With that one study showing ecigs having 1000x less harmful ingredients could you get a judge to issue an injunction against HC, otherwise great bodily harm would be inflicted on many people as they go back to regular cigs. just throwing ideas out there..
Schedule F (Food & Drug Regulations): Nicotine
- Thread starter rachelcoffe
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
well had my first entry refusal this week (10-30ml bottles)
If this goes forward, a Cotinine level test will probably be needed to back off HC and to find a per dose level to take to court - cause you know they'll fight a dirty fight using our tax dollars 8^) like this ( EDIT) I can't get the link to work, but a google search with the sentence below brings a few up (3rd one down was the original link i tried to post) 8^)
Combining the nicotine inhaler and the nicotine patch for smoking cessation
If this goes forward, a Cotinine level test will probably be needed to back off HC and to find a per dose level to take to court - cause you know they'll fight a dirty fight using our tax dollars 8^) like this ( EDIT) I can't get the link to work, but a google search with the sentence below brings a few up (3rd one down was the original link i tried to post) 8^)
Combining the nicotine inhaler and the nicotine patch for smoking cessation
Last edited:
Don't think it would matter...... apparently THAT site requires a subscription to access full text content.
edit - thanks for the info Ian - this line below, used in a google search will bring up a few studies - the first one is a 400 dbl blind and the 3rd one down was the one i tried to link to.
combining the nicotine inhaler and the nicotine patch for smoking cessation
combining the nicotine inhaler and the nicotine patch for smoking cessation
Last edited:
Rachel a lawsuit might work in a country with a real democracy, something we do not have here. All authorities in this country are, or are administrated by, appointed insiders. Crown attorneys , judges, institutions(hc), the supreme court and the Senate to list a few.
hc doesn't care about our health,they serve corporate lobby and the people that appointed them.
The media is owned by the same elite and serves them as well.They have also bought and paid for all of our political parties, so which one is in power means nothing.
I am not trying to discourage you, but I say this after many years of political activism, our democracy is a sham,always has been.We need to know what we are up against.
After over 13 weeks off analogs, and running out of juice I truly share your frustration and anger. An awesome lifesaving device is being taken away from us to save corporate profits, plain and simple.
Shame! on you hc, you should all be in jail for causing bodily harm, I am sure your mothers are really proud of you.
hc doesn't care about our health,they serve corporate lobby and the people that appointed them.
The media is owned by the same elite and serves them as well.They have also bought and paid for all of our political parties, so which one is in power means nothing.
I am not trying to discourage you, but I say this after many years of political activism, our democracy is a sham,always has been.We need to know what we are up against.
After over 13 weeks off analogs, and running out of juice I truly share your frustration and anger. An awesome lifesaving device is being taken away from us to save corporate profits, plain and simple.
Shame! on you hc, you should all be in jail for causing bodily harm, I am sure your mothers are really proud of you.
The more mainstream we can bring information, the better. Sometimes the public court can bring justice.
(d) in a form to be administered orally by means of an inhalation device delivering 4 mg or less of nicotine per dosage unit;
I've read this line many times and it's finally sunk in - this clearly describes e-cigarettes ( inhalation device ) as legal (delivering 4 mg or less of nicotine) (administered orally). There isn't anything that needs to go beyond this bit of Canadian legislation.
The contentious thing is not about 0% nic juice - that is Ok by HC and declared legal even, so it's not about the base liquid. Where they make an issue is the nicotine.
I've read this line many times and it's finally sunk in - this clearly describes e-cigarettes ( inhalation device ) as legal (delivering 4 mg or less of nicotine) (administered orally). There isn't anything that needs to go beyond this bit of Canadian legislation.
The contentious thing is not about 0% nic juice - that is Ok by HC and declared legal even, so it's not about the base liquid. Where they make an issue is the nicotine.
Last edited:
Agreed, kalvinf.
E-cigs & e-juice are factually not "health products" as HC has falsely claimed. And the nicotine in e-juice is factually exempt from Schedule F of the Canadian Food & Drug regulations, while HC falsely claims otherwise (by making an imaginary distinction that doesn't exist in law).
A bit of elaboration below:
---
No e-cig or e-juice manufacturer will ever waste time or money submitting their products to Health Canada for testing as a "health product", since their products aren't health products, make no therapeutic claims, and therefore could not possibly be approved by Health Canada as "health products" in a million years.
That's the real point here - no one can possibly receive market authorization from HC under these bogus conditions, because the premise is false from the beginning.
It's fortunate for us that it's not legal for HC to go around using blatantly false classifications for the sole purpose of banning legal products. Nor is it legal for HC to use imaginary distinctions that don't exist anywhere in law as the basis for ignoring related Canadian laws (see below).
---
HC is not arguing about dosage either, which is why that side of it is totally irrelevant; what they are saying is that section (d) of the nicotine exemptions in Schedule F - "in a form to be administered orally by means of an inhalation device" - doesn't apply to us. They're saying that any nic at all via vaping is disallowed...and they make this statement on the false basis that the inhaler is allowed, but e-cigs for some ephemeral reason aren't.
This distinction is imaginary & does not exist in law. It's just something they made up.
---
So yeah...I do agree with you kelvinf: they will primarily make this about the nicotine (and lose). Though HC has also been seizing a lot more packages lately, including ones that contained no nicotine or liquid at all. Batteries, empty cartomizers etc...they're not restricting their illegal seizures to nicotine, unfortunately. They're out of control, which is why have to take this matter before the courts ASAP.
On that front, good news vapers - we've found a firm that has expressed interest in taking us on - though they do have other cases too, some of which are presently keeping them pretty busy. No one likes to wait...but it'll be worth it in this case. The lawyers there have assured me that they will set up a meeting ASAP in order to discuss the matter further, and consider formalizing their representation.
In the meantime they have been eagerly discussing the matter online with us, at great length...we've even been discussing ways to counter potential future attacks that HC hasn't even suggested yet. We're definitely ready to handle the b.s. that HC is presently putting forth.
So keep on vaping & be of good cheer, friends - we're in it to win it!
E-cigs & e-juice are factually not "health products" as HC has falsely claimed. And the nicotine in e-juice is factually exempt from Schedule F of the Canadian Food & Drug regulations, while HC falsely claims otherwise (by making an imaginary distinction that doesn't exist in law).
A bit of elaboration below:
---
No e-cig or e-juice manufacturer will ever waste time or money submitting their products to Health Canada for testing as a "health product", since their products aren't health products, make no therapeutic claims, and therefore could not possibly be approved by Health Canada as "health products" in a million years.
That's the real point here - no one can possibly receive market authorization from HC under these bogus conditions, because the premise is false from the beginning.
It's fortunate for us that it's not legal for HC to go around using blatantly false classifications for the sole purpose of banning legal products. Nor is it legal for HC to use imaginary distinctions that don't exist anywhere in law as the basis for ignoring related Canadian laws (see below).
---
HC is not arguing about dosage either, which is why that side of it is totally irrelevant; what they are saying is that section (d) of the nicotine exemptions in Schedule F - "in a form to be administered orally by means of an inhalation device" - doesn't apply to us. They're saying that any nic at all via vaping is disallowed...and they make this statement on the false basis that the inhaler is allowed, but e-cigs for some ephemeral reason aren't.
This distinction is imaginary & does not exist in law. It's just something they made up.
---
So yeah...I do agree with you kelvinf: they will primarily make this about the nicotine (and lose). Though HC has also been seizing a lot more packages lately, including ones that contained no nicotine or liquid at all. Batteries, empty cartomizers etc...they're not restricting their illegal seizures to nicotine, unfortunately. They're out of control, which is why have to take this matter before the courts ASAP.
On that front, good news vapers - we've found a firm that has expressed interest in taking us on - though they do have other cases too, some of which are presently keeping them pretty busy. No one likes to wait...but it'll be worth it in this case. The lawyers there have assured me that they will set up a meeting ASAP in order to discuss the matter further, and consider formalizing their representation.
In the meantime they have been eagerly discussing the matter online with us, at great length...we've even been discussing ways to counter potential future attacks that HC hasn't even suggested yet. We're definitely ready to handle the b.s. that HC is presently putting forth.
So keep on vaping & be of good cheer, friends - we're in it to win it!
That's comforting good news rachel, having a legal firm showing interest. Given that they have spent time to initially assess the details, agree to set up a meeting and to offer pro bono service (hopefully) points to the case against HC holds enough water.
It's one thing to discuss and post and another to see action taking place. Not that posting isn't good or that the case against HC was ever in question. Thanks for your efforts!!
It's one thing to discuss and post and another to see action taking place. Not that posting isn't good or that the case against HC was ever in question. Thanks for your efforts!!
Thanks for this info Rachel, glad to hear things are looking up.
Before I heard that there was some interest to take it to the courts, I figured that the best way is to offer the option to as many people as possible, and just let them see that there is a viable alternative, I'm no preacher or anything, but I just figure the more the general public knows about this, the better, public awareness does a lot. I'll continue tossing out cards to my suppliers like crazy.
Also not smelling like a friggin ashtray all the time is a huge plus, does loads for PR
Before I heard that there was some interest to take it to the courts, I figured that the best way is to offer the option to as many people as possible, and just let them see that there is a viable alternative, I'm no preacher or anything, but I just figure the more the general public knows about this, the better, public awareness does a lot. I'll continue tossing out cards to my suppliers like crazy.
Also not smelling like a friggin ashtray all the time is a huge plus, does loads for PR
I support any and all efforts being made in Canada (and elsewhere) to protect adult smokers rights to choose e-cigarettes over real ones, simply because they've been shown (by many worldwide) to work at replacing or reducing cigarette consumption. Most of us would "shout it from the rooftops" about our much improved health since starting with e-cigs! They don't even need to test lab animals for safety - they've got a bazillion vapers worldwide to test and research!
I think that even the threat of a lawsuit against Health Canada, would gain media attention and create more awareness of the bigger issue that involves everyone - the freedom of personal choice. You must wear a seatbelt, you must wear a bike and motorcycle helmet, you must not talk on a cell phone while you drive - some things are not, or should not be, the role of government - and we are in a position, as a fairly underground and grassroots group, to continue to organize ourselves to make the issues, and facts, known.
One way to do that is through a class action lawsuit, and again, IMHO, even just "filing" one, may be enough to start the needed dialog simply by bringing the matter out in the open. And regardless of whether it goes forward, it's a good thing for public awareness and perception.
I also think that we should be in touch with Canadian Civil Liberties associations and am making contact with David Eby here in Vancouver to invite him to our upcoming Vancouver Vaper's meet-up to hear our concerns. These groups are all about protecting personal freedoms and are deeply committed to promoting reduced harm alternatives, and they likely are free of charge.
I have some ideas about how to raise some money once we know If/how much funding is needed to hire lawyers. Do we yet have a central meeting/discussion place that's more "private" than this public forum?
Cheers - and Hoppy Easter!
I think that even the threat of a lawsuit against Health Canada, would gain media attention and create more awareness of the bigger issue that involves everyone - the freedom of personal choice. You must wear a seatbelt, you must wear a bike and motorcycle helmet, you must not talk on a cell phone while you drive - some things are not, or should not be, the role of government - and we are in a position, as a fairly underground and grassroots group, to continue to organize ourselves to make the issues, and facts, known.
One way to do that is through a class action lawsuit, and again, IMHO, even just "filing" one, may be enough to start the needed dialog simply by bringing the matter out in the open. And regardless of whether it goes forward, it's a good thing for public awareness and perception.
I also think that we should be in touch with Canadian Civil Liberties associations and am making contact with David Eby here in Vancouver to invite him to our upcoming Vancouver Vaper's meet-up to hear our concerns. These groups are all about protecting personal freedoms and are deeply committed to promoting reduced harm alternatives, and they likely are free of charge.
I have some ideas about how to raise some money once we know If/how much funding is needed to hire lawyers. Do we yet have a central meeting/discussion place that's more "private" than this public forum?
Cheers - and Hoppy Easter!
...my mother always said "pick your battles". Seat belts, bike helmets and rules about driving without a cell phone at your ear - are all things meant to create greater safety for the greater population. Some people may not like them - but they do make sense.
The attack on ecigs though - that makes no sense at all. What does a ban on ecigs bring?
- greater danger and possibly death to individuals and the wider public.
- increased pollution (one battery in the landfill vs 4,500 cigarette butts every 6 months)
- fewer options for people wanting to move away from tobacco use.
... that's just the first few.
I saw a sign the other day against bad driving. Started with "if we had a cure for cancer and ignored it...."
Well, we have something that's cured many of us from our desire to smoke tobacco. Ignoring it is stupid - banning it is insane.
"Seat belts, bike helmets and rules about driving without a cell phone at your ear - are all things meant to create greater safety for the greater population. Some people may not like them - but they do make sense."
Hi kanadiankat!
I follow those laws about not talking/texting on my cell while driving, even though I don't agree with the "talking" part, but I find that trying to locate certain controls on a cars dashboard these days, can be more dangerous than using a cell, particularly if it's a rental and you're not familiar! Or how about banning drinking hot coffee while driving - I've had more near misses when hot coffee drips or spills! I also had many near misses when a lit cigarette fell on the floor while driving. And as genuinely dangerous as those things can be, they're allowed, go figure?
Even though we agree that we've found our "cure" for smoking tobacco, that it's helping many, and it shouldn't be banned, I can't agree with the thinking that the government should "pick and choose" and decide for us, what's in the greater good. There "should" be guidelines, in black and white, that are followed and criteria met, for example, requiring evidence and proof of any claim that allows a ban or a new law.
I've never been particularly interested in politics or activism, but now the issue affects me personally, and those who love me. When my freedom to choose what's working well for me, over what was killing me, it becomes a life or death matter. It makes me frustrated, it makes me mad, it makes me determined, and it makes me wonder, if or where it will end, and it makes me wonder what I can do to matter.
I appreciate and respect the variety of opinions out there, even those opposed to e-cigs (when they've been properly informed). I want to participate in a proactive approach to to creating awareness of the positive effects or e-cigs, while helping to educate and "properly inform" the interested, and to "attract" cooperation rather than try to "force" it, if possible.
That said, I fully intend to vape, no matter what the law, and am one of the fortunate ones to be able to buy from the states.
Hi kanadiankat!
I follow those laws about not talking/texting on my cell while driving, even though I don't agree with the "talking" part, but I find that trying to locate certain controls on a cars dashboard these days, can be more dangerous than using a cell, particularly if it's a rental and you're not familiar! Or how about banning drinking hot coffee while driving - I've had more near misses when hot coffee drips or spills! I also had many near misses when a lit cigarette fell on the floor while driving. And as genuinely dangerous as those things can be, they're allowed, go figure?
Even though we agree that we've found our "cure" for smoking tobacco, that it's helping many, and it shouldn't be banned, I can't agree with the thinking that the government should "pick and choose" and decide for us, what's in the greater good. There "should" be guidelines, in black and white, that are followed and criteria met, for example, requiring evidence and proof of any claim that allows a ban or a new law.
I've never been particularly interested in politics or activism, but now the issue affects me personally, and those who love me. When my freedom to choose what's working well for me, over what was killing me, it becomes a life or death matter. It makes me frustrated, it makes me mad, it makes me determined, and it makes me wonder, if or where it will end, and it makes me wonder what I can do to matter.
I appreciate and respect the variety of opinions out there, even those opposed to e-cigs (when they've been properly informed). I want to participate in a proactive approach to to creating awareness of the positive effects or e-cigs, while helping to educate and "properly inform" the interested, and to "attract" cooperation rather than try to "force" it, if possible.
That said, I fully intend to vape, no matter what the law, and am one of the fortunate ones to be able to buy from the states.
Rachel a lawsuit might work in a country with a real democracy, something we do not have here. All authorities in this country are, or are administrated by, appointed insiders. Crown attorneys , judges, institutions(hc), the supreme court and the Senate to list a few.
hc doesn't care about our health,they serve corporate lobby and the people that appointed them.
The media is owned by the same elite and serves them as well.They have also bought and paid for all of our political parties, so which one is in power means nothing.
I am not trying to discourage you, but I say this after many years of political activism, our democracy is a sham,always has been.We need to know what we are up against.
After over 13 weeks off analogs, and running out of juice I truly share your frustration and anger. An awesome lifesaving device is being taken away from us to save corporate profits, plain and simple.
Shame! on you hc, you should all be in jail for causing bodily harm, I am sure your mothers are really proud of you.
Finally someone who has the real picture.
I'm starting to accept this as well. How do we fight for our freedom though??? I'm just too young to recall any Canadian victories to emulate or apply to better our chances, if there is indeed any. The one thing that is eating at my mind is that HC, the FDA, and nearly any other "health agency" is taking the exact stance as the WHO... And I don't trust them as far as I can throw them.
I support everyone who fights for their rights but we can't forget this isn't the US everyone. Many products and drugs that are readily available in other countries are not in Canada because of HC's stronghold. If we had the science behind vaping, would that even help? I'll admit. I am baffled.
There has been a couple cases where HC lost court cases, the Melatonin case. Trueman Tuck vs HC they won a case in 2006 but just recently lost a second against HC. I havent been able to find anymore, but the Lawyer in several other cases vs hc was Shawn P Buckley. He seems to spend most of his time fighting hc on several issues.
- Status
Similar threads
