A Call For Better Labeling and Hardware vs Juice

[SpeakerPlayNet]

I would like to see Ecig batteries listed by voltage and type, just like AAA's, D's etc. are in the non Ecig world. Part of the reason countries want to regulate things is to protect the consumer who deserves to know what they are buying. The savy PV user here probably knows these things far easier than new PV users.

Chargers should state what volt/amp whatever the charger will take.

I've also seen eLiquids/juice advertised where one has to hunt for how many ml are in the bottle - not always but sometimes. Ingredients should ALWAYS be listed just like food is.

I used to sell soap and incense and supplies for same. We grumbled too at having to list the ingredients but once we learned how to do it properly, as well as what claims we could and could not make it was no big deal and for the most part, thanks to the Soapers' lists out there, we all began to comply in the same way. Those of us who sold fragrance and essential oils also learned to keep MSDS sheets on file (Material and Safety Data Sheets) and sent them to the consumer when requested, another no big deal. We would just block out the name of the company we got them from when sending to the consumer - we got the sheets from the manufacturer.

I don't see how the government can stop the hardware sales unless there are violations in the claims or they are manufactured faulty (and so far probably 99% have been safely manufactured). Where they can come in is the juice. We can grumble all we want but that juice does get into our system and therefore IS a health issue. Manufactured correctly no problem. But what if "YourSmokeJuiceX.com" is manufactured in a facility that is not sanitary, by someone with a spreadable disease who doesn't properly protect the process, the bottles are left uncapped in open air with asbestos floating around just to name some worse case scenarios.

I know most of us have the fear of the government causing the prices to go up as high as Tcigs (traditional cigs) and taxed as heavily as well. Or the person whom brews his own juice and sells it doesn't want any hassles caused by regulating the product. I understand that, but as an eCig user I kind of want to know that what I'm breathing in and that it was manufactured in sanitary conditions. How does "YourSmokeJuiceX.com" actually know one liquid is 18mg and the other 4mg?

I do have to laugh at myself though for smoking Tcigs for 40 years KNOWING the chemicals and cancer causing agents were in there and smoking them anyway. Perhaps the answer lies in buying the equipment and brewing my own for personal use or buying from companies with batch numbers on their products and fancy testing facilities. If Tcigs are allowed with all the known chemicals, how in ATI (or god or Budda or the void or Darth Vader') name can anyone justify not allowing an Ecig to be sold - it's by far a better choice.

Anyway, just throwing this out there. I'm posting this as an alternative POV and it would be nice if replies come but we know if you are a manufacturer or just plain ole consumer making the replies.

Peace -
Chris

 

[erischilde]

there are other complications with the govt stepping in, cost to the manufacturers would prohibit most small companies from doing anything because the testing process on any kind of injestible can be seriously prohibitive.

This is where groups of consumers have to step in, use, and find out what is the best and SHARE that information, boycott the worst of the lots. Democratic buying Forums like these are the best way to protect ourselves, and encourage the development of the PV industry!

 

[JB Goode]

I would like to see Ecig batteries listed by voltage and type, just like AAA's, D's etc. are in the non Ecig world. Part of the reason countries want to regulate things is to protect the consumer who deserves to know what they are buying. The savy PV user here probably knows these things far easier than new PV users.

Chargers should state what volt/amp whatever the charger will take.

Peace -
Chris

I agree with what you said above. There's little info and sometimes no info. The way I found out how to deal with 650 mah batteries was that one day, I checked out some recharable batteries digital cameras. The batteries were AA that I had for a long time. I examined all of the printed info on the 650s and compared them to to the camera batteries. Other than strength, I found that the camera batteries and the 650 batteries were identica types other than the screw in at the end of the pv batteryl. The 650mah were for pv and the camera batteries were 2000mah. The info which was originally on the camera batteries package said that the batteries should be completed drained before recharging. That's why they take so long to recharge--12 hours in a recharger that holds 4 batteries. About 4 to 5 hrs for a 650mah. ( that's how long it takes) All made sense. At least those camera batteries gave lots of info. I have 16 of those camera batteries for approx 6 yrs and have never lost any. That's why I totally drain the 650s. But yes, the info on pvs sucks.
I'm new at this and a bit of more precise info would be appreciated. Just sounding off.
Dave

 

[SpeakerPlayNet]

Yes this board helps with democracy and word of mouth, but none of that assures the conditions of manufacture. It's a buyer beware and use at your own risk type of thing in most cases. I'm just saying that I see two reasons the government is attacking the ecig industry, one I do believe it's a revenue thing but I also think some see it as a true safety issue thing. Do you want that hamburger you have for lunch to be prepared in someone's kitchen and then brought to the restaurant or do you want to know the restaurant kitchen is clean and free of rats and mice, the dishes clean, etc. But what really gets me is that the government doesn't have the right to pull bad meat off the supermarket shelves, it is left up to the beef companies themselves. Since we know smoking kills, I'd rather they focus on changing our food protection laws if they only have time to do one thing.

I'd still like to see the small "YourSmokeJuiceX" company at least post notice on the goodness of their techniques. For example, I used to sell bottles, jars and caps which come in pieces - I always stated the caps were put on immediately and stored and sold with cap on. and protected with clean plastic bags. (These bottles were usually for hand lotions and scrubs, that type of thing).

What I'm saying, or trying to say, is maybe by monitoring ourselves there will be less pressure. We got those same letters (not me personally) about non-compliance and eventually the issue solved itself. We were lucky, we had a few chemists on the board who worked in the cosmetic industry and they shared their knowledge with us about how to label (we could list either no indredient or all ingredients, if we listed generic name for one ingredient, we had to do that for all and vice versa, we couldn't say this lotion would result in younger looking skin because that was a claim which then made it a "drug" subject to FDA regulations.)

The tobacco industry certainly doesn't seem to have to comply with safety in inhaling issues. I just see where improvements could be made right away (labeling laws, etc.) I'm already seeing some improvements with compliance just by changing the wording on website (must be over 18, nicotine is addictive, this is not sold as a smoking cessation device) and none of that "hurt" anybody. I'm suggesting we start with where we are now and give them less to complain about.

 

[DocWyatt]

While I agree with the premise that better labeling is good for all of us so we can make informed decisions, my 2 cents is that it will have exactly zero impact on a ban. This is likely about control and taxation - not health/safety.

Let's assume that liquid ONLY had PG and nicotine and all were properly labeled. Would it matter? No. They want to ban it.

Perhaps I have an exceptionally dim view of their motives, but I see no other possible explanation.

About 30 billion packs of analogs are sold per year in the US. At an average taxation of near $5 a pack (depending on the state - some are more) that is likely $150 billion in tax revenue - per year. $150 billion "might" skew motives.

 

[t9c]

Even regulated food items list "artificial flavorings" on the label, which tells you nothing...and people just don't care, do they? So, if juice suppliers listed their ingredients, it would be: nicotine (%), propylene glycol(%) and/or vegetable glycerin (%) AND "artificial flavorings". Doesn't tell ME anything I don't already know upon ordering.

Given the track record of the fDA (intentional lc f, because food is at the bottom of their interests) I don't think they could control anything with their silly regulations.

 

[rogerdugans]

I am honestly of a split mind on this whole issue.

Historically, business has shown that there will always be a large number who do not concern themselves with customer health and safety whatsoever. Using hazardous ingredients would not be a problem for such companies.

On the other hand, I do NOT believe that MOST companies would conduct themselves that way.

But the other issue to deal with is that this is a fairly new market and the research is not all that thorough as yet, so even the companies that are doing all they can to ensure safe products may be inadvertently missing something.

Some companies actually work towards SETTING standards and DOING the research- these are the ones that I would prefer to give my business to whenever possible.
And I think they are an asset towards preventing an outright ban on eliquids.

While the systems that are in place in the US are far from perfect they were developed for valid reasons and I see it is very likely that they will become involved with our market. The question is this:
will they ban the products we require (without prescriptions anyway) or will they set in place standards and requirements that must be followed.
I think it unlikely that the US government will stay entirely out of things forever.

 

[DocWyatt]

One big problem about the "systems" in place. The "systems" are about money (i.e. taxation and big business). While big corporations moan and groan publicly about regulation - many could not survive without it. Regulation is a huge barrier to entry for small business (why it crushes economies). It creates oligopolies which in turn create higher profit margins for those in the game.

Think of any corporation in any business. Lets say small business wants to compete BUT there is 4800 pages of regulations they must meet. Will this eliminate virtually all "mom and pop's" from competing? Yes. Now lets say little regulation. Big corporations would have 10's of thousands of entrepreneurs to compete against. Their profit margins would go to zero - if not negative.

Big corporations MUST have regulation to survive (or at the very least maintain their margins), and they know it, and why they pay lobbyists a lot of money.

Regulation, in my view, is mostly about control and money. It isn't about you as a consumer. That is the spin for you to buy into the socialist game.

 

[JC Okie]

DocWyatt....what a cynic you are....I totally agree with every word you said. Hey, for some reason I've just now noticed you're an Okie. I'm in Tulsa...you close by?

 

[DocWyatt]

DocWyatt....what a cynic you are....I totally agree with every word you said.

Yeah this is pretty simple stuff. Look at how many "jobs" were created from small business with little regulation in this industry. We have tons of ECF reader families starting their own business, selling product, providing the best customer service ever known and making money.

This "was" how America became an economic force. If you want to create jobs - you reduce the barriers to entry. Unfortunately in the last two years there are FAR more pages of regulation created than any time in history. What many people do not understand is that some estimate that up to 90% of "laws" are not passed by Congress. They are "regulations" imposed by governing bodies, i.e. law. One of the myriad of reasons why I strongly believe our economy is going nowhere fast.

Our government was originally intended to provide a "framework" for opportunity. Regulation does not resemble that concept.

 

[Kevin Freeheart]

Talk is cheap. Not dismissing your arguement, but it will be your buying habits and not your words that dictate this (unless you use the aforementioned gun-in-the-room and if so, shame on you!).

Find a supplier that, as of now, lists all of their ingredients to your satisfaction. Let them know why you are buying from them and continue to do so.

Stop purchasing from companies that do not. Let THEM know why they no longer get your business.

If you do not find a supplier that meets your criteria, become that supplier.

Part of the reason countries want to regulate things

It's very often this regulation that causes crappy product labelling in the first place. The FDA's criteria for "Fat Free" actually allows it to include fat - ONLY government can mix up the meaning of words like that. It's Orwellian.

I can assure you that any American supplier, when asked about their labeling, will tell you it complies with the FDA standard. Most will then go on to tell you they contain "Natural and artificial flavoring, PG and perhaps alcohol". What kind of flavorings? What kind of alcohol? What compounds are present but are below the threshold for regulatory reporting? You'll NEVER see any "legitimate" supplier do this BECAUSE of the laws. Often when a supplier TRIES to do things like that, they're fined and prevented from selling their product because of the laws.

It reminds me of several meat packagers who, during the Mad Cow scares years back, started testing all of their meet at the demands of their customers and were PREVENTED from doing so.

Barred From Testing for Mad Cow, Niche Meatpacker Loses Clients - New York Times

 

[DocWyatt]

Agreed Kevin. Follow the money and you will find the "logic" behind any regulation....

The reason behind no testing for Mad Cow was the ability to sell our meat internationally. One positive test would have meant a ban.... (opps, regulation is for our safety, my mistake).

Also agree that consumers should dictate. If people want definitive labeling they will buy from those that do and companies will rapidly change. I guess I keep confusing the basic concept of capitalism with what we have today however....

 

[rogerdugans]

I understand your arguments and do not entirely disagree.
Never have been a fan of big government, never will be.

However- radical change only comes about through radical action and I do not believe a revolution is likely to take over the US in the near future.

So we have the political government systems that are in place to deal with which are unfortunately financed largely BY big business. The same big businesses that if they had there choice would pay little or no attention to health, safety or standards in any way at all.

Ignoring government and the bureaucracy and refusing to deal within it is simply asking the government to close you down.
Dealing with it and learning how to protect your business and fit it within the standards- especially if it is a NEW industry that currently has little or no government oversight- is the only way to allow that business to continue.

The US government WILL eventually get involved, I have no doubt.
If nobody in the industry takes steps to figure out how to "police themselves" than the terms will be dictated to them by the politicians who are funded by big business.

Industries that find their own methods and standards of self-policing when new generally fare much better than those who ignore all of this.

 

[DocWyatt]

I agree. A ban is being attempted and is likely. They certainly are trying via the courts. Exactly why I have been stocking up. My biggest point was if labeling will prevent this attempt and the answer is clearly no.

However, it is still a good business practice and should be done for that reason.

 

[SpeakerPlayNet]

Actually, not telling me I am purchasing a 501, K808D-1, etc., etc. is more a ploy by the independent ecig biz to keep me buying carts from them at 2 or 3 times the price I can get them elsewhere - etc., etc. until I figure out what to buy elsewhere on my own, through forums such as ECF.

Labeling juices should be no big deal You list the ingredients in order of concentration from the highest ingredient to the lowest. I bet every single juice dealer owns a printer and many of them make their own labels. The fastest way for the government to shut one down would be non compliance with something that doesn't even have to be argued in the gov system because it's already the law.

Some of you are right here, I do exercise my vote by buying Johnson Creek: YouTube - Johnson Creek Enterprises on CBS 58
Not only do they show their very clean lab, you can see they wear gear that protects their product from contamination. I bet if e-juice suppliers are shut down in the U.S. strictly for manufacturing practices, JC will be on of the few still standing. I'd love to find more suppliers and would try them if I felt as confident about what I was inhaling. But as I said before, I still smoked smokes when I knew the dangers so I have no right to preach. My goal is more to try to ward off future news stories ("YourSmokeJuiceX shut down for unsafe manufacturing" - things that will only hurt us who want to see Ecigs made perfectly legal without fear of being taken away.

 

[Kevin Freeheart]

However- radical change only comes about through radical action and I do not believe a revolution is likely to take over the US in the near future

Radical doesn't have to be revolutionary. Also, "secession" falls into radical which means it wouldn't have to impact the entire political landscape of a country.

Ever heard of "radical market anarchism"? Sometimes called Agorism. It's the idea that market action, especially action in defiance of the state, can overcome it.

It requires a willingness to engage in civil disobedience, of course, but that's "radical" without being revolutionary. It's a cause I've decided to take up as an activist.

Someone COULD produce, market and sell anything they wanted. It's the willingness to be seen doing such things that scares MOST people into apoplexy. It would also require a large enough community of like-minded folks that when the banhammer of the law comes down, they're resisted. So far we've got about a thousand activists here and a few businesses have sprung up that offer price-competition due to ignoring legal mandates and engaging in prohibited products. Producing well-labeled flavorings aren't something I'm interested in doing though. I doubt there's enough demand.

Industries that find their own methods and standards of self-policing when new generally fare much better than those who ignore all of this

Even businesses that don't self-regulate. Companies work their butts off for independent certifications. It's almost impossible to buy an electric device in the US without the UL certification even though it's not mandatory. They're just good at what they do and name brands want that certification. Companies vie for Good Housekeeping seal of approvals and all kinds of things like that. Reputation for quality, and lack of, is almost impossible to avoid because "knowing what I buy is safe" is a thing that's very much in demand. If companies don't fill it themselves, certification agencies will.