UK ASH on e-cigs
- Thread starter Boom!
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
For all of us who thought every other country would follow the FDA like lemmings off a cliff...NOT!
"In order to overcome the regulatory difficulties associated with the development of pure nicotine delivery products, ASH supports the Royal College of Physicians call for reform of the nicotine market and the creation of a new nicotine regulatory framework [3]. This would provide smokers with safer sources of nicotine that are acceptable alternatives to cigarettes and regulate novel products including e-cigarettes."
Exactly what many of us have been calling for - a new classification for e-cigs! Personally I would like to be SURE that my 24mg liquid is what it say it is, and doesn't contain anything evil. And no I don't trust the manufacturers to police themselves whether they're in China or the US.
Here's hoping the US mainstream media picks this up. How can we help make that happen?
"In order to overcome the regulatory difficulties associated with the development of pure nicotine delivery products, ASH supports the Royal College of Physicians call for reform of the nicotine market and the creation of a new nicotine regulatory framework [3]. This would provide smokers with safer sources of nicotine that are acceptable alternatives to cigarettes and regulate novel products including e-cigarettes."
Exactly what many of us have been calling for - a new classification for e-cigs! Personally I would like to be SURE that my 24mg liquid is what it say it is, and doesn't contain anything evil. And no I don't trust the manufacturers to police themselves whether they're in China or the US.
Here's hoping the US mainstream media picks this up. How can we help make that happen?
I'm not so optimistic. The creation of a Nicotine Regulatory Framework is definative of red tape and proof of safety. There is a statement that some e-cigs are incontravention of existing product safety standards. So they are referencing safety problems with equipment and eliquid.
I do hope it goes our way and these things are fast-tracked somewhere. If one ASH group can be convinced perhaps the domino effect will take over. "fingers and toes are crossed"
I do hope it goes our way and these things are fast-tracked somewhere. If one ASH group can be convinced perhaps the domino effect will take over. "fingers and toes are crossed"
E-cigs are going to be regulated. No getting around it. That's why Sun has been saying forever that the manufacturers should have been doing studies, posting ingredients, and doing better QC a long time ago.
Perhaps the regulatory powers that be (or will be) can work with the manufacturers to ensure good QC and our fears of being limited to ultra-low nic liquids are unfounded.
"Most deliver a low dose of nicotine which may not give a typical smoker a sufficient hit to satisfy cravings, discouraging smokers from continuing to use them."
They apparently haven't tried 36mg on a 5v mod ;-)
Perhaps the regulatory powers that be (or will be) can work with the manufacturers to ensure good QC and our fears of being limited to ultra-low nic liquids are unfounded.
"Most deliver a low dose of nicotine which may not give a typical smoker a sufficient hit to satisfy cravings, discouraging smokers from continuing to use them."
They apparently haven't tried 36mg on a 5v mod ;-)
ASH UK is not the equivalent of the FDA. It's the British equivalent of ASH US. The Regulatory body in the UK is the MHRA which deems the E-Cig to be not a Medicinal Device.
It is Trading Standards that enforces the Standards that the Ecig has to meet. They have already taken a good look at the E-Cig and as long as they are Childproof bottles and carry HAZMAT Warnings and the Ingredients etc they will leave them be. TECC,TW, E-Cigs.uk and Intellicig
are a few of the suppliers/manufacturers who have been checked out and ok'd by TS but TS will always be keeping an eye on them.
The other thing is that it has not gone unnoticed by Doctors that the E-Cig is actually having more success than NRT's.
Also Britain is trying to encourage Trade not Discourage it. Another factor is that you in the US have had your Election but Ours is still to come and putting people out of Business is not a good idea at the moment.
We still need to stay Alert for Rabid Anti-Anything's however.
Thanks for the clarification Deewal.
No problem ladyraj. It has to be said that Jason Cropper at TECC and TW must take a lot of the credit for the amount of time and more importantly Money in breaking the ice with Trading Standards. If a supplier will not meet the Standards set by them and refuses to comply with all the requirements they will be getting a visit from TS and will have to cease Trading until those requirements are met. So basicly the TS is about Safety of the Product. What it say's on the Bottle must be what is inside the Bottle and the Device must not explode etc.
I have seen Trading Standards officers using E-Cigs btw.
<br /> <br />
Sorry : I do not think ASH (UK) is equivalent to FDA (USA). In fact ASH is not gov related! See their web site.
<br /> <br />
So it is not a victory but it is nice that an anti tobacco group have an open view of benefits about going from analogs to ecigs.
Sorry,
Didn't see deewal answer, and that for the details about Trading Standards works.
Didn't see deewal answer, and that for the details about Trading Standards works.
No, there are two main differences.
ASH in the UK is something I respect.
ASH in the US is run by a fatbodied attention ..... lawyer by the name of Professor John Banzhaf whos only main goal in life is to get as much praise and money for himself as humanly possible regardless of how much damage he does, until God finally takes his ... off this rock and tosses him into the pits of Hell where he rightfully belongs and the rest of the human race doesn't have to hear his useless rhetoric anymore and the courts in this country can finally enjoy a calendar not filled with frivolous lawsuits..
Hopefully once the old man finally passes away, that dangerous ASH group will follow suit.
Pardon me for picking nits, but I don't see where any correction was necessary. The article states:
"The UKs Medicines and Healthcare Regulatory Authority (MHRA) has ruled that certain brands of e-cigarettes cannot be classified as medicinal products and therefore do not fall under the remit of the MHRA."
Perhaps I'm wrong, but MHRA sounds a lot like FDA to me.
TT33
The functions of the US FDA are divided up in the UK.
There is the MHRA, the FSA (Food Standards Agency), Trading Standards and perhaps other agencies each looking at slightly different things.
From JimW
ASH (UK) managed to convince HMG to pass the most draconian law on smoking in Western Europe. They did this by a 'smoke and mirrors' approach Smoke and mirrors | Society | The Guardian They may not be as brash as Mr Banzhoff III but they have the same aims.
As for their advice on e-cigs, at first glance it may appear to be good but, as others have noted, the idea of a Framework around nicotine is worrying. People who Smoke are excluded from discussions related to smoking. Will people who vape be excluded in the same way? Maybe ASH will speak for them?
ASH would like to see 'approved' nictoine delievery devices. Considering that ASH seem to be marketting NRT where would e-cigs ultimately fit into this?
If you are quitting smoking, perhaps you might like to take up ASH's recomendations rather than using an e-cig? What are they recommending, champix and zyban.
Reread the document. It is easy at first sight to think that ASH are supporting e-cigs. Beneath this there is a dark undertone of control.
Respect?
----
ASH seem to market NRT's because they are proven through clinical trials, so even if they believed E-Cigs to be better they couldn't 'market' them.
I think they are after following the Royal College of Physicans recommendations with the new Nicotine Reg Framework which would put E-Cigs in a good position as a safer source of Nicotine.
I only see that they are recommending that people not use PVs and use NRTs instead. What is that about nicotine levels being too low in PVs?? Isn't that more true about NRTs, where the user is unable to choose their nicotine levels? And by calling PVs "novelty items" they seem to be suggesting that they aren't a viable way to move away from smoking.
When are these people going to finally realize that smoking cessation does not have to equal nicotine cessation in order to be considered a healthier option for smokers?
When are these people going to finally realize that smoking cessation does not have to equal nicotine cessation in order to be considered a healthier option for smokers?
I would say that they have very much recognised that:
"ASH supports a harm reduction approach to tobacco, that is, we recognise that whilst efforts to help people stop smoking should remain a priority, many people either do not wish to stop smoking or find it very hard to do so. For this group, we believe that products should be made available that deliver nicotine in a safe way, without the harmful components found in tobacco."
Yes, but they seem to be talking out of both sides of their mouths. It's definitely better than what the US ASH spews out!
No, I disagree - they have to hedge their bets to a degree with the way things stand at the moment (imagine if they recommended them and then some awful test results came in?) but what they are saying is that they could well be a viable alternative for smokers who do not want to give up nicotine or who find it to difficult to do so (ie, as a harm reduction alternative to analogs).
How much more support from this type of organisation (at this point in time with the information available) could anyone realisticly hope for than:-
"Therefore, e-cigarettes, which deliver nicotine without the harmful toxins found in tobacco smoke, are likely to be a safer alternative to smoking. In addition, e-cigarettes reduce secondhand smoke exposure since they do not produce smoke."
They have gone on to say, for those wishing to give up (as opposed to harm reduction) they should sill go via the tried and tested routes.
Many vapers have complained that e-cigs don't deliver enough nicotine for them, so why is it wong for them to say that this may be a problem? (They haven't suggested that they might entice children or be a gateway to real cigarettes or any of the other rubbish that has been spouted elsewhere)
They have also given useful information saying that the MHRA has ruled that they are NOT medical devices (so we don't have the drug/drug delivery device issue that you have with the FDA in the US) and that the Royal College of Physicians is pro-harm reducion as well.
At least we know that, so long as decent test result keep coming out, the UK has backing of all relevant organisations.
Last edited:
- Status
