Will Changing the E-cig name keep them off the ban list?

[Da300Mann]

You know, I got'a thinkin', and yes, it hurt.

If the e-cig is on the FDA's chopping block, for being an "electronic cigarette", why can't we just rename it? I know, sounds silly, but hear me out!

I, you or anyone over 18, can buy ......... rolling papers, pipes, water bongs, hookas or vaporizers as long as it's call a "tobacco accessory". You can get these online, at your local "head shop" or even some gas stations. Now I know this is dumb, and no one smokes tobacco out of these devices, but it's legal to sell under this verbiage. So, let's call our e-cigs and such "water vaporizers". This is all they are anyway, a vaporizer. We don't have to say what we vaporize in our personal device.

If it's legal to sell devices for an illegal drug (in most states), why can't we change our verbiage of our nicotine delivery system to something that sounds harmless, like water vaporizers? We all know, until they ban nicotine, we can still make our juice out of ingredients found at Wal-Mart and drug stores. They can't ban VG or PG, so the only thing they can get their paws on IS our nicotine.

Just my thoughts... now to find my Advil...

 

[JonnyB88]

Just my

I think the "damage" has been done. PERHAPS, if they were never called e-cigarettes to begin with, the hoopla wouldn't be this bad. But, I'm fairly certain there would still be lies, scandals, controversies regarding them no matter what they were called. But, most likely (if they were named differently), the media regarding it wouldn't be so much.

 

[Da300Mann]

Just my

I think the "damage" has been done. PERHAPS, if they were never called e-cigarettes to begin with, the hoopla wouldn't be this bad. But, I'm fairly certain there would still be lies, scandals, controversies regarding them no matter what they were called. But, most likely (if they were named differently), the media regarding it wouldn't be so much.

If the damage has been done, do you think it's over? I can see some way of getting around the laws. It may be hard for those companies who sell them as e-cigs, but what about all our RBS? There is NO nicotine included with them, so we can put up a new campaign for "water vaporizers". It's going to be really hard to ban our mechs and VV mods, it just holds a battery and controls voltage/wattage to a connection. Again, if not sold as an e-cig, how can they stop the sales??

I guess I'm just ...... and over-thinking all this crap!

 

[Yerf Dog]

I don't think the damage is done, but it's got a good foothold.

 

[the_vape_nerd]

You know, I got'a thinkin', and yes, it hurt.

If the e-cig is on the FDA's chopping block, for being an "electronic cigarette", why can't we just rename it? I know, sounds silly, but hear me out!

I, you or anyone over 18, can buy ......... rolling papers, pipes, water bongs, hookas or vaporizers as long as it's call a "tobacco accessory". You can get these online, at your local "head shop" or even some gas stations. Now I know this is dumb, and no one smokes tobacco out of these devices, but it's legal to sell under this verbiage. So, let's call our e-cigs and such "water vaporizers". This is all they are anyway, a vaporizer. We don't have to say what we vaporize in our personal device.

If it's legal to sell devices for an illegal drug (in most states), why can't we change our verbiage of our nicotine delivery system to something that sounds harmless, like water vaporizers? We all know, until they ban nicotine, we can still make our juice out of ingredients found at Wal-Mart and drug stores. They can't ban VG or PG, so the only thing they can get their paws on IS our nicotine.

Just my thoughts... now to find my Advil...

It does not matter what you call them because there isn't going to ever be a ban on the devices. There is only one choke point in the whole system that makes any sense. That is the nicotine itself. A federal court has already said that an e-cig is not a drug delivery device and thus it can't be regulated by the fda.

Nicotine though IS a tobacco product and this is where their regulatory authority comes from. I still think the only way you will be able to vape is by purchasing tamper proof pre-filled cartomizers that can't be bought online. I think this b/c you must always follow the money in any political analysis.

 

[Da300Mann]

It does not matter what you call them because there isn't going to ever be a ban on the devices. There is only one choke point in the whole system that makes any sense. That is the nicotine itself. A federal court has already said that an e-cig is not a drug delivery device and thus it can't be regulated by the fda.

Nicotine though IS a tobacco product and this is where their regulatory authority comes from. I still think the only way you will be able to vape is by purchasing tamper proof pre-filled cartomizers that can't be bought online. I think this b/c you must always follow the money in any political analysis.

Then I need to stock up on a TON of nic! I can get all the other ingredients anywhere!

 

[the_vape_nerd]

Then I need to stock up on a TON of nic! I can get all the other ingredients anywhere!

dont stock more than 3 years worth, even when frozen it will go bad

you could also try to just wean yourself off the nic...im down from 24mg to about 8 now but i like my nic

as soon as these regs are put out...i expect the fine folks here to begin trying to figure out a work-around in terms of how can we get the nic by DIY methods...and there is already here...several posts on how you would do that but it isn't very simple...you dont just stick a tobacco leaf into some PG ...you need expensive distilling equipment and at least some knowledge of chemistry

maybe the solution is to have people do this locally and distribute it either by legal or illegal means...who knows

 

[mvroman]

Then I need to stock up on a TON of nic! I can get all the other ingredients anywhere!

Or just learn how to extract your own nicotine. Then you dont have an issue

OT: changing the name wont work. Think of it like the gun ban they were trying to pass, everyone was scared of assault rifles, so the government tried to create a list of requirements to classify a gun as an assault rifle. I think it looked like a certain barrel length, the ability to use the accesory attachment system as the military, the ability to mount a bayonet on it, ability to accept high capacity magazines.

With PVs, all they would really have to do is say that PVs are illegal because they are dangerous and the list that makes something a PV is: 1) first requirement 2) second requirement and 3) third requirement.

Do you see what I mean? It is VERY possible, and more likely than a gun ban. Gun manufacturers just like tobacco companies hold senators and other politicians in their pockets. Ecig companies dont.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 4

 

[BigBen2k]

The name is irrelevant, but you're more than welcome to call them PV: Personal Vaporizer.

The FDA has to run their tests, gather the evidence, to determine what regulation, if any, should apply, under the authority given to them by Congress. It's a scientific exercise at this point.

The courts have already shut the door on most:
-They're not medical devices
-They're not a tobacco product

What's left is:
-underage sale
-general safety
-safety of additives

They *claim* to have a mandate for all the above, under the FSPTCA, but they'll have to defend that position in court. The FSPTCA wasn't written for e-cigs; it's a tobacco product Act.

The FDA does not have the authority to ban tobacco.
http://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/how-will-the-family-smoking-prevention-a-13287/

 

[Da300Mann]

The name is irrelevant, but you're more than welcome to call them PV: Personal Vaporizer.

The FDA has to run their tests, gather the evidence, to determine what regulation, if any, should apply, under the authority given to them by Congress. It's a scientific exercise at this point.

The courts have already shut the door on most:
-They're not medical devices
-They're not a tobacco product

What's left is:
-underage sale
-general safety
-safety of additives

They *claim* to have a mandate for all the above, under the FSPTCA, but they'll have to defend that position in court. The FSPTCA wasn't written for e-cigs; it's a tobacco product Act.

The FDA does not have the authority to ban tobacco.
How will the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act Impact the Electronic Cigarette Industry? by Azim Chowdhury | Duane Morris LLP - JDSupra

So THAT'S why I can buy my "tobacco supplies" anywhere I want! lol

 

[JonnyB88]

you need expensive distilling equipment and at least some knowledge of chemistry

maybe the solution is to have people do this locally and distribute it either by legal or illegal means...who knows

I'm sorry. I HAD to!

Anyway, I am wanting to get into DIY not just for savings, but also in case of bans, taxes, etc.
Guess I should start stocking up on some nic too...

 

[bluecat]

You know, I got'a thinkin', and yes, it hurt.

If the e-cig is on the FDA's chopping block, for being an "electronic cigarette", why can't we just rename it? I know, sounds silly, but hear me out!

I, you or anyone over 18, can buy ......... rolling papers, pipes, water bongs, hookas or vaporizers as long as it's call a "tobacco accessory". You can get these online, at your local "head shop" or even some gas stations. Now I know this is dumb, and no one smokes tobacco out of these devices, but it's legal to sell under this verbiage. So, let's call our e-cigs and such "water vaporizers". This is all they are anyway, a vaporizer. We don't have to say what we vaporize in our personal device.

If it's legal to sell devices for an illegal drug (in most states), why can't we change our verbiage of our nicotine delivery system to something that sounds harmless, like water vaporizers? We all know, until they ban nicotine, we can still make our juice out of ingredients found at Wal-Mart and drug stores. They can't ban VG or PG, so the only thing they can get their paws on IS our nicotine.

Just my thoughts... now to find my Advil...

As a smoker who successfully switched from smoking to vaping, I never would have if it was marketed as a vaporizer. The "e-cig" is what got me.

 

[Da300Mann]

As a smoker who successfully switched from smoking to vaping, I never would have if it was marketed as a vaporizer. The "e-cig" is what got me.

I also quit using an "ecig". To me, this is the ONLY nicotine delivery system that worked for me, and like you, the name is what got me turned onto vaping.

I think regulations are coming, and it's sad they can't see just how safe and effective they are for people who want to quit killing themselves with smoking.

 

[BigBen2k]

There's also an obscure provision about e-cigs laugh: see what I did there?) delivering more nicotine than other NRT (gum, lozenges, patch, ...).

If anything becomes regulated, it'd be those high nic level juices (above 100 mg/mL ?), which no one in their right mind sells, or uses.

 

[Ben B Brown]

i like the name Personal Electronic Nicotine Inhalation System myself or P.E.N.I.S. thats what I tell everyone at the office that asked it is

 

[mare ze dotes]

I don't like the term Ecig. I would prefer the term atomizer. But I see the need or the cig tag.

 

[DC2]

dont stock more than 3 years worth, even when frozen it will go bad

Where did that come from? That statement seems to go against the prevailing wisdom as far as I can tell.

 

[DC2]

The courts have already shut the door on most:
-They're not medical devices
-They're not a tobacco product

The courts have most definitely NOT said they are not a tobacco product.
In fact, it's pretty much the opposite.

Judge Leon noted that the FDA could regulate e-cigs as a tobacco product under the FSPTCA.
He made note of this when he was ruling against the FDA and telling them e-cigs are not a drug/delivery device.

Electronic cigarettes, and all of their components, will officially become tobacco products when the FDA says they are.
That is what the upcoming proposal for "deeming regulations" is all about.

 

[BigBen2k]

Those were the only two options; it remains to be seen.

 

[the_vape_nerd]

Where did that come from? That statement seems to go against the prevailing wisdom as far as I can tell.

I'm only going off what I've read on ecf, mainly the DIY boards. I have never frozen any nic. I thought 3 years was the maximum shelf life even if frozen.