EU TPD vote: Europe has fallen - Big Money has triumphed

[Talyon]

So if I have a 0.8ml Kanger G5 clearo, and I fill it with 1.8% nic eliquid non flavored 50-50 pg/vg would I be breaking this new Law?

And if so which part or the above combo and where it says this in the directive?

Trying to get an understanding of the nitty gritty here.

 

[jwoode]

wizard labs.. here i come again.. gonna be a big one

 

[rolygate]

At this time we don't know the full details. It will take a while for each of the 28 countries to transpose this into their national law - two years has been quoted but I'd be surprised if it took the keen ones more than a year. We don't know if there is any legal route to refute these regs, but one route is that the stipulations in some cases appear to be pretty much identical to the medical regs proposed by the MHRA.

One of those proposed regs is that 'a device must deliver a consistent dose of nicotine'. We know that no current device can do this (as the MHRA have said so), and that no currently-existing ecig could obtain a medical license (because the MHRA have said so). One of the reasons for this is because no current device 'can deliver a consistent dose of nicotine' - not surprising as it's consumer technology not medical technology. Some of the pumps used for delivering intravenous drips cost $20,000 in order to get a consistent dose.

So right there we have a clause that can be used to ban every existing ecig. However, since it is clearly a medical requisite and has no relation to consumer products, and is an existing medical licensing requirement, it may also be a legal weakness.

Another is that tanks cannot leak even when being refilled. As far as I can see, that also removes all current tanks. Therefore the fact they are now limited to about 1ml isn't that important (many tanks can't be fully filled, and you commonly get about 2ml in a 1ml tank because of that).

As far as the UK is concerned, the TPD will be used to ban as many products as they can manage (all of them if they want to), ban internet sales, and ban advertising. The question is: what exactly will stand up to legal challenge and what will fall. Not much of it will be implemented at first, in the UK, because they will first need to establish an enforcement system. For example: who will be visiting the vendors' premises and confiscating stock for testing and destruction? (As that's what they will do.) Who will be testing liquids and testing products for 'consistent dose delivery'? Maybe the MHRA will be contracted to manage that as no one else has medical product expertise.

UK vendors: just be glad you don't live in the US because if/when this comes to pass there, they send a large armed team in to do the job.

 

[Robino1]

Just sick and heartbroken.
I know it will happen here too.

 

[makeyourself]

So if I have a 0.8ml Kanger G5 clearo, and I fill it with 1.8% nic eliquid non flavored 50-50 pg/vg would I be breaking this new Law?

And if so which part or the above combo and where it says this in the directive?

Trying to get an understanding of the nitty gritty here.

There's a difference between criminalising possession and regulating the sale of a product. I haven't read anything in the TPD that criminalises possession. I certainly plan to get my hands on a few such devices before they are withdrawn anyway!

One of those proposed regs is that 'a device must deliver a consistent dose of nicotine'. We know that no current device can do this (as the MHRA have said so), and that no currently-existing ecig could obtain a medical license (because the MHRA have said so). One of the reasons for this is because no current device 'can deliver a consistent dose of nicotine' - not surprising as it's consumer technology not medical technology. Some of the pumps used for delivering intravenous drips cost $20,000 in order to get a consistent dose.

Another is that tanks cannot leak even when being refilled. As far as I can see, that also removes all current tanks. Therefore the fact they are now limited to about 1ml isn't that important (many tanks can't be fully filled, and you commonly get about 2ml in a 1ml tank because of that).

Yeah reading this did concern me a bit but I wasn't really sure of the ramifications because I don't know enough about the technical side of things. So could say a clearomizer be redesigned to incorporate these features or are we basically talking about the possible end of the road for current devices? How much do you think this will this drive up prices, presumably non-electrical nicotine inhalers deliver a consistent dose seeing as they are certified NRT (I understand that they were developed by pharmaceutical companies I'm just saying they must cost less than $20k).

 

[rolygate]

Yes, an atomiser spray pump can deliver metered doses. But, this is a medicine and not designed as a leisure product to make anyone happy with its performance. You use it as little as possible and are glad to throw it away when done. It's also more expensive than vaping because to ensure metered doses the whole manufacturing chain and testing procedure are more costly. Imagine sending out a medical inhaler that delivered double the dose, or one-tenth of the dose - that might be extremely problematic and expensive for the company concerned. But in an ecig the 'dose' varies by at least a factor of 10 across all the devices available; it varies perhaps by a factor of 3 or 4 across examples of the same product; even in the same device it will vary by at least a factor of 2 according to usage parameters. It is not important because it's like coffee, if you need more you drink more; if you somehow get given a cup that is mega-strong then you pretty much know in a few seconds.

Maybe an ultrasonic device or a piezo-electric device could also be constructed that could deliver a metered dose of nicotine aerosol. So there are going to be different routes to achieve this.

But these solutions are not vaping. The reason why we can freely use the term 'e-cigarette' for what is far more accurately described as an electronic (or electric) vapouriser or EV is because the vapour is specifically engineered to replicate cigarette smoke. It is a vapouriser that, in the most important respects, replicates cigarette smoke. It's done the way it is because that is the best way to replicate cigarette smoke that we know - not for some irrelevant reason such as metered dosage.

There are all kinds of fairly cheap ways of producing a nicotine-containing aerosol but they won't be vaping as we know it. It will be strictly a personal vapouriser and may look and feel like an asthma inhaler. That's how you get a metered dose. That's what the MHRA and all the rest want to force us into, because it would automatically reduce sales by 90% without any other measure being necessary. Ecig vapour is not medical inhaler mist; that's the difference between an inhaler and an ecig.

Personally, I'm a smoker, I like to smoke, I still smoke cigars, and I choose to vape an ecig not smoke cigarettes. I've vaped for 4 years or so and avoided cigs for a long time now, and ecigs keep me off tobacco cigs. If an ecig looked like an asthma inhaler and the vapour was like inhaler mist, I'd be back smoking cigs tomorrow. I like vaping, not using medical inhalators.

As regards all the details, we don't know, and can't know until the law is mirrored here, and we still won't really know until someone starts the enforcement. Their intention is to wipe out ecigs so don't think it will all be hunky-dory. In practice it will just create a giant black market anyway (all the UK ecig businesses will tank). I'm talking about eventually - not next week or possibly even by the end of this year - when they get all their ducks in a row, and if none of the TPD is overturned in court.

 

[DrMA]

I'm deeply saddened by this development. I bet BP and BT are out partying together with their MEP puppets.

 

[SleeZy]

There's no words to describle my feelings about the whole thing atm... It's just... what? why?
Promote what's safe instead.
Here in sweden they've even announced that they've lost 33% in tobacco revenues (can't spell the word)
And they're worried about the loss of income.
And in the same article they mentioned how costly it's to treat cancer etc caused by smoking. "double edged sword".

Why don't they just adapt to the current market, start selling e-liquids and promote e-ciggs? It's a win-win.

"Controversially, the speaker of the European Parliament, Martin Schulz, banned MEPs from voting on the individual aspects of the legislation. They had to vote for it all or none. This had important wider implications on the harm-reduction clauses."

This quote makes me wonder... it must be bribes from tobacco companies involved with this.

Source for the quote:
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/02/26/EU-Votes-Through-Draconian-New-Anti-Smoking-Rules




Edit:

Also sweden got struck with a "kind of a" ban on snus. They're no longer allowed to have an ingredient list (what the hell?) And no advertised taste (I.e Cherry / mint / any other taste)
They wanted to ban e-liquid because there's no ingredient list on them. (which they failed with) Yet they, now ban the ingredient lists from our snus. And they say "you can look up the ingredients on the internet". I'm confused.

 

[dspin]

Time for this fella to rise from the dead and raise some HELL!

View attachment 309992

This is so true - too bad the current population lets the leaders of our country take them down the garden path.

"The fate of unborn millions will now depend, under God, on the courage and conduct of this army...we have therefore to resolve to conquer or die." General Washington July 2, 1776


Everyone has just about given this country away, all they care about is who is playing football on Sunday, etc etc etc. We are more enslaved them people think, many rights are gone and more being taken away - and still no one hollers. Those of us that do - people think we are nuts. Everything that is evil has now become good, everything good is now becoming evil - to our lawmakers, moneymen and far left liberals. Lawmakers only understand one thing and it isnt talking.

Here is good depiction of the people of USA following along with whatever the lawmakers do or whatever the current movie stars are for. Makes me sick. No lawmaker in the world I know of cares about the health of any human - its all about money.

 

[LDS714]

There's no words to describle my feelings about the whole thing atm... It's just... what? why?
Promote what's safe instead.
Here in sweden they've even announced that they've lost 33% in tobacco revenues (can't spell the word)
And they're worried about the loss of income.
And in the same article they mentioned how costly it's to treat cancer etc caused by smoking. "double edged sword".

Why don't they just adapt to the current market, start selling e-liquids and promote e-ciggs? It's a win-win.


This quote makes me wonder... it must be bribes from tobacco companies involved with this.

Source for the quote:
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/02/26/EU-Votes-Through-Draconian-New-Anti-Smoking-Rules




Edit:

Also sweden got struck with a "kind of a" ban on snus. They're no longer allowed to have an ingredient list (what the hell?) And no advertised taste (I.e Cherry / mint / any other taste)
They wanted to ban e-liquid because there's no ingredient list on them. (which they failed with) Yet they, now ban the ingredient lists from our snus. And they say "you can look up the ingredients on the internet". I'm confused.

Why confused? You stated the reason in the second sentence. Lost revenues.

The politicians did what any corrupt greedy business person would do - protected their own income and anything else be damned.

 

[SleeZy]

Why confused? You stated the reason in the second sentence. Lost revenues.

The politicians did what any corrupt greedy business person would do - protected their own income and anything else be damned.

I'm confused about the part where they've now removed the ingredientlist on snus (It's banned for some oddly reason) And for this, they actually loose money on it. And on the other hand, they tried to ban e-liquid because of "missing ingredient list". Which they failed with.

 

[pmos69]

For those wishing to see how their MEPs voted on article 18a: VoteWatch Europe: European Parliament, Council of the EU

I personaly wrote to all of the Portuguese MEPs about my concerns.
Few wrote back. (None of the ones I voted for did)
Of those, some expressed simpathy for my arguments.

In the end, NONE of the Portuguese MEPs opposed article 18a.

Did I expect anything different? Not really. It just reenforced my oppinion of Portuguese politicians.

 

[sqirl1]

so wait... the really bad proposal passed? like the one where they have to deliver consistent amounts of nicotine and all that? damn.... if it weren't for OMB's descision on sunday I would be really scared right now, but since the FDA is back at the drawing board for a while we've definitely lucked out for now here in the US. I just hope the courts kill this for you guys.

 

[FourWinds]

For those wishing to see how their MEPs voted on article 18a: VoteWatch Europe: European Parliament, Council of the EU

I personaly wrote to all of the Portuguese MEPs about my concerns.
Few wrote back. (None of the ones I voted for did)
Of those, some expressed simpathy for my arguments.

In the end, NONE of the Portuguese MEPs opposed article 18a.

Did I expect anything different? Not really. It just reenforced my oppinion of Portuguese politicians.

Thank you for posting that; very interesting information.

 

[SPACKlick]

I've now written to my 3 MEP's. And would like to give praise to Martin Callanan MEP for voting against this legislation. I will remember that only the conservatives defended the rights of vapers in May.

 

[FourWinds]

I've now written to my 3 MEP's. And would like to give praise to Martin Callanan MEP for voting against this legislation. I will remember that only the conservatives defended the rights of vapers in May.

Catherine Bearder didn't let us down I see. I have a little hope for our future here in the UK now I've seen this breakdown.

 

[zoiDman]

I feel like crying. This is absolutely horrifying and maddening. I have a feeling that the FDA has been sitting and watching to see how this plays out. When the dust settles, then they will show their hand.

This world is so screwed....

They say Every Cloud has a Silver Lining.

So perhaps this Terrible Tragedy that EU Vapers have been dealt can at Least help Vaper's in Other Countries to Wake Up. And Realize that they Could be Next.

And that now is Not the Time for Complacently.

 

[SPACKlick]

Catherine Bearder didn't let us down I see. I have a little hope for our future here in the UK now I've seen this breakdown.

Yeah, 3 abstentions, 29 Against, 19 DNV, 22 For.

EFD position was for, all UK MEP's rebelled (4) or DNV
S&D position was for, No Rebels
ALDE was for, 3 rebel against, 4 abstain/DNV
Greens were for, no rebels, no DNV
ECR were against, 1 rebel, 7DNV.

 

[FourWinds]

It's depressing to see that only the UK, Luxembourg, and the Czech Republic voted against it.

 

[sqirl1]

It's depressing to see that only the UK, Luxembourg, and the Czech Republic voted against it.

Even Sweden voted for it? That's pretty surprising with the whole snus thing over there, I figured they'd be all for E-cigs.