Wrote some letters - got a personal response

[renderwerks]

I wrote my representatives, the president, the FDA, etc... got a couple of responses:

Here was my letter:

I wanted to voice my opinion on the e-cigarette.

I have been a smoker for 35 years and have tried various methods to quit without success.

I recently learned of the e-cigarette while waiting on a doctor visit via the "health" channel shown on a TV in the waiting room. The segment was hosted by a doctor, and the general tone was approval. After discussing it with my doctor during that visit, I spent a couple of days researching on the internet as well as having an in-depth discussion with a PHD in Chemical Engineering (my boss) and decided it was a much better alternative to smoking if it could replace my 2 pack a day habit.

I purchased one and have been tobacco free for over 3 weeks. I honestly don't see ever using tobacco again. I generally feel better, my sense of taste has improved, and I've noticed I have more endurance.

In my research I’ve learned that a New Zealand doctor has been researching these devices for some time and these results show the e-cigarette to be signifigantly safer than any form of tobacco. I invite you to take a look: Health New Zealand


Further testing should be conducted; however, I believe that these devices should remain on the market as they are undoubtedly safer than the alternative.

Thank You,


Rick Hageman
Senior Mechanical Designer
Pacific Consolidated Industries
12201 Magnolia Ave
Riverside, Ca 92503
951.479.0860 x254
rhageman@pci-intl.com


Got a response from an agency of the FDA (OSHI, Office of Special Health issues):

Hello--

This office is not involved in regulation of these products. However, I found the following links to information of possible interest to you:
Import Refusal Report
Import Refusal Report

According to the information at the above links, under Federal law these products may not be lawfully marketed without having been tested and approved for marketing. Preliminary testing would not be sufficient as a basis for a regulatory determination for these products. While we appreciate the risks of smoking, products like this can be marketed only after thorough testing. In the absence of such marketing approval, their marketing would constitute a violation of Federal law.

Here is a link to non-FDA information:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/02/us...e.html?_r=1&hp.

I hope you find this information helpful.

David Banks
FDA Office of Special Health Issues

Well, THAT response kind of ...... me off...

The more positive response (partially) was from one of my Congressional Representatives, (it was hand signed):

Dear Mr. Hageman,

Thank you for contacting me regarding the e-cigarette.

I am concerned about the detrimental health effects of tobacco and am pleased to hear that the e-cigarette has helped you quit smoking. You also may be interested to know that Congress recently passed H.R. 1256, the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act.

H.R. 1256 seeks to enable the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to regulate tobacco products. In addition, H.R. 1256 would prohibit tobacco companies from manufacturing cigarettes containing artificial or natural flavors other than tobacco or menthol. I supported H.R. 1256 when it passed the House by a vote of 307 to 97 on June 12th. It now awaits the President's signature.

Please let me know if I may be of any future assistance.

Sincerely,

David Dreier

Better, although I don't agree with all the provisions of H.R. 1256. Besides, it's about tobacco, not our devices.

 

[Surf Monkey]

"While we appreciate the risks of smoking, products like this can be marketed only after thorough testing."

That's the core contradiction right there. Smoking HAS been tested and proven to kill, yet it's allowed to remain on the market. PVs have only been subject to some testing and have been shown NOT to cause the same range of issues as smoking, yet they're on the verge of being forbidden.

 

[OutWest]

"While we appreciate the risks of smoking, products like this can be marketed only after thorough testing."

That's the core contradiction right there. Smoking HAS been tested and proven to kill, yet it's allowed to remain on the market. PVs have only been subject to some testing and have been shown NOT to cause the same range of issues as smoking, yet they're on the verge of being forbidden.

Not to mention all the various dietary supplements out there that are marketed without having to be tested. I saw a new one (at least, new to me) at the grocery store the other day. It was a mix of vitamins and such being sold as a hangover remedy.

I just got a letter from my congressman that had nothing to do with what I contacted him about. I called and gave his aid an earful because every time I've contacted his office I've gotten a response that had nothing to do with what I contacted them about.

 

[gotthelife4u]

Not to mention all the various dietary supplements out there that are marketed without having to be tested. I saw a new one (at least, new to me) at the grocery store the other day. It was a mix of vitamins and such being sold as a hangover remedy.

That makes me think of Hydroxicut. It took someones death and others with liver complications to get the FDA attention. If only there was a lobby for supplements no one would care.

 

[brandeeashlynn]

Well if they are illegal to sell here in the states then i will order from overseas and pray that it does not get seized at the border. I guess then I can be clear I am not breaking the law

 

[Surf Monkey]

No one using or selling these products is breaking the law at the moment (with the possible exception of Smoking Everywhere, which made unsupportable health claims about the product.)

 

[gotthelife4u]

I bet if smoking everywhere and all of the others that made those claims and look like a analog were never around we wouldn't have this problem.

 

[Surf Monkey]

I think the government would have gotten involved eventually anyway, but the SE health claims and the decision to make them look like cigarettes got the ball rolling far sooner than it had to. Making them look like cigarettes is completely understandable from a marketing perspective, so I doubt we could have avoided that. But the SE health claims? That was completely out of line and set us back dramatically.

 

[gotthelife4u]

I agree with you surf along with people vaping wherever they wanted and when asked to stop putting up a fight. I know we can be a rowdy bunch but sometimes I think you just need to take it on the chin and move on.

 

[Surf Monkey]

Totally. I'm a big advocate of vaporing in public, but if I get even a hint of push back I put the PV away or move to a designated smoking area. Making people angry is not a good tactic. Making them aware is.

 

[gotthelife4u]

yeah I tried to vape at a bar with a buddy but the bouncer said that would freak out the owner so we just went out front with the analog smokers. I did get to field lots of questions from drunks which needless to say was interesting.

 

[Surf Monkey]

Yeah, I get that all the time. I had a guy telling his friends that "Each cartridge has like a whole carton worth of smoke in it! And they're only $5 each!" I tried to correct him, but there's no reasoning with drunks sometimes. At least he was enthusiastic about the PV. It's just a shame that he was ill informed about them.

 

[renderwerks]

No one using or selling these products is breaking the law at the moment (with the possible exception of Smoking Everywhere, which made unsupportable health claims about the product.)

Agree - but the FDA is hinting towards classifing them as a drug delivery device - if you don't use nic, it's not delivering any drug. Similar to what Canada has done. I think the nic juice may be more in question. I'm stocking up on unflavored nic, just in case... I can make my own flavors.

I bet if smoking everywhere and all of the others that made those claims and look like a analog were never around we wouldn't have this problem.

The problem may have taken longer to get rolling, but I think it was bound to happen.

As far as some looking like analogs, I understand that. When I first started looking for one, I wanted one that would go as far as it could to replace analogs; look and all. After researching, I decided that performance was going to help me more than looking like what I used to smoke. I have black and stainless 510's, and haven't missed analogs at all.

Totally. I'm a big advocate of vaporing in public, but if I get even a hint of push back I put the PV away or move to a designated smoking area. Making people angry is not a good tactic. Making them aware is.

Couldn't have said it better. I'll sometimes make an effort to introduce myself and explain what I have and the benefits of it. The first thing I try and get across is 1) no tobacco, 2) no carcinogens, 3) the "smoke" is liquid vapor, like a fog machine. I usually walk away with a thumbs up from them.

Thanks for the replies so far; a good conversation.

 

[gotthelife4u]

Thanks for the replies so far; a good conversation. [/quote]


Give it time knowing this place, it could degrade at a moments notice

 

[Bones]

Yea - I've said it many times now but will say it again - In the end there is no way they will be able to ban the devices - same as bongs - just relabel the usage and keep it away from the juices - don't call it an e-cig and it could be almost anything else - but the JUICE - ahh the Juice - I give up on trying to speculate - I'm gonna put in a big order this week from China and keep my fingers crossed that it makes it to me and that it lasts long enough for them to make up their bureaucratic minds -

 

[renderwerks]

Yea - I just ordered 60ml of 48mg unflavored from vapeme.com. I'll make orders every payday till I have lots in the freezer.

I'm stocking up on hardware as well.

I'll still order my regular vape from Johnson Creek and put the unflavored away for a "non foggy" day...