The Elephant in the Room
- Thread starter Plastic Shaman
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
I think you are pretty much right on all points. I also don't see how they can ban the sale of a mod if it can be used to vape 0mg. You have to pass a lie detector test to purchase it? My guess, ban it now, sort it out later.
So, I'm trying to read up on this because I admit that I only have a loose grasp of these issues. Every definition of elastic currency I've read says that this term only means currency that can be contracted and expanded to meet the needs of the economy. It is also not tied to anything, such as gold. If you're arguing for that we go back to the gold standard, all I can say is that, from my understanding, it won't work or change anything in any meaningful way. I can't make this argument. I know about three people who fully understand it and they all have extensive backgrounds in economics.
As for the statute, I have found one court decision that interprets it. Basically, it says that the purpose of the statute is to make it clear that federal notes are authorized currency of the United States. I really don't know what else to say about it. I still don't understand what you mean by legal and lawful.
Maybe we are confused about the other's definitions.
Good post mortem PapaSloth
and I agree, except maybe about one thing. Though I did not change my mind in that my direction has changed, what has changed for me after reading the discussion, arguments and points raised in this thread is that I more firmly believe I am on the correct path.So not really what I consider 'changed my mind', but a change in the certainty with which I view my position. Made the reading more worth while
I doubt it. How do you even define a mod or an atty? I can go to walmart right now and make a mod and atty by buying a flashlight and removing all the glass from the bulb. All I'd have to do is drip on the coil. It will heat up and vaporize liquid, correct?
The terms are too obscure and complex. Once the issues start popping up, the FDA will have to issue some clarifications or constantly be in court or having to make non stop declaratory statements. Like I said, I don't think they understand the scope of the issue and will have to tailor some things down when they see what they are dealing with.
This thread seems to have become focused on really one thing. What could they regulate or ban vs what could they not...
Here's the real question: If I sell nic juice with the intention of people vaping it, I think I can assume they'll have a grand 'ol time regulating me, taxing me, levying fines when I have compliance issues... etc.
OK. What if I sell laboratory grade nic and laboratory supplies and never say a word about who my target customer is or give them any advice on how to handle/use the products I sell? Since there do happen to be a couple of businesses *exactly* like that, it just sort of seems to me that they were thinking ahead. -- I can have a laboratory and all sorts of lab equipment that doesn't require any sort of license to own or use... and currently that includes about a zillion different chemicals I can experiment with at my leisure without ever having any requirements whatsoever to tell the govt about any of it. If my lab experiments with nicotine as a pesticide, I don't think I then fall under any sort of FDA regs currently proposed --- I could possibly have to deal with the EPA at some point in the future, but the FDA would lack jurisdiction.
Here's the real question: If I sell nic juice with the intention of people vaping it, I think I can assume they'll have a grand 'ol time regulating me, taxing me, levying fines when I have compliance issues... etc.
OK. What if I sell laboratory grade nic and laboratory supplies and never say a word about who my target customer is or give them any advice on how to handle/use the products I sell? Since there do happen to be a couple of businesses *exactly* like that, it just sort of seems to me that they were thinking ahead. -- I can have a laboratory and all sorts of lab equipment that doesn't require any sort of license to own or use... and currently that includes about a zillion different chemicals I can experiment with at my leisure without ever having any requirements whatsoever to tell the govt about any of it. If my lab experiments with nicotine as a pesticide, I don't think I then fall under any sort of FDA regs currently proposed --- I could possibly have to deal with the EPA at some point in the future, but the FDA would lack jurisdiction.
The problem with the extract is it will have virtually no nicotine in it. Getting the nic out of a plant is apparently quite difficult.
LOL the US would actually need to posses gold to go back to a gold standard, so that's not happening. How our government can issue a bond but not a note these days is beyond me though, wait no its not. Its designed to be a system of limited liability, where Congress blames Fed, Fed blames Congress ect to no end.
Its a ruse.
You're completely right. If you read the proposed rules, the FDA is totally against this. However, when you try to actually apply them to a situation that you or I am talking about, the logic breaks down since they can't possibly regulate all these products that only have links to e liquid in certain contexts. They will regulate at some point, I'm sure of that. However, they will have to make some exceptions and define things in a more solid way before they do this.
I don't think you are the troll who has stretched this out ... seems to be another usual suspect.
So, just a few semi-random thoughts...
I'd like the lightest regulation possible. Which means an application that requires something less than 500-1000 hours and millions of dollars to complete.
Because PG and VG are naturally unflavored, it actually requires adding flavorings to get liquids to taste like tobacco.
While most of us can stock pile liquids and nicotine and flavorings and can find our way around the loopholes, the proposed regulations as they stand have the potential to decimate the legitimate e-cig industry, and lead to a huge black market of people using the loopholes.
The result of blackmarket is diametrically opposed to the idea of regulation that will allow a free market with labeling and some oversight. Think of the brand new vaper, who doesn't know how to DIY, playing with black market nic, or the vaper who doesn't have a chemistry background trying to extract their own nic. Or the people building their own mech mods with no place to go to learn about battery safety. Or people who buy flavored oils when DIY-ing, or don't have access to information about which flavors to avoid. Not to mention the people who will continue to smoke, because first gen closed systems don't work as well as open systems where people can find what's effective for them.
Regulation that has the potential to decrease overall safety is not good regulation. And the current proposals are all about paperwork, not so much safety, but paperwork. The amount of the proposed paperwork will put most companies out of business, and the FDA knows this.
What's wrong with the idea of basic regulation as a consumer product? That should include labels and warnings as necessary.
I'd like the lightest regulation possible. Which means an application that requires something less than 500-1000 hours and millions of dollars to complete.
Because PG and VG are naturally unflavored, it actually requires adding flavorings to get liquids to taste like tobacco.
While most of us can stock pile liquids and nicotine and flavorings and can find our way around the loopholes, the proposed regulations as they stand have the potential to decimate the legitimate e-cig industry, and lead to a huge black market of people using the loopholes.
The result of blackmarket is diametrically opposed to the idea of regulation that will allow a free market with labeling and some oversight. Think of the brand new vaper, who doesn't know how to DIY, playing with black market nic, or the vaper who doesn't have a chemistry background trying to extract their own nic. Or the people building their own mech mods with no place to go to learn about battery safety. Or people who buy flavored oils when DIY-ing, or don't have access to information about which flavors to avoid. Not to mention the people who will continue to smoke, because first gen closed systems don't work as well as open systems where people can find what's effective for them.
Regulation that has the potential to decrease overall safety is not good regulation. And the current proposals are all about paperwork, not so much safety, but paperwork. The amount of the proposed paperwork will put most companies out of business, and the FDA knows this.
What's wrong with the idea of basic regulation as a consumer product? That should include labels and warnings as necessary.
Last edited:
^^^^^^Exactly this. We can go on and on about how people can circumvent the law. We can idealize how we are adamantly opposed to any federal regulation. Fact is that this industry is gaining more and more traction every single day. There is a tipping point where it's going to become a very profitable business for some of the liquid manufacturers.
Some people will get so heavily into vaping that they will grow potatoes in their backyard, and become basement chemists. The vast majority of people using e cigs do not fall into this category. The vast majority have no interest in obtaining a PHD in chemistry to find out what is in the liquid they are vaping.
Labeling "natural flavoring" doesn't solve the problem, I agree. You specifically point out the flavors with KNOWN dangerous substances for vaping. Pretty simple. First, the research has to be done, and testing. And most liquid manufacturers who are on the market today are not going out of their way to disclose in simple terms what is in their liquid. I am not saying all.
If we are the harms reduction alternative we claim to be (and I believe we are) ...the more transparent we become, the better. Otherwise we are no different than BT and BP hiding the truth.
This is a consumer product like any other. Actually, no.... nicotine is a known poison and a drug, so it bears a slightly higher degree of consumer safety requirements.
I think regulations are coming, and the sooner we become logical about what reasonable regulations look like, the better.
Meantime, I vape away but still really don't know for certain what's in my e liquid. And no, I don't have hundreds of hours to dedicate to research it. Besides, it appears that I could easily be lied to about what's in it (or the amount) by the vendor anyway. I do think it's far less harmful than smoking...so I act on faith.
My point is that it is a consumer product that's gaining widespread acceptance and popularity. Time to come out of the dark ages with it and make it a viable industry. I think the vendors who take steps now toward compliance with reasonable regulation will survive the cut. Those who won't or can't may not make it.
Just my two cents.
That's all I am saying.
Simple disclaimers could be added.
Examples that I have found on common household cleaners:
Keep out of reach of children (on all things under my sink)
If swallowed ______ (on some things under my sink)
If eye contact, flush with water (on some things under my sink)
Have you ever tried to read the stuff on a Windex bottle? You have to read through the liquid. Makes my eyes tired trying.
Common sense disclaimers but they have to be put on products because you know someone has done one of these.
Examples that I have found on common household cleaners:
Keep out of reach of children (on all things under my sink)
If swallowed ______ (on some things under my sink)
If eye contact, flush with water (on some things under my sink)
Have you ever tried to read the stuff on a Windex bottle? You have to read through the liquid. Makes my eyes tired trying.
Common sense disclaimers but they have to be put on products because you know someone has done one of these.
WARNING -- The Consumer General has determined that vaping may be hobby-forming and hazardous to your budget.
Hasn't teen smoking been at record lows for the past few years?
Couldn't vaping be the reason for that,since vaping in teens has increased in the past few years?
Couldn't vaping be the reason for that,since vaping in teens has increased in the past few years?
Not really. And if sale of nicotine will be prohibited some people will make it at home with varying results (may be dangerous ones).
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/diy-e-liquid/32414-extracting-nicotine-tobacco.html
I think e-cigs are a part of that, but there is also the continually increasing cost of cigarettes, increased laws prohibiting use of cigarettes in certain areas, anti-smoking campaigns...
- Status
Similar threads
