What if banned

[rustylug]

Ok did my multipe quote work ..... Test .... Test ...I hit the button but nothing happend ... A bit like some e-cigs lol lol .... Sorry Cash

 

[Kate]

Is drug paraphernalia allowed in the US?

 

[CaSHMeRe]

Rusty, lets say there are 3 posts you want to quote.

You hit the "Quote+" on each post, then for the final one you are thinking about using, you his the "Quote" button ...

 

[rustylug]

Hmm did this one work then?

this one goes out to rusty ... my dear old friend ...

Rusty, lets say there are 3 posts you want to quote.

You hit the "Quote+" on each post, then for the final one you are thinking about using, you his the "Quote" button ...

Lol Kate .... The penalty should be another bottel of coconut juce from pillbox for offering to help him lol

 

[CaSHMeRe]

YAYYYYYY !!!! My work here is done !!!

Now, you can use the multi quote, and under each quote, respond to it like so...

Ok did my multipe quote work ..... Test .... Test ...I hit the button but nothing happend ... A bit like some e-cigs lol lol .... Sorry Cash

No Problem Rusty ..

Is drug paraphernalia allowed in the US?

Yup ... Crack Pipes, bongs, you name it, its allowed.

Rusty, lets say there are 3 posts you want to quote.

You hit the "Quote+" on each post, then for the final one you are thinking about using, you his the "Quote" button ...

Quoting myself now ... i kind of like it ... LOL

 

[rustylug]

Thanks Cash .... I didnt know how you did that before ....Cheers

 

[cyberdude]

I think Rusty is right, they would stand to loose a lot of money if smokers all turned to e-cig, but that would never happen just yet as most people I meet in London have not seen them before and are amazed when I produce it outside the office or after work for a drink at the bar. I am told they had banned advertising them, is this true? If they did, it's either a health concern as it's not been trialled for clinical testing in the UK or that they are worried about having a product for safer smoking that they could not tax. They of course being the government in any country that smokers come from. The beauty of the internet is that it brings us all together with the same rights and powers even though the country and law, rules and regulations are different. I cannot see it being outlawed, but you can buy rat poison that would kill a human, doesn't mean to say that they won't sell a quantity to you that wouldn't top you. If they treat it as a pharmacutical product they would either force you just to buy cartridges or provide a service to top up your filters with their own brand of e-liquid. The possibilities of e-smoking as a valuable tool to combat tobacco addication are huge. I am loving it, and big shouts to pillbox38, who is an excellent ebay supplier for e-cigarettes. All of my orders this week for £250 ($500) containing about 14 different products were correct and quickly dispatched, got here in one piece and worked just as they should. Perfect! Thanks Jason, you have single handedly saved my life I havn't smoked a ... for 3 days now and I'm not going to. I actually prefer e-smoking now, I'm converted. SMOKIN!

 

[Kate]

Esmoking is banned in a few places, has anyone been keeping track? All I can remember is that it's not allowed in Singapore and that carts and juice with nicotine are not allowed to be sold in New Zealand.

 

[rustylug]

Can you imagian if the goverment found out about this forum. Hmmmm I think they allready know well about us and are asking the same Q on this forum as WE ARE ASKING OURSELF.

I think Rusty is right, they would stand to loose a lot of money if smokers all turned to e-cig, but that would never happen just yet as most people I meet in London have not seen them before and are amazed when I produce it outside the office or after work for a drink at the bar. I am told they had banned advertising them, is this true? If they did, it's either a health concern as it's not been trialled for clinical testing in the UK or that they are worried about having a product for safer smoking that they could not tax. They of course being the government in any country that smokers come from. The beauty of the internet is that it brings us all together with the same rights and powers even though the country and law, rules and regulations are different. I cannot see it being outlawed, but you can buy rat poison that would kill a human, doesn't mean to say that they won't sell a quantity to you that wouldn't top you. If they treat it as a pharmacutical product they would either force you just to buy cartridges or provide a service to top up your filters with their own brand of e-liquid. The possibilities of e-smoking as a valuable tool to combat tobacco addication are huge. I am loving it, and big shouts to pillbox38, who is an excellent ebay supplier for e-cigarettes. All of my orders this week for £250 ($500) containing about 14 different products were correct and quickly dispatched, got here in one piece and worked just as they should. Perfect! Thanks Jason, you have single handedly saved my life I havn't smoked a ... for 3 days now and I'm not going to. I actually prefer e-smoking now, I'm converted. SMOKIN!

 

[rustylug]

I would 1st of all like to say i came across the e-cig by mistake... then i would like to say i have CUT BACK on my real cigs by about 15 PER DAY ... I work as a Taxi driver in Aberdeen, Scotland and i came across e-cigs when my friend next door offerd me one.... I thought at the time ..Ok i will give it ago .. Then of the 1st day of trying it i only had 2 real cigs in my car the whole day...!!!! ....

 

[TropicalBob]

I'm late to this party, but want to be part of it. The bottom line is this: MAKE NO CLAIMS.

None. Zip. Zero. Don't even elude to this or that result. Every claim, or hint of a claim, will eventually result in a demand for scientific proof. Kate is 100% correct. This is NOT safer, healthier, wiser, smarter, more chic, or anything by any scienfically provable measurement. So don't say what you can't backup. And anecdotes will get you nowhere with government regulatory agencies.

Listen, the best ad campaign in the U.S. in years was for a dab-on product called Head-On. It showed a man or woman touching something to the forehead. And it just repeated "Head on, head on, head on." That was it. It made no claims. Viewers assumed it was a headache remedy. It sold like mad. Made its developers super rich, so they introduced still more products without claims. Finally, the product was tested. It contained nothing of medicinal use. Nothing. It did nothing. It was worthless, but people shelled out hard earned money because of a catchy ad that claimed nothing.

Just demo the e-cigarette in use for a TV commercial. Say only, "Inhale ... exhale ... inhale .. exhale." Nothing more. Smile. Scroll the where-to-buy info. Total: 30 seconds.

You'll get rich, Pillbox, and can quit those 18-hour days sooner than you expected.

 

[leaford]

Head On is an example of Homeopathic medicine, one of those horrible medical snake oil scams I despise. I get especially ...... off when I see the homeopathic pain relievers for pets! Selling a pet owner a placebo when they're trying to help their beloved pet is dispicable.

Here's a good expose of homeopathy:
YouTube - James Randi explains homeopathy

 

[TropicalBob]

I have seen Randi on this. Hilarious. Head-On only made the homeopathy claim after its ingredients were exposed. It's a fraud all the way. But it made its makers rich!

 

[mEtoke2]

I'm late to this party, but want to be part of it. The bottom line is this: MAKE NO CLAIMS.

None. Zip. Zero. Don't even elude to this or that result. Every claim, or hint of a claim, will eventually result in a demand for scientific proof. Kate is 100% correct. This is NOT safer, healthier, wiser, smarter, more chic, or anything by any scienfically provable measurement. So don't say what you can't backup. And anecdotes will get you nowhere with government regulatory agencies.

With the impending scrutiny of government agencies would it be best to even streamline the name of the device? When it's called an E-cigarette, it already carries the stigma of that evil word and immediately ties it into something bad for you. Could it be called a Electronic Vapor Device? (EVD) or maybe a Personal Vapor Device? (PVD). This small change could help in the coming struggle. Any thoughts?

 

[cyberdude]

With the impending scrutiny of government agencies would it be best to even streamline the name of the device? When it's called an E-cigarette, it already carries the stigma of that evil word and immediately ties it into something bad for you. Could it be called a Electronic Vapor Device? (EVD) or maybe a Personal Vapor Device? (PVD). This small change could help in the coming struggle. Any thoughts?

Great idea. I think it's also tarred with the same brush when calling it a cigarette. How about Personal Atomization Chamber(PAC), BOFA(Breath Of Fresh Air) or GAF(... backwards). I'm going for a breath of fresh air with my PAC to have a GAF. I think the other forum members can come up with loads of cool names for these things.

Have a nice day,
CYBERDUDE.CO.UK
from England, UK (Check out my website!) G.

 

[Kimmiegrif]

Personal Vapor Device sounds awesome! Makes you think of room vaporizers and they aren't banned! Thats about what these are when there isn't any nic. right?

 

[ismoke]

Ismoke, I just noticed that you're registering as a supplier on the forum and felt that I should respond to your post above. If you are selling, storing and handling nicotine I think you should be more aware of the dangers.

Nicotine is very poisonous, 60mg can kill an adult, that's 2/3ml of high nic juice or 3 classic size cartridges. Less can kill a child or pet, all they have to do is swallow the core from a cartridge or two and they would be dead. It amazes me that authorities in many countries still allow unregulated nicotine to be sold on the open market, this is a very hazardous substance. It doesn't have to be swallowed either, it can be absorbed through skin. Inhaling nicotine is not harmless either, it is a vasoconstrictor and can cause heart and circulatory problems.

Medical nicotine has been put through years of clinical trials and tests. Dosage and purity is strictly controlled, handling and labelling are regulated too. There is no comparison with esmoking supplies, we are living in limbo at the moment, it will not last forever, safety measures will be enforced. I suggest that you learn to respect this hazardous chemical and not present it to the public as something benign.

Our problem at the moment doesn't appear to me to be the anti-smoking brigade so much as ignorance within our own community.

Considering you know nothing about me, my background, education, experience, company or products you have made some remarkably impertinent assumptions.

I am on the side of electronic smoking and have been for far longer than this forum has been in existence, or, for all I know - not making any assumptions, any of you had ever heard of it.

You compare electronic smoking nicotine with medicinal nicotine because you think it's safer, indeed you state that years of trials prove that. Kate, it's on the shelf in Tesco, tens of thousands of milligrams of the stuff in nice easy to swallow great tasting sweets and gums. Or take patches for example; did you know that most transdermal patches contain 20 times the amount of nicotine that will be absorbed during the time of application? That means numbers like 100mg per patch. Even after removal, most patches still contain at least 95% of the total amount of drug initially in the patch - yet it is safe because it was tested, or because it is supplied by a pharmaceutical company?

Last year the Committee on Safety of Medicines took the warnings off nicotine patches and other forms of NRT so that pregnant women, breastfeeding mothers and those with liver, heart and kidney disease could have access to them. The NHS also made nicotine patches available to children as young as 12 via their school nurses.

Do you think they did this because nicotine kills? It can, but the truth is it does very, very rarely and leaping on my comments because you want to demonise nicotine suggests that you don't fully understand it - unless you know more than the Committee on Safety of Medicines?

There are many long-term safety data on medicinal nicotine products and although nicotine may produce some adverse pharmacological effects these are generally not clinically significant. Furthermore, take snus for example, which is a form of smokeless tobacco that delivers far higher levels of nicotine than any medicinal nicotine product. Snus has been shown to lower the risk of myocardial infarction and lung cancer compared to smoking among exclusive snus users. Available evidence suggests that nicotine, delivered without the other constituents of tobacco smoke, has minimal adverse heath consequences.

Medicinal nicotine products contain far lower concentrations of available nicotine than cigarettes therefore, given that studies have shown that smokers self-titrate their consumption of nicotine by more aggressive smoking of lower-strength cigarettes, it follows that there is a far greater risk of nicotine overdose with gum and lozenges for example than there is from electronic cigarettes, which provide their nicotine faster thus enabling the smokers to satisfy their cravings sooner and with a great deal more accuracy.

My point was that anything that looks like a cigarette, or that resembles smoking in any way is going to be roundly attacked by the anti-smoking brigade on principle.

I can help you, or you can alienate me because you value your opinion over anyone else's.

 

[Kate]

In what way can you help me? You don't sound like you have expertise in handling nicotine. Your claims sound like a sales pitch to me, can you produce any scientific evidence that esmoking with nicotine is less harmful than smoking or NRT?

 

[DeviLFisH]

Considering you know nothing about me, my background, education, experience, company or products you have made some remarkably impertinent assumptions.

I am on the side of electronic smoking and have been for far longer than this forum has been in existence, or, for all I know - not making any assumptions, any of you had ever heard of it.

You compare electronic smoking nicotine with medicinal nicotine because you think it's safer, indeed you state that years of trials prove that. Kate, it's on the shelf in Tesco, tens of thousands of milligrams of the stuff in nice easy to swallow great tasting sweets and gums. Or take patches for example; did you know that most transdermal patches contain 20 times the amount of nicotine that will be absorbed during the time of application? That means numbers like 100mg per patch. Even after removal, most patches still contain at least 95% of the total amount of drug initially in the patch - yet it is safe because it was tested, or because it is supplied by a pharmaceutical company?

Last year the Committee on Safety of Medicines took the warnings off nicotine patches and other forms of NRT so that pregnant women, breastfeeding mothers and those with liver, heart and kidney disease could have access to them. The NHS also made nicotine patches available to children as young as 12 via their school nurses.

Do you think they did this because nicotine kills? It can, but the truth is it does very, very rarely and leaping on my comments because you want to demonise nicotine suggests that you don't fully understand it - unless you know more than the Committee on Safety of Medicines?

There are many long-term safety data on medicinal nicotine products and although nicotine may produce some adverse pharmacological effects these are generally not clinically significant. Furthermore, take snus for example, which is a form of smokeless tobacco that delivers far higher levels of nicotine than any medicinal nicotine product. Snus has been shown to lower the risk of myocardial infarction and lung cancer compared to smoking among exclusive snus users. Available evidence suggests that nicotine, delivered without the other constituents of tobacco smoke, has minimal adverse heath consequences.

Medicinal nicotine products contain far lower concentrations of available nicotine than cigarettes therefore, given that studies have shown that smokers self-titrate their consumption of nicotine by more aggressive smoking of lower-strength cigarettes, it follows that there is a far greater risk of nicotine overdose with gum and lozenges for example than there is from electronic cigarettes, which provide their nicotine faster thus enabling the smokers to satisfy their cravings sooner and with a great deal more accuracy.

My point was that anything that looks like a cigarette, or that resembles smoking in any way is going to be roundly attacked by the anti-smoking brigade on principle.

I can help you, or you can alienate me because you value your opinion over anyone else's.

yup that is why singapore health authority ban sales of e cig commerical in here as last few mths back got one owner of a spa saloon want to bring in to sell But stop by health authority when he go for an approve for selling the ruyan penstyles .

the singapore health authority give the reasons because it stuff resembles smoking and this may mistaken as a toy to kids if they happen to hold on it altought the products stated for smokers and above 18yrs old to own it.

 

[ApOsTle51]

Plenty of info out there on the toxicology of pure nicotine.
Seems the general thought is 50-60 mg of pure nicotine is a fatal dose to a person 12 years or older.
An average cigarette contains 8-10mg of nicotine in raw form , the smoker actually absorbs 1mg of this, a 1mg dose is enough to kill a lab rat.

nicotine gum can contain a maximum of 4mg of nicotine because it is absorbed faster than via the skin where the maximim nicotine in a patch is 21mg (released over a 24hour period )

Nicotine is used as the active ingredient in some insecticides.

Nicotine has a half-life of 2 hours in the body

Few people realize that pure nicotine is actually quite deadly. Nicotine is the active ingredient in some insecticides. "A couple of drops (about 60 milligrams) of pure nicotine would kill you," Dr. Heishman warns. For every cigarette a person smokes, he or she inhales about 1 to 3 mg of nicotine. Fortunately, the body quickly breaks down nicotine to keep it from building up to a fatal dose

I'm with kate on this one.
Trying to 'down play' the dangers of Nicotine to the users of this forum is irresponsible , especially when there is so much information freely available to confirm it's dangers.