Regulatory Policy Committee puts the MHRA in its place!

[Rusty]

A great find by Tom09, posted elsewhere by Kate. Have a look here!

Seems like the MHRA has been found wanting in its Impact Assessment of e-cigs and has been told to go away and try again - can do better??

 

[Perfectionist]

Appears to be good news ..... but does the RPC have any teeth ??

 

[Rusty]

I'm not sure if the RPC has any clout regarding the final outcome - rolygate and company on here will have much more idea.

From my perpective, it shows that the MHRA is flawed in its basic premise (nicotine as a medicine) and that the concept of innocent until proven guilty has been reaffirmed by the RPC (why ban something that has shown no cause for concern).

But - I'm just a Yorkshire Pudding, so I may be wrong.

Rusty

 

[darkmenace]

it's a

...SMACKDOWN...

 

[jsaveker]

it's a

...SMACKDOWN...

I wish I could agree

Having briefly given the document a glance it would seem to do nothing more than suggest the MHRA produce a second draft of the IA doc. This is normal for any such document. These things will go through various iterations, hence the point of the processes of consultation.

When the MHRA complete the suggested changes it will most likely be a much more robust document.

The whole thing is quite sad

 

[Perfectionist]

it's a

...SMACKDOWN...

If only it were true dude !! Like I said, the RPC is a dog with no teeth ......

I wish I could agree

Having briefly given the document a glance it would seem to do nothing more than suggest the MHRA produce a second draft of the IA doc. This is normal for any such document. These things will go through various iterations, hence the point of the processes of consultation.

When the MHRA complete the suggested changes it will most likely be a much more robust document.

The whole thing is quite sad

Exactly - all government bureaucracies have countless "committees" to "oversee" each other - but in reality they all follow the same agenda ......

 

[deewal]

If only it were true dude !! Like I said, the RPC is a dog with no teeth ......

Exactly - all government bureaucracies have countless "committees" to "oversee" each other - but in reality they all follow the same agenda ......

What you actually said was

but does the RPC have any teeth ??

dude.

 

[googled]

It seems that the RPC really doesn't have any teeth in light of the Trading Standards email. We're all doomed*!



*to buy juice from China.

 

[Vocalek]

Maybe not yet. See this It looks like the consultation decision has been made - UK Vapers

 

[Perfectionist]

What you actually said was

dude.

It's called a "rhetorical question" DeTroll ...... here, I'll give you another example ....... dude !!

Does looking through Deewal's post history ...... give the distinct impression that he works for (possibly owns!) Totally-Wicked ??

It seems that the RPC really doesn't have any teeth in light of the Trading Standards email. We're all doomed*!

*to buy juice from China.

Dude, most of the Juice available in the UK ...... originally came from China anyway ......

Maybe not yet. See this It looks like the consultation decision has been made - UK Vapers

Yup, Crusader-Kate jumping the gun again ......

 

[googled]

Ever heard of not shooting the messenger? If anyone is jumping the gun it's the lady in the Trading Standards letter/email/scan or whatever the delivery format was.

Maybe not yet. See this It looks like the consultation decision has been made - UK Vapers

Umm. That was what I was referring to.

 

[Perfectionist]

Ever heard of not shooting the messenger? If anyone is jumping the gun it's the lady in the Trading Standards letter/email/scan or whatever the delivery format was.

Dude, read all of Super-Kate's replies in that thread (or in any thread for that matter!) ...... shes's not just a messenger, she's a clueless, s**t-stirring, rabble-rouser (always has been!) ......

 

[Toby]

Dude, read all of Super-Kate's replies in that thread (or in any thread for that matter!) ...... shes's not just a messenger, she's a clueless, s**t-stirring, rabble-rouser (always has been!) ......

I don't get it Mr P, you're not that stupid.. but is there anyone on the planet you actually like...
.. or maybe you are prepared to support?

 

[Perfectionist]

I don't get it Mr P, you're not that stupid.. but is there anyone on the planet you actually like...
.. or maybe you are prepared to support?

Support a Naive and Foolish Drama-Queen, who does more harm than good ?? You're right, I'm not that stupid ...... are you ??

Dude, if it was your life at stake here instead of just your business - would you spend hard cash on a professional, fully qualified and highly experienced Legal Team ...... or would you rely on internet based freebies from Kate The Crusader & Friends ??

 

[Toby]

Well, we have a reply in the form of an email from Helen Wale, a Trading Standards officer of West Sussex County Council, regarding her letter from 29 July (please see attachment).

Here are some quotes from another forum -

Hi everybody, i have had an email reply from Helen Wale she has asked me if i work for the MHRA or am i a user of the product, i have replied that i am a long term user of the product as well as working as an area manager in the industry for a uk based manufacturer. Asking me if i work for the MHRA was a strange question. I will keep you all informed.

Ok I have a reply for you all. Case closed for now.


Dear Tim

I have not had a direct contact from MHRA. My information was second hand through another trading standards authority who said they had been in contact with MHRA. My letter, in hindsight, was poorly worded in that I should have said "we understand the outcome will be...." or "the likely outcome....", or "the outcome may be.....". I believe there were/ are 3 outcomes being discussed by the MHRA and I did acknowldge in the letter that the consultation had not finished yet.

Obviously my letter was not intended for public consumption. Appologies for any confusion.

Regards

Helen Wale

 

[Perfectionist]

Well, we have a reply in the form of an email from Helen Wale, a Trading Standards officer of West Sussex County Council, regarding her letter from 29 July (please see attachment).

Here are some quotes from another forum -

True to form, another hyperactive misfire from Clueless-Kate !!

Where exactly did she get this letter from anyway ??

More importantly, why the hell didn't she first verify it's authenticity and relevance BEFORE spreading scaremongering rumours all over the web ............... yup, so she can create a panic and kick up a (premature and counter-productive) stink, like she always does !!

 

[googled]

Kate is active on plenty of other forums, take your issues with her to those via pm, she can't answer here and your battle with her is just a distraction to the real issues.

 

[Perfectionist]

Kate is active on plenty of other forums, take your issues with her to those via pm, she can't answer here and your battle with her is just a distraction to the real issues.

Other Forums ?? PM ?? Battle ?? Distraction ??

Dude, her rabidly counter-productive temper-tantrums have constantly and consistently done immense damage to Vaping - you don't think that is an issue ??

Your Cult Leader has an army of devotees who foolishly worship her like the Messiah - I'm just a guy who can see that the Emperor (Empress!) has no clothes ...... and trust me, it's not a pretty sight !!

Thankfully we have another Kate on the scene now, who actually does things in the right manner and might just give Vaping a fighting chance !! Hurrah !!