WESH: Smokeless Cigarettes Deliver Nicotine Electronically

[Obi Wan]

We're betting our lives that they're not as harmful as tobacco cigarettes, which contain the same ingredients + a lot of known poisons and burn rather than vapourising. Disprove it.

if i invent a new product i am liable to prove its safe to a certain degree..
how safe?
thats up to the fda or whoever regulates that type of product.

if the fda regulates e-cigs then they will make the rules of how safe they have to be proven..

will they be fair about it,,, who knows..
but suppliers wont be able to say disprove it isnt safe..

 

[Boomer]

this is the number 1 thing i dont understand ?????
does the government and states make money from smokers or lose money ??? same with insurance companys which is why companys say they add smoking bans..
they claim the health costs are costing them to much money because smokers get sick more..
then they tax cigarettes real high and get alot of money from it..
so are smokers helping or hurting the states and the government with money???
maybe no one will ever know.. but if they know they are getting more money then losing, then they would want to stop e-cigarettes..

Interesting question, and the answer is i dont know but i do know the amount of tax i pay on cigarettes is incredible, i would find it really hard to believe they are not making a huge profit on me as a person even if i was to get cancer or have a heart attack but for every person like me there are people buying cigarettes from other sources and not paying tax so who knows i would think it almost impossible to work out. Still if these are proven to be safe i do not think i would mind paying some sort of tax to ensure a clean safe regulated supply of liquids etc but then again it depends how greedy they get. The tax on cigarettes here in the UK is just plain crazy.

 

[strayling]

if i invent a new product i am liable to prove its safe to a certain degree..
how safe?
thats up to the fda or whoever regulates that type of product.

if the fda regulates e-cigs then they will make the rules of how safe they have to be proven..

will they be fair about it,,, who knows..
but suppliers wont be able to say disprove it isnt safe..

I get what you're saying, but sometimes it's too easy to get caught up in the procedural niceties of the whole thing and ignore the starting conditions. The e-cig uses known technology and known ingredients (I'm all for full disclosure of ingredients, BTW and this is where the FDA can be helpful). Common sense suggests that it's extremely likely to be less harmful than burning and inhaling tobacco and this should be taken into account.

Basically, I think it's reasonable to expect either approval pending proof of harm greater than analogs or a fast-track testing process which takes into account its similarities to already approved devices such as nicotine inhalers.

In the end, I'm merely trying to provide a different perspective from all the dire predictions and assumptions of guilt before innocence I read here.

 

[Obi Wan]

Interesting question, and the answer is i dont know but i do know the amount of tax i pay on cigarettes is incredible, i would find it really hard to believe they are not making a huge profit on me as a person even if i was to get cancer or have a heart attack but for every person like me there are people buying cigarettes from other sources and not paying tax so who knows i would think it almost impossible to work out. Still if these are proven to be safe i do not think i would mind paying some sort of tax to ensure a clean safe regulated supply of liquids etc but then again it depends how greedy they get. The tax on cigarettes here in the UK is just plain crazy.

thanks for responding to my ?,s

i think there is only 1 thing that everyone on this web site agrees on,,and that is the fact that somehow MONEY and or greed effects what will happen with these e-cigs.

opinions on safety and freedom and on hating anti smokers are all unique and our free choice to write about, but in the end it always seems like the issue of money and its future effect is the thing that everyone agrees with.

i agree i wouldnt mind a fair tax or even an fda regulation with over the counter sales.
but an anti ban to protect tobacco,s tax money would be a decision from greed.
or a ban just to be anti smoking would be a socialist and controlling thing.

theres so many pasts and new news on here everyday but no big decision or regulation news from the fda..

there was also posts about walgreens selling e-cigs in stores in april.. i wonder if that will still happen ?

 

[Boomer]

Strayling I think sometimes it's good to bring a different perspective to a debate, it makes you step back and think.

Im afraid earlier i just got that worked up with all i was reading and started rambling on, sometimes it's easy to let your emotions take over and get too worked up and start spouting fears that are maybe exagerated.

 

[Obi Wan]

I get what you're saying, but sometimes it's too easy to get caught up in the procedural niceties of the whole thing and ignore the starting conditions. The e-cig uses known technology and known ingredients (I'm all for full disclosure of ingredients, BTW and this is where the FDA can be helpful). Common sense suggests that it's extremely likely to be less harmful than burning and inhaling tobacco and this should be taken into account.

Basically, I think it's reasonable to expect either approval pending proof of harm greater than analogs or a fast-track testing process which takes into account its similarities to already approved devices such as nicotine inhalers.

In the end, I'm merely trying to provide a different perspective from all the dire predictions and assumptions of guilt before innocence I read here.

i agree with you about optimistic safety because of known ingredients.
and i think tests will actually turn out to prove e-cigs are 1000 times safer then tobacco cigarettes..
i was just saying that the fda makes any rules they want and if they regulate e-cigs instead of just banning them outright then they will need test results so i hope manufacturers will provide them with whatever they want.

 

[strayling]

Strayling I think sometimes it's good to bring a different perspective to a debate, it makes you step back and think.

Im afraid earlier i just got that worked up with all i was reading and started rambling on, sometimes it's easy to let your emotions take over and get too worked up.

Hope for the best; plan for the worst.

I'm a glass-half-full sort of person so I find it easier to write about the positive side. That doesn't mean I dismiss the views of the doomsayers or have anything against them, only that I don't accept the inevitability of things going badly.

 

[strayling]

i agree with you about optimistic safety because of known ingredients.
and i think tests will actually turn out to prove e-cigs are 1000 times safer then tobacco cigarettes..
i was just saying that the fda makes any rules they want and if they regulate e-cigs instead of just banning them outright then they will need test results so i hope manufacturers will provide them with whatever they want.

Glad you understand where I'm coming from. Yes, the FDA could go into full-on jobsworth mode and insist on 5 years of tests if they get ...... off. Hopefully we can persuade them of the irrationality of such a course of action.

 

[Obi Wan]

damn,,i hope these dont get banned,, i tried everything over the years to quit smoking and always went back to smoking.
i know these still have nicotine but nicotine doesnt seem to be as bad as whats in winstons from what i have read.
these are the first thing that seem to work and now they will probably ban them, or tax them to $300. for a kit..lol

 

[green-lantern]

Oh and green-lantern we can kill ourselves with cigarettes yes but there are a lot of things we are not allowed to kill ourselves with. I think a lot of it is down to how much money the government can make from it.

Peace Lee.

ding ding ding winner!

It is about money and power. follow the money!

My prediction: The government puts the smack down on ecigs. They do some testing and OK it for certain companies that follow certain guidelines (fees and special drug licence) under strict "government regulations" then they tax it so it's just as expensive as smoking analog cigarettes to fund whatever health care plan they promised when campaigning. They might even make it prescription.

 

[Nick O'Teen]

Interesting question, and the answer is i dont know but i do know the amount of tax i pay on cigarettes is incredible, i would find it really hard to believe they are not making a huge profit on me as a person even if i was to get cancer or have a heart attack but for every person like me there are people buying cigarettes from other sources and not paying tax so who knows i would think it almost impossible to work out. Still if these are proven to be safe i do not think i would mind paying some sort of tax to ensure a clean safe regulated supply of liquids etc but then again it depends how greedy they get. The tax on cigarettes here in the UK is just plain crazy.

According to Times Online :
"The NHS estimates that smoking related illnesses cost it between £2 billion and £3 billion a year. However, the Treasury reaps some £7 billion to £8 billion a year in tobacco tax. So not only are smokers supporting their own healthcare, but also providing a useful stream of income for other government spending."

There's also some good discussion of the cost v. revenue issues at ethics.or.au

Yep, the government is banking on your dying before you can be a long-term burden on the State - they're quite happy to cosy up to Big Pharma and Big Tobacco to farm your cancer for cash. Sickeningly cynical really.
It's not the smokers' fault they don't invest that extra £5-6 billion in healthcare, but choose to piss it away on warmongering and buying up toxic debt - we subsidise the health fascists' healthcare and keep taxes down for everyone else but don't expect gratitude from them any time soon.

As for how greedy they get, look at the prices of NRT - they bear no relation to the actual cost of the materials. Patches, gum, horrid plastic inhalators, they charge much the same price per mg of nicotine as smokers pay for their heavily taxed product, despite being entirely untaxed. It's blatant profiteering.
So the cancer farmers feel threatened by a product that not only works in improving health and aiding quitting, but haven't found a way to steal the majority of the profits - of course they're against it.

Having said that, the tables are now turned I think - with the advent of the Internet, they'll never actually be able to suppress it. It's basically a very low-tech principle - they can't ban heating coils, or batteries, or PG, and I'm sure the tech gurus will come up with ways to convert available materials. If I have to adapt other atomizer products, and boil up tobacco leaves to make juice, so be it. The more I think about it, the more optimistic I am - reading some of the modding and tech tips threads here is a revelation!
It would stunt take-up by new users though

 

[LaceyUnderall]

I thought it was obvious.


My tax rant was probably in the wrong thread. Lacey got me spun up on the government. I’m just really tired of the way this country is being ran into the ground.

So sorry. Did not mean to hijack your good mood. My apologies

 

[green-lantern]

So sorry. Did not mean to hijack your good mood. My apologies

No No your post was right on the money! I loved it! I just got spun up in it and got a little off topic.

 

[Lorddrek]

Tropicalbob I like you. I always read your posts. They are all educated and informative. Recently I have noticed many are also biased. Your angry at manufacturers for not doing whats best for you and I. But do not forget they have made the E-Cigarette for us.

Ultimately the companies will suffer too from any E-Cig bans. Not just us. So they put profits ahead of future world domination. How could you be surprised? I am not. Someone in a far away country made an incredible device and marketed it. Others improved it. Eventually we got ahold of it. The tests done were good enough to produce and sell in China. If most other countries need more expensive trials and tests before even considering allowing an open market for this product then so be it. Consider yourself lucky to have one hanging from your face right now.

Yes this is classified as a drug and/or regulated in some fashion in most countries. Yes this is a nicotine smoking product so it carries all the baggage of a normal cigarette. Yes we can be legitimately concerned about the manufacture given Chinas track record. Yes we should concern ourselves about upcoming enforcement. But no you can not blame companies for failing to jump thru the worlds health hoops. Not so long ago this would not even be an issue. Thankfully in most cases we are watched over or else by now we all might glow and bear three headed children.

But not in this case. Cigarettes are bad. Nobody denies this. E-Cigs are most certainly leaps and bounds better than analogs. We know what nicotine does. We even know what PG does. At least short term. Other additives may be questionable and if that is a concern then mix your own. But to blame Chinese companies for coming up with a product that could bring Big Tobacco to it's knees just because they chose profit over many years and millions of dollars worth of trials is just ludicrous.

Get over it please. Move on. Now is the time to be productive. No doubt the road that lies ahead will be a rough one. Let's put it to good use. Stop blaming those who brought you what you love.

Lorddrek

 

[Lorddrek]

This thread was stickyed and policed to solicit ideas for action against the looming threat of the FDA. We all have ideas on why the opposition is so geared up. But what can we do?

Sorry I can't track of all these gloom and doom threads. So obviously the above does not apply.

 

[TropicalBob]

We're betting our lives that they're not as harmful as tobacco cigarettes,

This is such a common misconception, one the FDA will not even consider. It's not e-cigs or real cigs. It's e-cigs alone. An e-cig must prove itself safe -- not against tobacco cigs or vodka martinis or speeding Porsches or anything else. The FDA won't weigh e-cig vs. cigarette, and the health groups lined up against this say we all have a choice among approved NRT products (none of which work and all too expensive and too wimpy). The hardcore anti's simply say, quit or die. No one suggests we return to cigarettes. If we do, then it really is our choice.

Lordreck, I read and respect your posts, too. You seem to think most things through and don't fly off on tangental rants about the government taking away your "rights", etc. But, no, I doubt I'll stop blaming Chinese manufacturers. But this will end when some company, perhaps in America, makes a decent vaporizer and gets it approved. That's coming. Altria is hard at work. Big Money has eyes on this prize. E-smoking has a future, and plenty of deep pockets know that.

But the guys who got us hooked? Watch 'em run.

 

[Lorddrek]

But this will end when some company, perhaps in America, makes a decent vaporizer and gets it approved. That's coming. Altria is hard at work. Big Money has eyes on this prize. E-smoking has a future, and plenty of deep pockets know that.

you are absolutely right. That is where this is headed. Yeah the Chinese manufacturers dropped the ball. Yes you can even blame them for this present mess. But if they did everything properly by world standards we would not be vaping right now. I think having import E-Cigs around will keep Big Tobacco from raping us when they finally take over. In all likelihood these will continue to be produced in China for whoever finally meets FDA approval.

Lorddrek

 

[RayJ1]

My first post...so take it easy on me folks! I bought my first e-cig about a week ago....NPRO. Okay not the best on the market, but it's keeping me off the analogs.

In defense of the FDA....and our US laws....I would like to see an independent lab test the juice that we're vaping. Stick the brands of e-liquid on a gas/vaper analyzer and let's see what it reads. I have no idea what this juice mix does when it's heated.... vaporized... and inhaled. Are there perhaps some of the flavoring chemicals that react badly and become toxic? Heck I don't know. What methods are they using in preparing the nicotine for our usage? Are there residual chemicals from processing that are highly toxic? Don't know. How much nicotine am I actually getting with these things directly....or indirectly from the mouthpiece? Don't know. I do know that I feel a lot better not smoking analogs......but at what potential other price? At least give me some kind of informed chemical analysis of what I am vaping. Perhaps there are formulations on the market that are better than others as far as toxicity.....I would like to know. I do feel that the mfr's out there now really to need to submit there juice to labs to have it tested....or perhaps they already have.....and they don't want us to know the truth. Perhaps these things really are much better for us. Why shouldn't we be better informed?

We could argue all day about who's making what money......who stands to lose.....big pharma...tobacco...etc,etc etc...and the issues of what brought this potential ban of e-cigs/nicotine liquid to light. The fact remains....ecigs have been linked to smoking cessation..... and nicotine delivery..... accordingly the FDA has to act. It's unfortunate....but in the same token it could benefit us in the long run.

 

[Boomer]

At the minute it is up to the manufacturer if they get it tested so that would be a good thing about them becoming regulated. This is off the totally wicked sites FAQ so it looks like these guys do test and im sure there not the only ones who do, but it should no be up to them in my opinion.

"Pillbox38 has had its Totally Wicked E.Smoking tested by a UK Independent Accredited Laboratory to ensure that they do not conatin any hazard substances apart from nicotine.

Nicotine is addictive, and is classed as a poison, and as regular cigarette smokers, you will be aware of this. In the conclusion of the report the Laboratory have said that on balance the nicotine cartridges appear to be a much safer alternative to the traditional cigarette, as they do not contain any of the known harmful chemicals that are in cigarettes."

 

[Angela]

TW has published the full reports on the cartridges and their liquid on this forum