The FDA Loses Appeal!

Status
Not open for further replies.

SimpleSins

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Jul 18, 2010
1,121
18
SW Iowa
I just don't see how further analysis of the chemicals in e-cigarettes are going to tell us any more about the safety of e-cigarettes than the fact that thousands of people have been using them to avoid smoking without serious adverse effects? For me the issue now, lacking any scientific evidence that e-cigarettes are causing harm to people and considering how much good they are doing, should be regulating the manufacturing, labeling and advertising of these products for quality control. The issue of safety is a moot point until or if we actually get complaints of serious illness or injury - and then those risks need to be evaluated compared to the health effects of smoking and how many people are actually affected - the same way they treated Chantix and hundreds of other products.

That's just how I personally see it, anyway.

There have been studies that showed some of the ingredients in juice were potentially bad- bad enough that popcorn makers removed it, but enough that public safety agencies have forced a reinvestigation of our favorite chemical because of the hazards on vaporized inhalation. Since I presume you were once a smoker, did you have immediate side effects from your cigarettes? Did everybody have immediate side effects from cigarettes? For myself, it took about 20 years before I started to to notice the effects of smoking. Ecigs have only been around for around three years here and four years in Europe. The use of flavorings is an even shorter time. It is entirely conceivable that in 15 years, there could be a lot of problems associated with ecigs. There have been a lot of people that have reported problems since starting vaping and they're quickly shut down as it being due to past cigarette use, an effect of quitting cigarettes, or the ever popular hypochondriac. Whether it's politically correct here to say it or not, there are a lot of people who have had respiratory problems with vaping and have stopped, some using Snus and others going back to cigarettes. But since it is an unknown, it's entirely possible that in 20 years, we'll find out smoking was the safer choice.
 

kristin

ECF Guru
ECF Veteran
Aug 16, 2009
10,448
21,120
CASAA - Wisconsin
casaa.org
What kind of studies can be done that will tell us what will happen in 20 years without people actually using them for 20 years?

And honestly, there are immediate effects of smoking that pretty much tell you it's not going to be good for you.

Additonally, there have been a minority of people who have had issues since they started vaping, the majority of which are also symptoms of quitting smoking, some are allergic to PG and a very few that don't fall under that haven't established that it's linked to vaping. Show me all those people who initially had complaints and the issues weren't resolved once they switched to VG or whose symptoms disappeared after a month or two (indicating it was probably related to their body healing from the smoking.)

I agree that there will be some people who will have adverse reactions to something in vaping (although they will be largely a minority from what I can tell) and they just won't be able to vape. The same way some people can't eat nuts - nothing is safe for 100% of the people.

But again, just as was the case with Chantix, the fact that it is safe enough for the majority and helps them avoid even greater health risks, shouldn't automatically cause e-cigarettes to be declared as an overall risk based on the reaction of a few.
 
Last edited:

shanagan

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Jul 14, 2010
1,238
72
Texas
Seriously, simple, I'm not using the PG. I use only VG. The flavors I can do without if need be. PG is in the inhalers used by asthmatics. I have a nephew who has asthma. He's been inhaling PG since he was a child.

I actually don't think so - I think the pg-in-inhaler thing is vapers' myth. I couldn't find any proof of its inclusion, but would love to know if someone else has. (PM me, I didn't mean to derail.)
 

cozzicon

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 19, 2010
2,564
900
Chicago IL

SimpleSins

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Jul 18, 2010
1,121
18
SW Iowa

cozzicon

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 19, 2010
2,564
900
Chicago IL
That study is from 1947, the time when we were still using DDT, DES, thalidomide for morning sickness, lead paint, and asbestos. I think before we deem is safe, it would probably be better to have something within the last 50 years.

For Christ sake... It's a study. And it hasn't been invalidated.
 

shanagan

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Jul 14, 2010
1,238
72
Texas

cozzicon

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 19, 2010
2,564
900
Chicago IL
Woohoo Coz!! That's one ingredient. It's not ideal as it doesn't cover long-term vaporizing, but I'll content myself with that. Now how about those studies showing the flavoring agents are safe to inhale. Has anybody tracked those down yet?

I wonder why I waste my time....
 

wv2win

ECF Guru
ECF Veteran
Feb 10, 2009
11,879
9,045
GA by way of WV
.....But since it is an unknown, it's entirely possible that in 20 years, we'll find out smoking was the safer choice.

My personal physican has read everything he can on the subject and told me to keep vaping and was overjoyed that I quit smoking. I trust my personal physican. It's significantly more likely that I will die in a car accident than most any other activity I do on a regular basis. I continue to drive. I don't trust people who state the "the sky is falling" at every turn in life's path or who use the word "pedophile" in a non-related discussion just to scare people.
 
Last edited:

wv2win

ECF Guru
ECF Veteran
Feb 10, 2009
11,879
9,045
GA by way of WV
I wonder why I waste my time....

I completely understand your thought, coz. To be PC, it is very difficult to understand how this thread, starting with very good news for those who vape, can be turned into a negative that even goes as far to suggest that vaping could be worse than smoking. The FDA, ALA and ASH must love it.
 
Last edited:

DC2

Tootie Puffer
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 21, 2009
24,161
40,974
San Diego
Woohoo Coz!! That's one ingredient. It's not ideal as it doesn't cover long-term vaporizing, but I'll content myself with that. Now how about those studies showing the flavoring agents are safe to inhale. Has anybody tracked those down yet?

I wonder why I waste my time....

Snide personal attacks aside, the flavorings are clearly the biggest concerns.
Turning the conversation towards PG is a bad move for those who want to have their cases heard.

And yeah, snide personal attacks keep coming from all sides and all angles.
Just reel yourselves in, before you derail any thread that may be useful or informative.

EDIT: If you feel you're on a "side" then you are not doing anyone any favors.
EDIT: There should be no "sides" when it comes to the truth.
 
Last edited:

Numanoid

Full Member
Jan 12, 2010
48
3
51
MN
It's amazing how people can overreact negatively to obvious good news. It usually stems from not doing your homework or guessing at things. Thankfully we have the internet what contains facts if you're willing to search for it.

PACT act is a non issue. It is based 100% around the definition of "cigarette" under section 2341 of title 18 of US code. The act specifically excludes cigars. You can read PACT here: Read The Bill: S. 1147 - GovTrack.us

Read up on HR 1256 here: Read The Bill: H.R. 1256 - GovTrack.us

Some of the 1256 rules are good news. We will be able to see the ingredients in the flavors and independent research may come out of it.

Finally, ECF is not going to get closed because it "markets" tobacco product use. Worst case scenario is that it may need to alter its relationship with the vendors.
 

FreakyStylie

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Oct 22, 2010
4,651
933
The Internet

After watching the piece, I can see their point when they mentioned that smokers get confused because they look like cigarettes, and then proceed to light up and smoke.

This is a very good reason to move electronic cigarettes away from looking like cigarettes and popularize another name for them. I know that people haven't agreed on what to call them yet, but I feel that it is urgent that we find another terminology for them in order to not be lumped into the same category.
 

mauzey

Super Member
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Oct 19, 2010
452
39
Washington State
After watching the piece, I can see their point when they mentioned that smokers get confused because they look like cigarettes, and then proceed to light up and smoke.

This is a very good reason to move electronic cigarettes away from looking like cigarettes and popularize another name for them. I know that people haven't agreed on what to call them yet, but I feel that it is urgent that we find another terminology for them in order to not be lumped into the same category.

That would be a hot one if they got a ticket. ;) I don't like the light at the end of the 510's I think it is kind of dumb and a waste of power at best.
 

THE

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Jun 4, 2008
1,247
21
USA
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread