to YouTube, if that'll work. I only chose Blip.tv because the quality of the flash file is much better in lower resolutions and their servers are less overloaded, which means faster streaming.

I'll upload to YouTube... that way I can also embed the vid within a post as well.

Yep I can view youtube videos.. In fact most videos I can view just not this one for some darn reason.. Thank you for taking the time to do this btw...

 

[LaceyUnderall]

Lacey, they have turned back shipments of vaping goods because they don't have new drug approval. That sounds like a clear ban to me, what more proof do you need? Nobody here is likely to be able to cite the legislation that gives the FDA permission to police vaping specifically. They have classed electronic cigarettes and eliquid as new drugs so it's their jurisdiction.

You could challenge the classification I suppose. Personally, as far as eliquid is concerned I think you are fighting a losing battle, it's already banned.

Enforcement is another matter.

As has happened between you and I before, we agree to disagree?... but your points are not going unthoughtabout over here... I promise

 

[Kate]

It's ok to disagree Lacey, no problem, I don't see how you seem to be saying that the FDA can't or won't enforce a ban that they have already announced and taken selective action on.

But, whatever.

 

[DisMan]

Who has the control over the content of the story, what is given more importance, which point of view receives more time and attention????? Don't you get it????? It's like the reporter who asks the accused "Do you still beat your wife?" Either way he answers, he's damed.

The person who paid for more advertising on the station has control over the weight of the viewpoints expressed. It's simple logic really...don't bite the hand that feeds you.

I didn't think the article was bad, myself.

 

[TropicalBob]

Lacey, I haven't looked at the following references of law, nor do I intend to. The language referencing them is quite clear. You've read it, and we obviously get differing meanings, if you think the FDA is somehow overstepping its jurisdiction, but here's the pertinent part from the FDA's email to suppliers:

The "electronic cigarettes" that we have reviewed are designed with a re-chargeable battery-operated heating element that volatilizes the chemical constituents contained within replaceable cartridges. These cartridges may or may not include nicotine. Since we are not aware of any data establishing that such products are generally recognized among scientific experts as safe and effective for these "drug" uses, they are "new drugs," as defined by section 201(p) of the Act (21 U.S.C. § 321(p)) requiring approval of an application filed in accordance with section 505 of the Act (21 U.S.C. § 355) to be legally marketed in the United States. None of these so-called "electronic cigarettes" is covered by an approved NDA. Thus, the marketing of them in the United States would be subject to enforcement action, which is why your products have been detained.

The FDA has unquestioned authority to regulate drugs. No one disputes that. This email was earlier than Rita Chappelle's recent (e-cigs) "are illegal" statement that you found on CNN and elsewhere. If anything, the FDA is hardening its position and shipments to the U.S. are getting harder to get by Customs.

 

[CssReb]

Well I will take your opinions of it as I sadly still cant play it. I even downloaded it into a temp file and it still wont play.. It even brings up my real player and lists it but wont play.. Sorry guys.. I am sure you both did great though and thank you for taking the time to do this interview..

I was having a problem too until I was about to give up and clicked on the smiley face next to bizzyb0t's name above the video and waalaaa! it came up.

Hope that helps

go to the link e-cig news clip I'm in and click on the smiley face next to his name

 

[chokmah]

I was having a problem too until I was about to give up and clicked on the smiley face next to bizzyb0t's name above the video and waalaaa! it came up.

Hope that helps

go to the link e-cig news clip I'm in and click on the smiley face next to his name

Ok I feel like a dork.. I got it to play finally thank you CssReb.. Who knew to click on the smiley face lol..


Not a bad interview I dont think and I think it was fair.. You guys both did great and thank you again for taking the time to do the interview..

 

[Kate]

It doesn't get any clearer that that statement TBob has posted.

The "electronic cigarettes" that we have reviewed ...

... cartridges may or may not include nicotine ...

... are "new drugs," ...

... the marketing of them in the United States would be subject to enforcement action ...

... your products have been detained.

What I've just noticed is the phrase 'marketing of them ... subject to enforcement ...'

That might mean that they will not or can not enforce a ban on personal possession and/or use.

That doesn't help traders I'm afraid but the wording is good for individuals.