Take a look at the guidelines for manufacturer's regarding tobacco and SE (905j I think) , it states specific points for construction and heating elements
FDA bans four cigarette products, rules them not substantially equivalent to a product marketed before Feb 15, 2007
- Thread starter Bill Godshall
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Take a look at the guidelines for manufacturer's regarding tobacco and SE (905j I think) , it states specific points for construction and heating elements
We can sit here and throw around what the FDA could do, and ignore what they HAVE done. In case you forgot, FDA said in August '13 that they will pass regulation on e-cigs in October '13, yet here we are vaping. On the subject of FDA banning our delivery device, I'm sure they watch DEA ban glass pipes, ....s/hookahs, and small scales. Oh, wait, DEA COULDN'T ban those because they provide other uses (just like your mech mod can be used for other things, like GG's flashlight attachment). Only thing FDA could ban is the juice. Again, juice has been around since 2003 and I can gaurantee the company has the information the FDA needs, the reason "Bill" hasn't gotten it is because to the company he is a NOBODY. They aren't going to turn over business info to some random guy who claims he's doing it for their benefit, true or not. It is never good business practice to give out info to anybody outside goverment agencies. I have done my research, but not on CASAA. It is bad research to go to a baise site, even if it leans your way.
Again, Big Tobacco is NOT behind it. They are getting into this market and no, not just with cig-a-likes. I know 1 company that will be releasing their own line of juice and another creating their own VV/VW device. BT knows who is spending the millions of dollars in the industry and it isn't cig-a-like users.
I have only been a member of THIS site for a few days, I've been lurking for months and only reason I joined was to try and find vapers in TX (which was a waste of time as nobody posts in the Texas forums, too hard to find in the maze of sub-menus) and stumbled upon these threads. Don't judge a book by its cover, or you'll end up getting lost in its pages.
Again, Big Tobacco is NOT behind it. They are getting into this market and no, not just with cig-a-likes. I know 1 company that will be releasing their own line of juice and another creating their own VV/VW device. BT knows who is spending the millions of dollars in the industry and it isn't cig-a-like users.
I have only been a member of THIS site for a few days, I've been lurking for months and only reason I joined was to try and find vapers in TX (which was a waste of time as nobody posts in the Texas forums, too hard to find in the maze of sub-menus) and stumbled upon these threads. Don't judge a book by its cover, or you'll end up getting lost in its pages.
Bill,
Thanks for pointing us to this article. Reading how a product was banned under this "substantially equivalent" first hand, I now have a much better understanding of the concern you've expressed all along.... a bit of a "light bulb moment" in understanding how this process works and how it COULD apply to e-cigs. Bravo, sir, and thanks again for all you do here.
Thanks for pointing us to this article. Reading how a product was banned under this "substantially equivalent" first hand, I now have a much better understanding of the concern you've expressed all along.... a bit of a "light bulb moment" in understanding how this process works and how it COULD apply to e-cigs. Bravo, sir, and thanks again for all you do here.
This is a ridiculous comparison to the idea of legislation on ecigs. This company was producing tobacco cigarettes in flavors such as chocolate, cherry, or mango. They are produced in several counties in south east Asia. They consist of tobacco wrapped in tendu or temburni leaves and tied with colorful strings. They have a higher amount of nicotine and tar and produce more carbon monoxide than traditional cigarettes, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. This is a group of individuals from south-east Asia trying to circumvent US laws to sell a product that is more harmful than cigarettes already sold in this country (and avoid paying for taxes and licensing required of US manufactures).
If we are to keep ecigs and the like legal and unregulated we need to focus on the fact that they are less not more harmful than tabacco products. Aligning ourselves with greedy, fly by night manufactures selling a harmful product does nothing for our cause.
If we are to keep ecigs and the like legal and unregulated we need to focus on the fact that they are less not more harmful than tabacco products. Aligning ourselves with greedy, fly by night manufactures selling a harmful product does nothing for our cause.
Last edited:
"This is a ridiculous comparison to the idea of legislation on ecigs."
No, the Substantially Equivalent rule could apply to e-cigs just as easily, so the comparison is not meant to compare e-cigs to the products taken off the market, just that the same rule could apply.
"This company was producing tobacco cigarettes in flavors such as chocolate, cherry, or mango."
As far as the company producing cigarettes in flavors such as chocolate, cherry or mango......sounds a lot like the flavors we can get in e-liquid.
"This is a group of individuals from south-east Asia trying to circumvent US laws to sell a product that is more harmful than cigarettes already sold in this country (and avoid paying for taxes and licensing required of US manufactures).
Well the ANTZ could say just about the same thing about e-cig manufacturers. As a matter of fact other than saying they are more harmful than cigs they just say they don't know how harmful. But the rest of the quote is just what they are saying.
" Aligning ourselves with greedy, fly by night manufactures selling a harmful product does nothing for our cause."[/I]
No one is aligning e-cigs with the product pulled or the manufacture of that product. The case was shown as how the SE regulation can be used against e-cigs.
Bill Godshall is certainly not a "nobody". He has dedicated his life as founder and Executive Director of Smokefree Pennsylvania to work with many levels of government to help develop and pass smoking laws. He knows more about the legislative process than he has time to explain.
If you do a little more research, I think you'll find his work speaks for itself. The fact that he keeps us informed on the legislative tripe out there, and helps us learn how to combat it, speaks volumes since he is very much against smoking, but quite gung-ho for e-cigarettes.
He is very much a friend to e-cigarettes and this community - and this community is very protective of him.
This line of discussion ends here.
Last edited:
Go to the CASAA web site, join and support CASAA. It was started by about 9 ECF members back in 2009 when the FDA first tried to ban vaping nationwide. You can click on the banner at the bottom of my post to go directly to CASAA.
Already a member, not sure how to support other than by word of mouth when saving pennies to move and remodel a house is all.
Thank you for being a member. If you ever get a little extra, CASAA definitely could use it. But being a member is the most important part, keeping track of issues and writing your elected officials.
Bill, I HAD one of the early smoking anywhere ecigs that was manufactured in 2007 but im not sure if I still have it and the charger. I will check to see, but it may have been disposed of last year. Hopefully I can find it for you.
I had one too, possibly circa 2008, but I will look anyway... damn being a packrat
Reason.com's comments on FDA and tobacco regulation, specifically on processing substantial equivalency application:
FDA Cigarette Regulations Protect Big Tobacco, Not Public Health - Reason.com
FDA Cigarette Regulations Protect Big Tobacco, Not Public Health - Reason.com
haha, i dont like throwing anything away. i either find a use for it later, or it becomes collectable has been my experience with things so i do not like throwing away things.
I WAS able to locate my old Smoking Everywhere ecig. i have PM'd Bill to let him know i found it, and to see what he wants to do.
i only have the battery and 1 atomizer (without the yellow mouthpiece that had the polyfil, that was lost a long time ago) so there is no charger for it. but if what i have will help im more than happy to send it to Bill.
Just posting this here to update the others in the thread.
Still searching here, working and working on moving so who knows what might turn up... a constitution that's actually followed?!
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
