Fda Blunts E-Cigarette Claims

[Christopher]

GlaxoSmithKline Plc's Nicorette gum was the top-selling brand-name nicotine-replacement drug for the year ended in June, with $144.6 million in sales, or 12 percent of the $1.2 billion smoking-cessation market, according to IMS Health Inc., a research company in Norwalk, Conn.

I think we can see why they might view the electronic cigarette as a threat. Marketed by companies as a cession device or not.

http://www.ohio.com/business/103505939.html

[Jkimbo]

I think we can see why they might view the electronic cigarette as a threat. Marketed by companies as a cession device or not.

http://www.ohio.com/business/103505939.html

I fail to see the problem if companies stop advertising ecigs as ways to quit smoking! Market them simply as ecigs, no other claims.

What hurt the industry was such claims. Clearly they did not think that one all the way thru. Other claims that hurt us was the smoke any where claims. Clearly we can't and this invites adding confusion in no smoking areas.

What's ironic is that the whole world has gone mad regarding ecigs and lost all sense of logic! Cigarettes which are 4000 more times more dangerous, and do not have child proof safty caps and and be picked up off the ground often already lit by children is not seen as a threat, yet they have focused on ecigs in a evil way!

WTF is going on here!?

[Uma]

Human testing? Testimonies aren't enough... word of mouth. Yet symantics can get them banned. wait. Testimonies can get them banned too. No matter what is said or done, they can get banned. That says a lot about the politics of this whole thing.

Edited September 29, 2010 by Uma

[Popsicle]

Human testing? Testimonies aren't enough... word of mouth. Yet symantics can get them banned. wait. Testimonies can get them banned too. No matter what is said or done, they can get banned. That says a lot about the politics of this whole thing.

That's so true. Look at how many people electronic cigarettes have killed. I believe the tally is zero. It's not a matter of "We messed up here, messed up there, should have done that," because it is all politics.

[BirdDog]

Look at how many people electronic cigarettes have killed. I believe the tally is zero.

This isn't directed at you, but anyone that makes that statement. That statement has bothered me for the longest time and what I am about to say is probably going to make me sound like I am on the side of the FDA. I am not on the side of the FDA or any other person out there that thinks we need extreme testing on the ecig.

We can't go about spouting off that ecigs have not killed anyone. They have only been available to the masses for the last few years and the numbers of users is growing fast. Sure we all have had better health since we started, but is this only short term or will something come along in 5 years? It is kind of hard to prove because most ex-smokers will have some health complications from smoking, even if they quit 20 years ago. We really don't know if anyone has died from ecigs, like overdosing on nicotine, or continuing the effects of emphysema and COPD at a slower rate. Not every ecig user belongs to a public forum. I guess what I am getting at is we need to stop making the claim that ecigs are not killing anyone. To me this statement runs hand in hand with the statement it is a quit smoking cessation product. Just my 2 cents.

[Jkimbo]

Do the math.

tobacco = 4000 chemicals

e liquids = 2 main chemicals

We can use the death statistics from tobacco related deaths and sort of get an idea that there will be at the very least, fewer deaths caused by ecigs.

I think it's a valid statement to use and further sheds light on the goofy way they are treating ecigs and ignoring all the things we do know about cigarettes!

They piss and moan about child proof caps on juice bottles but never mind all the cigarette buts children can pick up off the ground and many still burning too!

It is all politics!

[Popsicle]

Do the math.

tobacco = 4000 chemicals

e liquids = 2 main chemicals

We can use the death statistics from tobacco related deaths and sort of get an idea that there will be at the very least, fewer deaths caused by ecigs.

I think it's a valid statement to use and further sheds light on the goofy way they are treating ecigs and ignoring all the things we do know about cigarettes!

They piss and moan about child proof caps on juice bottles but never mind all the cigarette buts children can pick up off the ground and many still burning too!

It is all politics!

You pretty much wrote my reply.

I kept trying to elaborate, but I almost said something about smoking cessation that is never to be spoken, EVER. Instead, you just get a digital high-five.

[Uma]

After reading the docket today, it's pretty obvious (imho) that they're wanting to nudge the retailers out of business so that the big pharma can take over. this idea has been floating around for some time, from the past comments and nonsense the FDA has strewn forth. But now it's practically word for word. Big Pharma has lots of money to lose if they don't close down all the other retailers. IMHO Big Pharma will allocate our fix, dilute our fix, add crappioly to our fix, make it harmful in other ways so that they can proceed with the warning lables of using their product and sound oh so professional. Maybe we can come up with our own warning labels: Might cause happiness, a pimple or two, possible elevated blood pressure, possible racing heart alerting your body it can celebrate and cut back on it's nicotine level, might take away your wheezing because you're not inhaling smoke and tar anymore, and you might accidentally blow out a smoke... excuse me... a vape ring now and then. IMHO

[Popsicle]

Big Pharma will allocate our fix, dilute our fix, add crappioly to our fix, make it harmful in other ways so that they can proceed with the warning lables of using their product and sound oh so professional.

You just nailed my number one main concern that I have had this whole time. We can throw around the word "regulation" because it sounds like a good thing, but it's not inherently good or bad. In this case, it is going to be bad. They "regulate" cigarettes and they contain thousands of chemicals that do nothing but bad.

They said that they found liquid with components of antifreeze in it; well once they finish with it, it will contain a lot worse.

[upStomp]

Y'all got on this boat for different reasons, but y'all come to the same place. So now I'm asking more of you than I have before. Maybe all. Sure as I know anything, I know this - they will try again. Maybe on another world, maybe on this very ground swept clean. A year from now, ten? They'll swing back to the belief that they can make people... better. And I do not hold to that. So no more runnin'. I aim to misbehave.

--Malcolm Reynolds