Sometimes we're much happier not knowing. How Many Insect Parts and Rodent Hairs are Allowed in Your Food?
Why so many members take issue with the FDA
- Thread starter EddardinWinter
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
They already banned them and ordered customs to seize shipments coming into the US. Only a court order stopped them. Did you read the history of vaping that was posted in the thread?
Come on, now. Just read the information and come back to us, okay. I would really like for you to do that. If the FDA has already tried to squash vaping altogether, and failed, what makes you think they would simply require testing now?
Please read the link that was posted in this thread about what has happened from the dawn of vaping (2003) until now. I think it might change your mind.
HERE, I even brought the link forward for you!
http://casaa.org/E-cigarette_History.html
Last edited:
uh oh, AgentAnia, that does not sound good 
The only thing more dangerous that those spouting ideology are those spouting what sounds like ideology, because they are getting paid for it.
- You should have seen all the crap that so-called non-profit organizations spouted in the European Parliament before the vote on the tobacco directive. With regard to the e-cigs.. which were supposed to be hidden in a side note, to be banned / regulated as medicines = de-facto banned without anybody noticing. "Children! gateway drug! nobody knows what is in it! No studies! danger!!!!" etc etc ad nauseam.
Only recently did it come to light (in public) that those alleged non-profit organizations who are allegedly so concerned with public health - - are paid by Big Pharma.
- And this is not off-topic. As most of those fearmongering blatherers just love to cite those FDA "findings" from 2009. Without, of course, mentioning that the "oh-so-horribly-dangerous" substances were found in the same concentrations (traces) as in FDA-approved NRTs. Without, of course, mentioning that those traces were found in a small part of the samples tested. Without mentioning that the "test" took place 4 years ago, in a market that has been continuously developing further. And, of course, without mentioning who pays them to say that.
Say "FDA" to any German vaper - and you will get the same reactions that you get from American vapers.
....
edit:
the European Parliament vote on the Tobacco Directive took place on 8 October 2013.
The European Parliament voted NOT to regulate e-cigs as medicines. YEAH!
- This was due to a lot of vapers writing to their Member of European Parliament to alert them to the e-cig question and to tell them what e-cigs are and what they do.
- - The fight is not over yet, though. There is still the European Commission to be consulted.. and the Big Pharma ... uhm.. paid people are still desperate to win.. so the vapers have not won the fight quite yet.
As Eddard said:
all we want is to vape.
The only thing more dangerous that those spouting ideology are those spouting what sounds like ideology, because they are getting paid for it.
- You should have seen all the crap that so-called non-profit organizations spouted in the European Parliament before the vote on the tobacco directive. With regard to the e-cigs.. which were supposed to be hidden in a side note, to be banned / regulated as medicines = de-facto banned without anybody noticing. "Children! gateway drug! nobody knows what is in it! No studies! danger!!!!" etc etc ad nauseam.
Only recently did it come to light (in public) that those alleged non-profit organizations who are allegedly so concerned with public health - - are paid by Big Pharma.
- And this is not off-topic. As most of those fearmongering blatherers just love to cite those FDA "findings" from 2009. Without, of course, mentioning that the "oh-so-horribly-dangerous" substances were found in the same concentrations (traces) as in FDA-approved NRTs. Without, of course, mentioning that those traces were found in a small part of the samples tested. Without mentioning that the "test" took place 4 years ago, in a market that has been continuously developing further. And, of course, without mentioning who pays them to say that.
Say "FDA" to any German vaper - and you will get the same reactions that you get from American vapers.
....
edit:
the European Parliament vote on the Tobacco Directive took place on 8 October 2013.
The European Parliament voted NOT to regulate e-cigs as medicines. YEAH!
- This was due to a lot of vapers writing to their Member of European Parliament to alert them to the e-cig question and to tell them what e-cigs are and what they do.
- - The fight is not over yet, though. There is still the European Commission to be consulted.. and the Big Pharma ... uhm.. paid people are still desperate to win.. so the vapers have not won the fight quite yet.
As Eddard said:
all we want is to vape.
Last edited:
Are you serious? Have you read the lies they've put out there?
Let's see... They've stated that what they found in a couple of ecigs and blanketed the whole thing with 'this is what we found' while not stating that the same things were in their OWN FDA approved inhalers.
I've seen warnings go up on this site about this or that, in a VERY timely fashion. Hmmm how long is the FDA going to let Chantix kill people before they finally pull it off the market.
Trust the FDA? No. Think they get SOME things right? Maybe.
I apologize if this has been said, I didn't read anything after the 3rd post, lol.
My issue with the FDA is their complete lack of common sense, and their major backing by big pharm. My issues with them stem from more than their stance on e-cigarettes, my issues come from a wide range of generally bad practice they have shown us over the years. This includes not allowing MMJ research for medicinal value, not allowing private cancer research, allowing untested drugs to be put on the market, allowing known dangerous drugs to be put on the market... need I go on?
If their true intention was consumer protection, it should not be impossible for people to get FDA certification to do their own trials. They would not forbid testing of certain products because they feel the results will be exactly what they expect.
I do believe the FDA is a good concept, its horribly executed, and right now they're talking about regulating something they know absolutely nothing about as stated in their own words.
The new Tapatalk update blows... that is all
My issue with the FDA is their complete lack of common sense, and their major backing by big pharm. My issues with them stem from more than their stance on e-cigarettes, my issues come from a wide range of generally bad practice they have shown us over the years. This includes not allowing MMJ research for medicinal value, not allowing private cancer research, allowing untested drugs to be put on the market, allowing known dangerous drugs to be put on the market... need I go on?
If their true intention was consumer protection, it should not be impossible for people to get FDA certification to do their own trials. They would not forbid testing of certain products because they feel the results will be exactly what they expect.
I do believe the FDA is a good concept, its horribly executed, and right now they're talking about regulating something they know absolutely nothing about as stated in their own words.
The new Tapatalk update blows... that is all
This (IMO). Distrusting the FDA as regards vaping (and other issues) doesn't necessarily mean we think the entire operation is useless, no need to go to that extreme; nor does it mean the FDA is "out to get us" or anything...but given their track record on this particular issue? Just no...for me...
The difference is that CEO's and COO's of big companies are compensated based on their performance. Performance is measurable by the company's market share, their SEC filings and the company's stock price. They typically have gained their status with a track record of performance at other companies or within the company that they lead.
Political appointees have no such measure of performance, and gained their status because of who they are, who they know, what they've done for the administration or what they could do to the administration if they weren't kept under close watch of the White House Chief of Staff.
It's been that way since the FDR administration and it's unlikely to change.
Remember also that the sitting POTUS is a smoker who's reportedly trying to quit. So is the sitting Speaker of the House. They're kinda familiar with the issues of tobacco addiction and the success rate of currently available cessation rates.
And, for the record, I still think FDA backs up 10 yards and punts again.
I think you're right about punting. It just prolongs our agony.
At the same time, it gives us more time to come up with more evidence and people to fight with.
You have stated this, and I witness the position. I will celebrate you being correct, sir, should it come to pass.
Enter troll?
1. There are a lot of tests of e-cigs and e-cig liquids, and all serious tests prove that e-cigs are approx. 99% safer than tobacco cigarettes. The not-so-serious tests prove the same. Once a knowledgeable person cuts through their lies and omissions. (French magazine "60 millon de Consommateurs", anyone? )
2. There is no substance that is 100% harmless. Even consuming 10 quarts of water can kill a healthy adult, through osmosis.
3. A look at this article may put a few things in perspective: The Rest of the Story: Tobacco News Analysis and Commentary: Action on Smoking and Health Warns Public of the Dangers of "Secondhand Electronic Cigarette Smoke"
..........
To those not familiar with the "findings" of the "study" published by "60 millions de Consommateurs" - please see comment by Dr. Farsalinos: http://www.ecigarette-research.com/...09-50-07/126-a-new-study-on-chemical-analysis
Short summary
That French magazine tried to make e-cigs look bad (right before the vote in the European Parliament... awww.. the coincidence...
) - and shot itself in the foot, big time. Just take a look at the table with the figures.
Last edited:
Most people would like to see some sort of regulation, such as not selling to minors, and you dont have to worry about what is in your juice if you make it yourself. But what happens when it is heavily taxed, regulated and falsely vilified to the point where its not even an option to current and future smokers who want to quit. You think that is okay? Perhaps put them all on Chantix and see how many make it out the other end alive and in one stable piece? I think all anyone wants is some common, honest sense from them but past actions dont indicate that is likely.
I really don't think they are going to punt this time, although they have punted on this issue a number of times.
The CDC getting involved tells me otherwise.
The dramatic increase in media sensationalism tells me otherwise.
The letters to the FDA from certain Congress-Critters (not the first time) and certain "non-profit" organizations (first time) tells me otherwise.
But I've been wrong before, and don't mind being wrong again.
The longer they take to propose regulations, the more vapers we have who might be ready to fight them.
I couldn't agree more! But I am afraid we might need a history and political literacy test before one can vote to accomplish the goal.
I really don't think they are going to punt this time, although they have punted on this issue a number of times.
The CDC getting involved tells me otherwise.
The dramatic increase in media sensationalism tells me otherwise.
The letters to the FDA from certain Congress-Critters (not the first time) and certain "non-profit" organizations (first time) tells me otherwise.
But I've been wrong before, and don't mind being wrong again.
The longer they take to propose regulations, the more vapers we have who might be ready to fight them.
WILL be ready to fight them
I really don't think they are going to punt this time, although they have punted on this issue a number of times.
The CDC getting involved tells me otherwise.
The dramatic increase in media sensationalism tells me otherwise.
The letters to the FDA from certain Congress-Critters (not the first time) and certain "non-profit" organizations (first time) tells me otherwise.
But I've been wrong before, and don't mind being wrong again.
The longer they take to propose regulations, the more vapers we have who might be ready to fight them.
I do sense a certain coordination of activities. You could be right. I hope ICBR is.
Time is on our side, yes it is.
Now I have jumped into it, too. You guys are a bad influence!
I am writing myself a citation!
I am writing myself a citation!
Seriously, what is someone going to put in electronic cigarette juice?
If you think some whack-job is going to put arsenic in their juice, well, yeah, it could happen.
But FDA regulation isn't going to stop that.
I don't remember how FDA regulations stopped anyone from putting razor blades in Halloween candy.
And that has nothing to do with what the FDA is proposing, which means your comment makes no sense.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
