The future of vaping

Status
Not open for further replies.

madjack

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Aug 17, 2011
2,394
1,027
70
Central Louisiana
I think if BT/BG gets involved we will see the death of innovation in this industry and something like disposables and Blu type e-cigs get locked in as the defacto standards...much more control/money from the end product that way for both BT/BG ...I also fear the addition of a zillion chemicals into juice...much the way reg tobacco is today, all in the name of taste and safety(chemical preservation substances like nitrites/nitrates)...there will be nothing beneficial about it...if the FDA regs hit the kiosks and gas station ciggys and left the "home" market alone, that possibly might be beneficial...but don't hold your breath on that one............
madjack:2cool:
 

Cool_Breeze

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Apr 10, 2011
4,115
4,289
Kentucky
Very true. Most of these posts turn into 'I hate the goverment' and it probably turns off 1/2 the people that might otherwise offer support. I think it helps the overall cause if it's kept as apolitical as possible. If possible.

A hostile or confrontational attitude, whether that be toward government, the pharmaceutical industry or the tobacco industry, does no good. Government may ultimately decide our fate. Open aggravation of the pharmaceutical industry could cause them to dig in and attempt to go for bounty on their own part and they have an established relationship with the FDA. While association with the tobacco industry may bring unwanted attention to us, they none-the-less may offer improvements. We needn't embrace them, but hostility helps us none. They are and will continue to be players in the larger scheme of things, if not in the United States, world-wide for certain. A 'known evil,' and established may be more comfortable in some ways than a new and unknown murky industry associated by some commonality of product.

I still don't understand what you want to the juice suppliers to do or how that what would be enforced.

In the best of worlds, matters would stay as they are now...free commerce and no direct regulation. It seems to be the predominant mindset among many participants in ECF that taxation is inevitable. I think alternatives can be considered.

For government to become involved in regulation and taxation, there must be health, welfare and safety concerns...at least to justify intervention. If the e-nicotine industry gets serious about avoiding government control, they must take action. Obviously such action needs to be focused upon the health, welfare and safety concerns of nicotine.

The industry needs to identify the concerns of supply, distribution and quality control among others. A positive approach that assures authority, 'We understand your concerns and here's what we can do,' will more likely be better received than hostility.

Among the things that can be done by the industry are

oversight of the supply and distribution process of e-nicotine

Standards regarding qualities of e-juice

Standards for preparation of e-juice

Safety guidelines for home-mixers and end users

No doubt this list could be expanded.

If the industry will take the lead in this rather than wringing our hands, fretting and commiserating about the terrible taxes and regulations that will be laid upon us, some of the fears expressed on these matters may not materialize.

Rather than hurling epitaphs at "the antis," and attempting to counter every word that might not be in our favor, our leadership needs to develop a positive and pro-active relationship with authority, define the concerns least they be defined for us and offer solutions least they be dictated to us.

Self-regulation from within an industry is not necessarily a panacea and it is not without costs. However, self-regulation may be the only thing we have to offer.
 

Uncle Willie

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
May 27, 2011
2,395
101,515
Meet Me in St Louie Louie
Rather than hurling epitaphs at "the antis," and attempting to counter every word that might not be in our favor, our leadership needs to develop a positive and pro-active relationship with authority, define the concerns least they be defined for us and offer solutions least they be dictated to us.

Self-regulation from within an industry is not necessarily a panacea and it is not without costs. However, self-regulation may be the only thing we have to offer.

Wise words ..........
 

DC2

Tootie Puffer
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 21, 2009
24,161
40,973
San Diego
Rather than hurling epitaphs at "the antis," and attempting to counter every word that might not be in our favor, our leadership needs to develop a positive and pro-active relationship with authority, define the concerns least they be defined for us and offer solutions least they be dictated to us.
Who is our leadership? And what authority should they develop a positive relationship with?
 

DC2

Tootie Puffer
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 21, 2009
24,161
40,973
San Diego
Is there a vaping industry trade group?
There have been various attempts, but not for the right reasons if you ask me.

The first real attempt is now defunct, which is probably a good thing in that case.
Other attempts have not gotten off the ground.

And the current attempt is not representative of the best interests of the industry as a whole from what I hear.
I would look up the history and the names, but I've got to take off shortly.
:(
 

Cool_Breeze

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Apr 10, 2011
4,115
4,289
Kentucky
Who is our leadership? And what authority should they develop a positive relationship with?

Leadership might be found in industry-friendly organizations...some of which have participants in ECF. I mentioned that government (perhaps FDA) may decide our ultimate fortune. That's one entity to consider a possible authority. As well, positive relations with the Pharmaceutical and Tobacco industries might prove useful at some point. They certainly have a wealth of experience that the e-nicotine industry does not have. A positive relationship needn't be considered an endorsement.
 

DC2

Tootie Puffer
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 21, 2009
24,161
40,973
San Diego
I'm still getting ready to leave, but I wanted to pop back in and see if you had responded...

I am all for positive relations with Big Tobacco, if they make sense, because they are the enemy of my enemy.
But as far as I can tell Big Pharma hates everything about us and will do anything in their power to completely eliminate us.

And they basically pay the FDA and the "health" groups to do their bidding, so I'm not seeing any possibility of positive relations there.
I'd love for you to convince me otherwise, along with suggestions of how to actually go about it.

As far as the talk of a trade association, we've all been saying that for years now.
I hope to see such a thing happen in my lifetime.

As for where I personally think we have any chance, it is in the power of numbers.
It is in a voice so loud and passionate that nobody can help but hear us and pay attention.

Either that, or maybe Big Tobacco can save us.
 

Cool_Breeze

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Apr 10, 2011
4,115
4,289
Kentucky
You make some interesting points regarding the Pharmaceutical industry. I don't think it does any good to be publicly combative towards them. ...better to just ignore them and put energy elsewhere, if they are hostile. Of course if they petition 3rd parties such as the FDA against us, we need to address such as the FDA.
 

DC2

Tootie Puffer
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 21, 2009
24,161
40,973
San Diego
Of course if they petition 3rd parties such as the FDA against us, we need to address such as the FDA.
Well, here is how it went down as far as I understand it...

The Big Pharmaceutical companies, through the Robert Woods Johnson Foundation, help fund all the "health" organizations.
In some cases, like Campaign For Tobacco Free Kids, they pretty much founded the organization.
The New Corporate America Business Model

And those organizations urged the FDA to eliminate electronic cigarettes by declaring them a drug device.
Which prompted the FDA to start seizing shipments.

If it weren't for Judge Leon's ruling in the case of FDA vs Smoking Everywhere, we would have already lost.

Now the "health" organizations are taking a different approach.
They are trying to convince health boards around the country to include electronic cigarettes in smoking bans.
They use propaganda, scare tactics, and lies to try and convince health boards and the public that electronic cigarettes are dangerous.

We have people in the trenches fighting these efforts, and even winning quite often.

In the meantime, the FDA is taking a different approach.
We will have to see where their intention to regulate electronic cigarettes as tobacco products will take us.

We have people in the trenches trying to urge the FDA to take a reasonable and responsible approach.
All indications thus far are that the FDA isn't even reading the same book we are, let along close to being on the same page.

What we need, in my opinion, is more people in the trenches.
And more people supporting them.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread