LaceyUnderall

I wanted to interject here: Keenan - Your letter is great. Why? Because it is very important that while many have accidentally quit tobacco, right now we stay focused on the general importance of his product and that is an excellent alternative to tobacco cigarettes... that we as American's should have the freedom to choose whatever it is we want, especially the perceived harm to ourselves is minimal and to those around us is none. I strongly suggest that right now, if you are in California, you get your thoughts to the Governor and provide him with documentation to back up those thoughts: ie the Exponent report. I have a copy of this and am extremely willing to share it. Just ask.

Here are all the numbers for Cali's Governor's Office: http://gov.ca.gov/interact Governor's Office: Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger State Capitol Building Sacramento, CA 95814 Phone: 916-445-2841 Fax: 916-558-3160 ( new number ) District Offices: Fresno Office 2550 Mariposa Mall #3013 Fresno, CA 93721 Phone: 559-477-1804 Fax: 559-445-5328 Los Angeles Office 300 South Spring Street Suite 16701 Los Angeles, CA 90013 Phone: 213-897-0322 Fax: 213-897-0319 Riverside Office 3737 Main Street #201 Riverside, CA 92501 Phone: 951-680-6860 Fax: 951-680-6863 San Diego Office 1350 Front Street Suite 6054 San Diego, CA 92101 Phone: 619-525-4641 Fax: 619-525-4640 San Francisco Office 455 Golden Gate Avenue Suite 14000 San Francisco, CA 94102 Phone: 415-703-2218 Fax: 415-703-2803 Washington D.C. Office 134 Hall of the States 444 North Capitol Street NW Washington D.C. 20001 Phone: 202-624-5270 Fax: 202-624-5280 I STRONGLY suggest that if you are serious about not letting the California bill become law... you DO something about it. As the Governor has UNTIL October 10th to veto this legislation... then getting information to him immediately is of the utmost importance. Anyone live in San Diego and belong to the 52nd District? YOU NEED TO CONTACT YOUR CONGRESSMAN! He is a vaper who might be able to get you in to see the Governor... You never know. If you write your letters and you want links to certain studies... then let me know. The first study that I would most certainly include is the Exponent Response to the FDA's study. http://e-cig.org/pdfs/Response-to-the-FDA-Summary.pdf

Compenstine - I don't think the persons responsible for this participate here... however, if you are interested you are looking for Bonniegirl, JustJulie Tazcat Lika TheIllustratedMan And they can be found at www.righttovape.com OR at www.e-cigarette-forum.com (Sorry Chris for putting links to other forums ). If you PM any of them with your name, etc, they will respond. Also... if you are interested in volunteering on a regular basis... I would certainly stop into Right to Vape http://www.righttovape.com/right-to-vape-activism/looking-for-some-warm-bodies-who-want-to-roll-up-their-sleeves-and-get-to-work!/ This link explains who and what they expect from their volunteers.

If it is about the children.... Also... there was a study done in the 30's where they PUMPED pg into a children's ward at a hospital. They also had a wing they used as the control where the did not put pg into the air. (vapersforum link as suggested by Doofusman will provide you with the pdf of this study) These children suffered from a multitude of serious ailments and they found that in the pg ward, the children were 85% less likely (something of that nature) to suffer chest infections as compared to the other wing. This of course, is huge considering that with compromised immune systems, a chest infection is deadly. Also, pg is found in everything from cigarettes to toothpaste AND if pg were so deadly, it is for certain Disney would not pump massive amounts into the faces of young children, infants and the elderly DAILY in their parades around the world. (I have no link to this, however, I witnessed it first hand... and if Disney can safely pump non-food grade (i assume) pg into the crowd, then my guess is that they researched this pretty deeply for liability purposes... and ours is food grade which is held to higher standards for production). They also use fog for Mickey's Not So Scary Halloween where it literally fills the streets, knee high... which young children are knee high... In looking for you anything that would tell us about their fog... I did find this "article/blog post" of someone else's experience... http://www.yesterland.com/msepfinal.html

In a nutshell - This submission by consumers stated that: A. The FDA does not have the right to just make up whatever intended use they want - however, based on the new tobacco laws, the FDA does have the right to regulate the ecig as a tobacco product. B. Cited the example of Ariva where a petition was sent to the FDA encouraging Ariva to be treated as an NRT and not a tobacco product and in 2003, the FDA said "Nope, sorry, based on the lack of any marketing claims that this cures, treats, or mitigates a disease, this is not an NRT but a tobacco product." There is legal precedence that the FDA has in fact, turned away a product from it's regulation before. C. Consumers should have the right to chose an alternative to burning tobacco and they musn't be forced to quit. D. Discounted every comment made by ASH in their brief as irrelevant, misleading or unfactual. What does this do? It gives consumers the last word in this case and that word is that the ecig is NOT an NRT and should not be considered one. Now... what happens from here is that the Judge decides if he is going to keep ASH's brief, the consumer brief, throw them both out, whatever. Then the judge will decide and rule.

Lika posted this at VF and ECF: On behalf of the Alliance of Electronic Smokers I would like to take this opportunity to announce the attached Amicus brief was filed yesterday by members of our community. The group name is nothing more than a name created by a group of consumers for the purpose of filing the brief - that's what ad hoc is. Our attorney filed on a pro bono basis and was procured by one of our own members. Please understand that we would have loved to ask more people to join in our efforts but time was of the utmost importance. I realize many of you will have questions and we will do our best to answer them. Some of the members that filed that are also members of this forum are: Bonniegirl, JustJulie Tazcat Lika TheIllustratedMan There are other members as well but they do not wish to be named at this time. Of any of the names mentioned above you can PM them for additional information and each has agreed to disclose their real names if requested. While we had to move quickly to get this filed we wanted to give our community the opportunity to be heard. In that respect we hope to have represented the consumer as a whole. ***** For those who are interested in reading the brief, which was originally in PDF form, we have transposed it on our blog and you can read it here: http://www.e-cig.org/2009/09/10/electronic-cigarette-smokers-weigh-in-on-fda-lawsuit/ There is a downloadable PDF available at the bottom so you can save it and spread! Enjoy! It is freaking fabulous!

Well... I thought about that... however, with the equivalent of 300 cigarettes, you wouldn't have a battery and an atomizer dead. At least I wouldn't hope so! Now, if we did a picture with say: 300 cigarettes = 1 week for me x lets say average use of battery and atomizer on the low end 2 months so 8 weeks... I would need 2400 cigarette butts, 120 cigarette boxes, 12 cartons, 1 battery, 1 atomizer, 8 glass jars, 40 dead carts and their wrappers (and I could technically do fewer carts considering they are reusable... but still... to be on the honest/clean side... this is what it would be). I don't know if I could get all of those cigarette butts together. That's really kind of gross! Even smoking 5 cigarettes a day, I would need almost 6 weeks to come up with that number of cigarette butts. I don't know if I can make that kind of commitment LOL. PS: As far as the bottle... I don't recommend people reusing them... the more experienced vapors or those who like to mix their own or what have you... yes... but those who are just straight up esmokers, buying their product as they would cigarettes, this might be too much for them and heaven forbid they find other uses for their bottles that once contained nicotine... washed or not.

Found this on ECF: http://forum.thedailyshow.com/tds/board/message?board.id=story_suggestions&message.id=12976&jump=true#M12976 Start posting your responsible requests!!! If we can get picked up on the Daily Show, that could be HUGE!

Sorry to hear about your friend... it looks like he made the most of life while he was here Condolences.

That's craziness! Sheer craziness!

Includes a great picture of what the waste from 300 cigarettes is compared to one, 15ml bottle of eliquid that should yield the equivalent of 300 cigarettes, based on using 2-3 drops to get the equivalent of 7-14 puffs depending on the smoker. So I should also mention that the smell taking this picture was so bad that I almost couldn't take it.... Had to stand back and zoom in! Yuck! The E-Cigarette: A More Eco-Friendy Way To Smoke PS: This is in no offense to RJR's Camel Brand. We actually encouraged our friends who were Philip Morris smokers to switch because of the tobacco bill and this is what they have saved up for us! If they couldn't go ecig... then they certainly shouldn't support PM. Diggable? http://digg.com/d312mYj

Thanks to VocalEK and Frederick on ECF for pointing me to this. www.Regulations.gov is currently taking comments regarding the new Tobacco Regulations to be put in place. While some of the comments are well, totally uneducated attempts at having an opinion LOL... others are not to be missed. Dr. Siegel, brilliant doctor advocate for the PV... here is his response: http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#documentDetail?R=09000064809fa134 To submit your comment: http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#submitComment?R=09000064809e74eb To review comments: http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#docketDetail?R=FDA-2009-N-0294 Please remember, and I know everyone here will, but keeping your emotions in check and your facts straight send the clearest message. Edit: My comment not posted yet: Tobacco use has been a widely debated topic for many years. There is no doubt in my mind that tobacco harm reduction is a necessity and any regulations that are to be set forth, should keep in mind that there are less harmful products on the market. As an agency that is to consider all things for the public health, IMHO it is very important that we stop this advocacy philosophy of "quit or die" and hopefully, regulation will come that offers adults access to more responsible choices for their nicotine needs. If the agency can keep in mind the Tobacco Harm Reduction philosophy and base regulation upon that, then we could really begin to move forward in this country and start seeing massive reductions in smoking related illness, disease, and death and THAT is what the goal of regulation should be.

"Despite 98 Suicides and 188 Suicide Attempts Reported Among Chantix Users and No Deaths Reported for E-Cigarettes, FDA Would Rather You Use Chantix " Wonderful insight! http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/08/despite-98-suicides-and-188-suicide.html

Thanks Sus. Hopefully others will pick it up. I have posted it where ever I can think of and I know it has made it to digg! So digg away if you can! http://digg.com/d312WvA

"Unfortunately, FDA has not gotten off to a good start. FDA condemnation of electronic cigarettes, in its July 22 press conference, and FDA insistence that electronic cigarettes should be regulated as a drug/device combination rather than as a tobacco product makes no sense from a public health perspective. It flies in the face of FDA laboratory findings on other products already approved by FDA. If one looks at electronic cigarettes as a sentinel for all tobacco products less hazardous than conventional cigarettes – the outlook for FDA action reducing tobacco-related illness and death among current adult smokers is dismal." The full letter is available on our blog... it is a lot of reading but it is definitely worth it! http://www.e-cig.org/2009/08/30/american-association-of-public-health-physicians-writes-on-behalf-of-electronic-cigarettes-to-the-incoming-director-of-the-fda/

Please digg if you are a digger! Electronic Cigarette Association Urges Congress to Make E-Ci "“Our products are not intended for those under the legal smoking age. We are extremely careful to market only to committed, adult smokers looking to avoid the toxins found in combustible cigarettes. We would like to see legislation that will back up our efforts in restricting sales to those underage,” said ECA President Matt Salmon."

You may or may not have seen Rep. Steve Buyer discussing on the House floor the fact that smoking lettuce is as harmful as smoking tobacco because it is the combustion, not the nicotine that is dangerous. Lika, on www.righttovape.com, posted this video in a discussion and it is awesome! It made my day so I thought I would share! Happy Weekend everyone!

I lived in Northern VA for a bit and would love to go back for a visit, we are now in the good old Hoosier State... when I do head out your way for a visit, I will get ahold of you and we will have that beer... or two... or three... because beer is goooood The darker and thicker the better. (I am Irish... what can I say!) Cheers!

Oh Karate... I apologize. I didn't even see the one in caps. I think I automatically turn the vision down when I see shouting. You are totally right. That one is particularly trashy. The other one... while I can totally see where you are coming from... I can't help but agree. Now... I try to not flat out write that they are corrupt... I tend to let the reader figure out that one for themselves... but... as your rant just above, and a beautiful one at that... sometimes we do lose ourselves in the moment... so that one I chalked up to that. There have been times I have left Siegel's blog and needed to excuse myself to the smoking room in the far back of the garage to regain my composure before typing. Vaping certainly doesn't subside every craving. LOL. This guy... simply didn't take time to cool down before posting. I can sympathize. And imagine... maybe he JUST found out! How pissed were you when you first put the whole picture together? I am still fuming... I've just learned to control it. (Hopefully he does too) Still... the first one you are right. Those kind of comments make us look like a bunch of drug addicts without logic who are crying and whining. IMHO, I like nicotine just like my sister, who stops at a coffee house 4 times a day, likes her caffeine! LOL. PS Thanks for the pat on the back. I needed that And on another note... I wonder how long it takes to approve comments?!? Seriously. Mine isn't up yet? Was it too truthful? I didn't think it was aggressive at all. Hmph.

Why do you think that Karate? They weren't that bad, slightly aggressive, but not that bad and someone did post a link to Dr. Siegel which is awesome. Edit: I did notice that they allowed the sellers link to be a link and not the tobaccoanalyis link. Wonder why? I have seen your comments before on articles so I know you have a totally different way of going about it which I completely respect. Just FYI. Here's my response: FDA Approval? Is it really necessary? Once they approve tobacco cigarettes, will all smokers be left to smoke tobacco in peace? What concerns me is the philosophy that we all must quit or die. Why must we quit or die? Why can't there be a category right down the middle that allows people the options of reduced harm products? There are so many products on the market that people are using instead of tobacco cigarettes and that is what we should be focusing on. Not making them look as bad as tobacco cigarettes because they are not. What also concerns me are the restrictions placed on NRT's. Why can't NRT's like the gum and patch be sold where tobacco cigarettes are sold? Shouldn't adults be able to choose how they intake their nicotine? Wouldn't it seem reasonable that one night, after smoking a lot, someone might want a pack of nicotine gum INSTEAD of buying that next pack of cigarettes? I can completely get on board with the idea that the electronic cigarettes should not be sold to minors, they should not be marketed in any other way other than an alternative to tobacco, quality control and safety standards at the manufacturing level are necessary and I can even get on board with a tax rate that is LOWER than traditional cigarettes. There is WAY more to this story than the FDA has said. The FDA has not given the AG's and the public the full story and the tobacco analysis link is a great place to see "The Rest of the Story"... http://www.e-cig.org

Apparently, it wasn't SE who made that comment about looking cool, it was Artie someone... sorry his last name escapes me as I don't have XM. Also, another thing to note is that XM is a paid subscription so IF kids are listening to Howard Stern, then their parents are letting them. The other interesting thing about this PR is that they deliberately left out pertinent information: Where it was filed? By whom? This was all in an attempt to make it look like consumers were suing SE when in fact it appears that the only suit on the table is from the AG's office in Oregon. So... this was ouch a few weeks ago. They are just putting it out there a different way to make it look worse than it really is. Typical.

Hey all! Could be fun!!! And Bill Maher might just love the idea! Just got this email from Bill Maher and thought those interested could weigh in! What do you want Bill and his guests to discuss on Overtime? Submit your question now! http://boards.hbo.com/topic/Maher-Overtime/Submit-Questions-Overtime/2000008052&#msg2000609062

Well... if the media doesn't want to listen, maybe we can get AP to listen. That's crap if they are not allowing the truth to be noted. Shameful. Thanks for backing me on this one Karate. I think it is very important this gets stopped ASAP.

This morning I found several articles reporting a serious piece of misinformation: From: NY county moves to block e-cigarette sales : Health : Community : WSTM NBC3 and http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/economy/ap/53690647.html "But a recent U.S. Food and Drug Administration test of 19 e-cigarette brands found more than half contained a cancer-causing substance." My response in the comments which has not been posted as of yet: From the FDA website: "FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation, Office of Compliance purchased two samples of electronic cigarettes and components from two leading brands. These samples included 18 of the various flavored, nicotine, and no-nicotine cartridges offered for use with these products. These cartridges were obtained in order to test some of the ingredients contained in them and inhaled by users of electronic cigarettes." 19 brands were NOT tested. 2 brands were tested. This is incorrect information you have noted in your article. **** I have also determined that the originator of this misinformation is AP and sent the following email to info@ap.org To whom it may concern: In the recent AP article "Oregon attorney general, New York county move to block electronic cigarette sales" by William McCall, the statement "But a recent U.S. Food and Drug Administration test of 19 e-cigarette brands found more than half contained a cancer-causing substance" is false. From the FDA website: "FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation, Office of Compliance purchased two samples of electronic cigarettes and components from two leading brands. These samples included 18 of the various flavored, nicotine, and no-nicotine cartridges offered for use with these products. These cartridges were obtained in order to test some of the ingredients contained in them and inhaled by users of electronic cigarettes." 19 brands were not tested. 2 brands were tested. This is incorrect information you have noted in your article and it needs to be retracted as it is incorrect. Sincerely, *** If anyone else would like to join in on this, please feel free to email AP. I think it is necessary that we stop the impending wildfire as quickly as possible.

What really gets me about this whole situation is that suppliers and manufacturers have approached the FDA on many occasions (as we did the ATF) and were told they either didn't want anything to do with the ecig OR they ignored us. This could have been handled so differently from the beginning. I noted this in a post at ECF... It is kind of like a kid in the sandbox. He is offered a shovel and a bucket. He doesn't want anything to do with it... He would rather dig with his hands. Then, when he sees what the other kid has built, he decides not only does he want the bucket and the shovel, but he wants the bad-*** castle too! Could you imagine the funds the FDA alone could have put forth towards helping small suppliers and manufacturers, if they had been open to the idea in the first place? Imagine what it is costing them to fight nJoy and SE? Imagine what nJoy and SE could have spent those funds on if the FDA had been a bit more helpful! Yes... hind sight is 20/20, but the regulatory agency hasn't just been ignored by the suppliers/manufacturers, it is the other way around and it is quite alarming that they are twisting this to make it look as if the manufacturers are shady and trying to slip through the system. They made an amendment to the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act for Dietary Supplements, there is no reason they can't do it for the ecig.