• This forum has been archived

    If you'd like to post a thread, post it here instead!

    View Forum

Possible legal ramifications for Canadian retailers selling nic based juice?

Status
Not open for further replies.

johnnytwofingers

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Aug 24, 2012
112
54
Vancouver, Canada
Is there any precedent out there for the possible legal ramifications of retailers selling nic based juice in Canada? I was wanting to pick up a bottle of juice the other day and popped into in a tobacco shop hoping they might have some, but no luck. I was talking with the owner for a bit and said he should carry it, but he said he was too nervous about the legal issues.

Is there any actual instances of actions taken against retailers? I know there are several vape shops in Canada operating out in the open, but to my knowledge nothing more than a warning (please don't sell nicotine juice) letter from Health Canada has ever been sent. Is it possible that they could get their business license &/or tobacco license pulled? Or does Health Canada not actually have any legal power other than to stop the import of juice at the border?

Curious if anyone knows the low down on all this.
 

johnnytwofingers

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Aug 24, 2012
112
54
Vancouver, Canada

Vapoor eyes er

ECF Guru
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Sep 13, 2011
11,028
8,945
Toronto, Ont.
Is there any actual instances of actions taken against retailers? I know there are several vape shops in Canada operating out in the open, but to my knowledge nothing more than a warning (please don't sell nicotine juice) letter from Health Canada has ever been sent. Is it possible that they could get their business license &/or tobacco license pulled? Or does Health Canada not actually have any legal power other than to stop the import of juice at the border?
I read of one instance where the threat of pulling their tobacco license influenced one tobacco shop owner. My neighborhood shop wanted to sell and he was told the same by inspectors.
 

Projectguy

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 9, 2012
3,557
4,838
Oakville, ON
Ok so ESharp gave us the link to the VPLive which featured Cindy, owner of Rainbow Vaper this is what she has posted on the legal page of her site;

Legalities

Some may consider this as only applying to vendors but it applies to all of us.

I have been given permission to reproduce Rainbow Vapor's legal here. I strongly urge you to read and become conversant with this information you want to fight back here is a way.

Know the law.

LEGALITIES - knowledge is power!​

Unlike other vendors, at Rainbow Vapor we're not content to merely know what we're supposed to do. We're not content to merely talk about what we're supposed to do either. We insist on actually doing what we're supposed to do, in full - walking the walk. And we want you to be informed about what that involves. Can other Canadian vendors say the same?

We've done our homework regarding the laws and regulations which apply to our products. But many other vendors have not - and many vapers remain in the dark as well. Why is this is a bad thing? Because this mixture of ignorance and non-compliance is what allows Health Canada to continue bluffing and bullying the Canadian vape-industry into hiding - or worse, into shutting down. It's what keeps sensible regulation - and a brighter, safer future for Canadian vapers - unrealized. It's what allows vendors to get away with b.s. that they shouldn't get away with. It's what keeps vapers from knowing better, and holding their vendors to account.

We know that many of you are hungry for knowledge about what the law really says.​

We know that like us, you're eager to see the day when vaping finally wins - when having successfully overcome the obstacles and opposition, a vapey new future can dawn in Canada. A future where millions of Canadians can easily choose to make the switch from smoking to vaping; where we need no longer worry about this precious gift being taken away. We also know that you aren't well-served by vendors who merely claim to share these goals, and remain vague on demonstration.

That's why we've created this Legalities area - where we will be asking the pressing questions, and pointing everyone towards the answers. We who make and/or sell these products - your vendors - are required by law to do the right thing. If we want the Canadian situation to change for the better, we are required to take step #1 - engage Health Canada - and openly, actively win the fight.

The people we sell to - you, the vapers - would be well-served by knowing just what it is we're supposed to be doing. You have a valuable role to play in the fight, by bringing pressure to bear on vendors who don't comply and aren't truly fighting for you. We won't do all your homework for you. But if you're ready to take step #1 - if you want correct information, comprehension, clarity and the confidence that stems from these things - Rainbow Vapor will show you precisely where to find it.

Let's get started.


Q: Since 2009, Health Canada has claimed that any e-cig product containing nicotine is a drug / new drug, requiring market authorization as such. Is this claim an appropriate one, and valid?

A: Health Canada does indeed make the aforementioned claim, but a closer examination is required. It is the fundamental nature of medicinal products (such as drugs) to make medicinal / therapeutic claims. However, Rainbow Vapor has never attached any such claims to its products (and no responsible member of the vape-industry would ever do so). In the absence of these therapeutic claims, e-cig products with nicotine categorically fail to meet Health Canada's own definitions of drug / new drug.

So: in the absence of therapeutic claims, an e-cig product with nicotine is not a drug or new drug, and does not require market authorization as a drug / new drug. The answer is entirely conditional on the presence or absence of therapeutic claims. Health Canada knowingly contradicts its own definitions when it ignores this.

In plain English: a non-medical product, which makes no medical claims, cannot be required to seek authorization as a medicine, lol. The very absence of medical claims attached to the product would automatically disqualify it for approval as a medicine. You see? As you may have surmised by now, Health Canada is not lawfully allowed to require products to seek authorization as something that they aren't (and therefore could not possibly receive authorization as).

~​

Q: Why don't you make medical claims? Aren't e-cigs supposed to help smokers quit?

A: The reason why we at Rainbow Vapor have never attached therapeutic claims to our products is simple: e-cig products are not smoking-cessation medicines or smoking-cessation products. Rather, they offer an infinitely safer way to continue enjoying your habit and recreationally consuming nicotine.

This is one reason why Health Canada's repeated claim - that the safety and efficacy of electronic cigarettes remains untested - is a lie, unless viewed in the proper context. The safety and efficacy of e-cig products as smoking-cessation products is indeed untested - and will forever remain so, since electronic cigarettes aren't smoking-cessation products. However the safety and efficacy of e-cig products as the consumer products they actually are is something that's well-tested.

Full and careful compliance with all the relevant laws and regulations is the fundamental step needed to ensure that consumer safety issues, vendor liability issues, and product quality issues are all addressed.

~​

Q: What Canadian laws / regulations are applicable to e-cig products?

A: (Please note that the following is not a comprehensive list.) The Consumer Chemicals and Containers Regulations, 2001 are a good starting point. The regulations therein most definitely apply to e-juice with nicotine - and Rainbow Vapor verifiably complies with them all, in full. The CCCR 2001 applies because e-juice with nicotine meets the definition of a consumer chemical product. As the contents illustrate, there are a great number of precise (and non-negotiable) requirements we have to fulfill. The labels for our e-juice bottles are a particularly good reflection of these requirements.

Other regulations which apply include the CCPSA (Canada Consumer Product Safety Act). As with the CCCR 2001, the CCPSA requires vendors to practice due diligence - which is why Rainbow Vapor insists that manufacturers provide CE and RoHS certification for any products we intend to sell. Due diligence is why we regularly submit our e-juices to an independent, accredited laboratory for testing to confirm that 1) our e-juices are contaminant-free, and 2) contain precisely accurate levels of nicotine.

Fundamentally, e-cig hardware consists of consumer products, battery products, and electronic merchandise - therefore, e-cig hardware is subject to the same laws and regulations that any other such electronic merchandise / batteries / etc are subject to. Fundamentally, e-juice with nicotine is a consumer chemical product, and therefore subject to the same laws and regulations that any other consumer chemical product is subject to.

~​

Q: But wait a minute. Isn't nicotine prohibited under the Food and Drugs Act?

A: No. Nicotine is explicitly exempted from the Food and Drugs Act, by the Food and Drugs Act - "in a form to be administered orally by means of an inhalation device delivering 4 mg or less of nicotine per dosage unit."

Electronic cigarettes are indisputably an "inhalation device." Health Canada does not dispute this fact. At the nicotine levels commonly consumed by vapers, electronic cigarettes indisputably deliver 4 mg or less of nicotine per dose. Health Canada does not dispute this fact.

Health Canada has previously - and rather weakly - attempted to claim that the aforementioned exemption does not apply to electronic cigarettes, due to an alleged difference in "pharmacokinetic profile" between electronic cigarettes and the pharmaceutical inhaler. Yet 1) Health Canada has never provided any scientific evidence to demonstrate this alleged difference in "pharmacokinetic profile." 2) The law does not even mention pharmacokinetic profiles - they have nothing to do with the conditions for exemption. 3) The law does not make any distinction whatsoever between varieties of inhalation devices.

When one considers this precise, explicit exemption of nicotine - in addition to the fact that e-cig products categorically fail to meet Health Canada's own definitions of drug / new drug - it is abundantly clear that the nicotine in our e-juice is not prohibited by the Food and Drugs Act. Health Canada is simply lying when they say otherwise.

~​

Q: But what constitutes a dose?

A: We hear this question often - usually from vapers worried about whether or not we truly fit the exemption. Any question of what constitutes a dose is answered very simply: e-juice is a recreational product, consumed one drag at a time. The frequency of these drags varies according to user preference - and the dosage frequency is not restricted by the Food and Drugs Act.


Rainbow Vapor regularly tests its e-juices through an independent, accredited laboratory - so we know precisely how much nicotine our e-juices contain. We know that at the nicotine levels contained, and when used as intended, it is not physically possible to receive more than 4 mg of nicotine from a drag - which is how e-juice is intended to be consumed (one drag at a time). If you take a drag on your electronic cigarette, you receive a dose of nicotine. Take another drag, and you receive another dose.

The simple fact that e-cig products are recreational - and not medicines intended to treat a disease - explains why the dosage frequency is not restricted. There is no standard amount of e-liquid which vapers will consume in a given day - just as there is no standard amount of coffee which coffee drinkers will consume in a given day. What is clear is that:

- when used as intended, e-juice is consumed one drag at a time;

- at the nic levels contained, and when used as intended, a drag cannot deliver more than 4 mg of nicotine

- the frequency of these drags varies according to user preference

- the dosage frequency is not restricted by the Food and Drugs Act

~​

Q: What can I, as a vaper, do to help?

A: Plenty! There are a lot of well-meaning but disengaged vendors out there. So first and foremost - with step #1 under your belt, you can significantly pressure your vendors to get their act together. Speak with your words, and with your wallets. Make this the most important issue, and make sure they understand you feel this way. If you care about being able to easily, legally purchase compliant vape-products within Canada - then the compliance of your vendors (or lack thereof) should matter immensely to you.

Either a vendor is fully complying with all the relevant laws and regulations, actively engaging with Health Canada, and fighting for you (and themselves) -

- or they aren't. It's really as simple as that. What have we seen for years now? Confusion amongst vendors, who hide their nicotine and are either afraid or unprepared to engage Health Canada. Vendors who are failing to comply with virtually any of what they're supposed to comply with. Vendors who do not even understand what it is they're supposed to comply with, or why. Vendors who fail to intelligently seek out that understanding - who fail to respond at all (much less respond successfully) to Health Canada's nonsense.

But it is vendors who make and/or sell these products - and so the responsibility is on us. Health Canada certainly isn't going to stop its nonsense of its own volition. The ball is in the vendors' court. As a vaper, you should care deeply about whether we are successfully responding to Health Canada's nonsense.

Vendors = your access to vaping.​

Do you want to see a greater availability of (and visibility of) e-cig products within Canada? Or do you want to see the availability and visibility of e-cig products in Canada decrease for no good reason - leaving you reliant on attempting to sneak in what you can from distant shores?

You can see why we are pleased to answer the question "what Canadian laws / regulations are applicable to e-cig products?" - because knowing the answer lets you the customers start putting real pressure on your vendors. Pressure to smarten up and win this fight for everyone concerned. When Canadian vendors fail to lawfully, intelligently respond to Health Canada's nonsense - those vendors are just as much to blame for the vape-situation in Canada as Health Canada is. No one - not Health Canada, and not a vendor - can defensibly claim ignorance of the law as their reason for failing to recognize and comply with it. Nor should they.

At Rainbow Vapor, step #1 - correct information, comprehension, clarity and the confidence that stems from these things - is something we've achieved. We've applied it carefully - and in full - to our products, and to our business. We're engaging Health Canada - eagerly and openly. We're successfully fighting for you, for ourselves - for vaping. Wouldn't it be nice if others were as well?

~​

Q: Won't regulation increase the cost of vape-products for vapers?

A: Consider first that it is neither realistic - nor desirable - for any industry to be unregulated. (Would you feel comfortable with an unregulated, uninspected food industry?) A lack of regulation is precisely what those who oppose vaping want - so that they can carry on voicing doubts about quality control, and their "we don't know what's in the vapour" lines. Regulation takes away those arguments. Regulation also provides consumers with the assurance that the products they purchase are accurate, contaminant-free, and meet the standards' certification required by law. Most importantly: regulation already exists. Rainbow Vapor knows it - understands it - and abides by it, in full.

Have our prices increased because of it? No.

Each vendor is free to lower, raise, or maintain their own pricing at any given time. Hence we can only speak for ourselves at Rainbow Vapor. But there's no intrinsic reason that regulation should increase costs for consumers. In fact, there is every reason to believe that regulation will (in time) make prices more competitive in Canada than they presently are.

Consider: the current misclassifications by Health Canada (and the subsequent product seizures from the Canadian Border Services Agency) place a significant burden on vendors - not only in lost time and money, but in keeping us from achieving the kind of market visibility that we all desire. These losses and limitations hurt vendors, and inevitably impact the final retail price of the products you buy from us.

Now imagine a day when legally-compliant vendors no longer have to worry about unlawful border seizures. A day when the market visibility for our products is 1000 times what it is today. 10,000 times! Far from raising prices, when we are freed from unlawful border losses, and able to significantly increase our customer base - it will inevitably impact prices for the better.

The question you should ask yourself - and pointedly ask your vendors - is "are my vendors actively, successfully working to bring about a better day? Or are they merely bemoaning their present circumstance on a forum somewhere, failing to do anything about it?" It's time to move forward - together.

~​
 

johnnytwofingers

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Aug 24, 2012
112
54
Vancouver, Canada
I read of one instance where the threat of pulling their tobacco license influenced one tobacco shop owner. My neighborhood shop wanted to sell and he was told the same by inspectors.

1. Can you remember when this happened?

2. Do you know if this was regarding selling nicotine juice specifically, or ecig hardware in general?

You know, the whole Health Canada stance on this is disingenuous at best. They're allowing SmokeNV and others to sell ecigs without nicotine in retail stores, but nicotine content is disallowed.

If there's any unknown danger lurking within ecigs, it sure as hell isn't the nicotine. An organization whose mandate is supposed to protect the health of the citizens having this stance on the subject is a joke and they should be ashamed of themselves.
 

Esharp

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Nov 7, 2012
353
226
London, Ontario
If there's any unknown danger lurking within ecigs, it sure as hell isn't the nicotine. An organization whose mandate is supposed to protect the health of the citizens having this stance on the subject is a joke and they should be ashamed of themselves.



HC position is that nicotine is a drug. That argument has failed in other countries around the world, but HC still holds on to that line. Obviously they don't have a problem with the nicotine free set-ups, so IMO then don't have a problem with vaping, just the nicotine.

Other dangers, well there is a debate there. We really don't know what the long term effects of vaping are (20, 30yrs), the product is still fairly new. There is concerns that have been raised regarding silica wicks and recently I read an article that was measuring nano particles of metal in the vapor (most likely coming from the heated coil or atty). I wonder how many nano particles of metal are coming out of a cars exhaust. IMHO, I look at it as harm reduction. Although I'm in the process of changing all my wicks to cotton. There is nothing in this world that comes without risk, even e-cigs. Research continues, and products are getting better. We may be guinea pigs, but I feel allot better than when I smoked. So I'm back to "Harm Reduction".
 

Projectguy

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 9, 2012
3,557
4,838
Oakville, ON
HC position is that nicotine is a drug. That argument has failed in other countries around the world, but HC still holds on to that line. Obviously they don't have a problem with the nicotine free set-ups, so IMO then don't have a problem with vaping, just the nicotine.

Did you not read below?????????

Other dangers, well there is a debate there. We really don't know what the long term effects of vaping are (20, 30yrs), the product is still fairly new. There is concerns that have been raised regarding silica wicks and recently I read an article that was measuring nano particles of metal in the vapor (most likely coming from the heated coil or atty). I wonder how many nano particles of metal are coming out of a cars exhaust. IMHO, I look at it as harm reduction. Although I'm in the process of changing all my wicks to cotton. There is nothing in this world that comes without risk, even e-cigs. Research continues, and products are getting better. We may be guinea pigs, but I feel allot better than when I smoked. So I'm back to "Harm Reduction".

And I subscribed to that thread and send a bunch of it to one of my clients (inventor) and he sent it to a buddy metals Phd at MIT who laughed and responded "never not at those temps the mesh would collapse at the temps required to generate CrVI" he add "people with a little knowledge can come to erroneous conclusions which become urban myths"
 

Esharp

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Nov 7, 2012
353
226
London, Ontario
Did you not read below?????????



And I subscribed to that thread and send a bunch of it to one of my clients (inventor) and he sent it to a buddy metals Phd at MIT who laughed and responded "never not at those temps the mesh would collapse at the temps required to generate CrVI" he add "people with a little knowledge can come to erroneous conclusions which become urban myths"

That's good to know Projectguy - I mentioned it because it was posted as a thread here at EFC, someone had posted the link to the study regarding nano particles of metal in the vapor. Funny thing about the study, it was comparing metal particles in vapor and smoke, my question was, how would there be metal in tobacco? Regardless it did not sway my opinion on vaping. Nano particles are parts per billion, at least the best I can tell. The allowable limit of mercury in fish that is deemed to be safe is one part per million, and mercury is a nasty one. So if nano particles are truly parts per billion, then it should not raise any alarm bells. Thanks for your leg work, as you are saying that our metal parts of vape gear would not reach those heat limits anyways.
 

Donovan69

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Mar 28, 2013
139
79
54
Abbotsford, British Columbia, Canada

BuzzKilla

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Nov 4, 2010
2,036
2,152
Etobicoke, Ontario
www.graindeep.etsy.com

johnnytwofingers

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Aug 24, 2012
112
54
Vancouver, Canada
HC position is that nicotine is a drug. That argument has failed in other countries around the world, but HC still holds on to that line. Obviously they don't have a problem with the nicotine free set-ups, so IMO then don't have a problem with vaping, just the nicotine.

You are correct about their stance, but it's a silly stance to take. By allowing no-nic ecigs, but banning ones with nic, they are acting as if nicotine is the unknown in the equation, when the fact of the matter is, people have been consuming nicotine in cigarettes for decades, whereas the genuinely new aspect, the electronic cigarette and the inhalation of PG/VG/etc is deemed allowable. It's madness!

Actually, it just makes it blatantly clear....it is not the health aspect that is important in this ruling, it is the addiction aspect. They (the government) are at risk of losing control of a multi-billion dollar per year source of revenue, and they're trying to figure out how to re-harness it without having any logical argument.
 

Esharp

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Nov 7, 2012
353
226
London, Ontario
You are correct about their stance, but it's a silly stance to take. By allowing no-nic ecigs, but banning ones with nic, they are acting as if nicotine is the unknown in the equation, when the fact of the matter is, people have been consuming nicotine in cigarettes for decades, whereas the genuinely new aspect, the electronic cigarette and the inhalation of PG/VG/etc is deemed allowable. It's madness!

Actually, it just makes it blatantly clear....it is not the health aspect that is important in this ruling, it is the addiction aspect. They (the government) are at risk of losing control of a multi-billion dollar per year source of revenue, and they're trying to figure out how to re-harness it without having any logical argument.


That about sums it up....... and I'm sure BP has given HC their two cents worth as well, they also stand to lose a whack of coin........ kinda hard to sell gum and patches that don't work especially when they are now trying to compete with e-cigs that do work!
 
Last edited:

Watchmaker

Full Member
Jan 9, 2013
19
3
Vancouver
THe fact that ECTA has not published a sticky on this forum outline what the laws are and what our rights are is a disgrace. Nor will I accept the argument that they are an "industry organization" not a consumer organization is nonsense.

I've always been under the impression that when starting an organization that's under watch from any regulatory body, the first thing you do is establish the legal rights and framework you'll be operating under. How can you have trade when your product is being confiscated or refused at the border?
 

longtimesmok

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Sep 7, 2012
113
10
montreal
I've always been under the impression that when starting an organization that's under watch from any regulatory body, the first thing you do is establish the legal rights and framework you'll be operating under. How can you have trade when your product is being confiscated or refused at the border?
the ECTA is nothing and is crumbling day by day, they started with 10 and now down to 6 as i got wind that yet another vendor has left since they realized it is a useless group. i knew this from when they first came out, to bad all the people buy into the propaganda they put out, give them to end 2013 they will not exist.
 

johnnytwofingers

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Aug 24, 2012
112
54
Vancouver, Canada
the ECTA is nothing and is crumbling day by day, they started with 10 and now down to 6 as i got wind that yet another vendor has left since they realized it is a useless group. i knew this from when they first came out, to bad all the people buy into the propaganda they put out, give them to end 2013 they will not exist.
Well that's not good to hear....do you have any details on who was in and now left?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread