EU draft directive to be presented on wed 19th Dec

tommy2bad

Dear Mr smartiepants,

Thank you for your question on the upcoming tobacco directive revision.

As a member of the Public Health Committee, Nessa will be working hard on this issue when it comes before her committee in the coming weeks.

As you know the proposal does not ban e-cigarettes it just proposes to regulate them meaning if they a have a certain level of nicotine they have to go through authorisation the same way nicotine patches or gum products have to get authorisation before they are placed on the market.

Nessa also shares the concerns of the Irish Heart Foundation on the issue of electronic cigarettes, which is outlined below.

Thanks again.




Nicotine containing products

The Commission’s Impact Assessment recognises the uncertainty about the health effects of nicotine containing products.

Nicotine-based products (that is, products containing nicotine but which are not tobacco products, such as electronic cigarettes, nicotine gel, drinks, and sweets) are often marketed as alternatives to cigarettes and in some cases as aids to quitting smoking. In the future, these products should only be sold as quitting aids and should be required to comply with specific safety and quality requirements under the regulatory framework imposed on other pharmaceutical products.[1]


[1] Association of European Cancer Leagues and Smoke Free Partnership (2012) Position Paper on Tobacco Products Directive.

Sincerely,

Aidan OSullivan
Parliamentary Assistant

Nessa Childers MEP
European Parliament
60, Rue Wiertz
B-1047 Brussels
Belgium

Nessa is behind this directive and see no reason to change it. Boo for Nessa.
Won't be voting for her.

grindle

tommy2bad wrote: »

Nessa is behind this directive and see no reason to change it. Boo for Nessa.
Won't be voting for her.

Looks like the Irish Heart Foundation needs a talking to as well. I thought these people were supposed to be well read?
Since when does "We're not sure of the risks, it needs testing." translate to "REGULATE!!! Quickly, as if money is vanishing!"?

Nessa is a shítbag of the highest order.

tommy2bad

I've sent a further reply and hope to hear more, wonder if I should tell them I'm publishing their replies?
Come to think of it am I breaking some law??

was.deevey

grindle wrote: »

Looks like the Irish Heart Foundation needs a talking to as well. I thought these people were supposed to be well read?
Since when does "We're not sure of the risks, it needs testing." translate to "REGULATE!!! Quickly, as if money is vanishing!"?

Nessa is a shítbag of the highest order.

Actually they have gone a step further and have decided that basically any nicotine delivery system other than the actual killer cigarettes themselves be marketed as a "stop smoking" devices which fall under medical jurisdiction which is outright lunacy.

Essentially they are saying.

• I can go to a newsagent, buy something that WILL kill me and give me my fix
  
• Or I can now get a prescription for the nicotine "fix" that will not kill me, is not readily available 24/7 and will probably be not available in the strengths needed to get the fix in anything other than crappy cartridges or something which is in no make shape or form addressing the habit, the cost factor or the pleasure that is vaping.

WTF ?

The Commission’s Impact Assessment recognises the uncertainty about the health effects of nicotine containing products.

Nicotine-based products (that is, products containing nicotine but which are not tobacco products, such as electronic cigarettes, nicotine gel, drinks, and sweets) are often marketed as alternatives to cigarettes and in some cases as aids to quitting smoking. In the future, these products should only be sold as quitting aids and should be required to comply with specific safety and quality requirements under the regulatory framework imposed on other pharmaceutical products.[1]

If the commission has reservations about the safety of these aids then why are they allowing them on the market in a pharmaceutical manner in the first place ?

Fishy methinks

grindle

tommy2bad wrote: »

I've sent a further reply and hope to hear more, wonder if I should tell them I'm publishing their replies?
Come to think of it am I breaking some law??

They're public figures providing correspondence in relation to a public consultation.
While their emails would be copyrighted, unless they've said or implied "Keep this between us, it's a secret." and you've agreed to the terms (contract formed) they wouldn't get far in court.

tommy2bad

Look we know that this is about capturing nicotine for the pharmaceutical industry, they have already done this with homeopathic and natural remedies and now want the nic market.
This regulation was written by pharma reps posing as consultants or advisors for the commission, what else did we expect.
I really think this is a done deal, it should have died with the Borge fiasco but the need to placate the pharma lobby(pharma may be Europe's largest industry) is so strong that it was back on the table within 3 months.
In spite of that I'll still have a go at them. I wont be affected personalty, I use a rebuild-able atty and diy juice so all I need to sort is a source of nic base, shouldn't be too hard from China,. What matters is the smokers who haven't yet switched being denied the easy option of switching, the attitude of 'only as a aid to quiting' will cause millions to die as the snus ban has. If ecigs are described as quit aids then the only people they will appeal to are the ones attempting to quit. Most smokers know they should but don't want to so they won't bother with ecigs anymore than they do with patches or inhalers or sprays.

Vaperus

http://news.stv.tv/scotland/210349-should-electronic-cigarette-advert-be-broadcast-on-british-tv/

kiffy

I think the only chance we have to get this proposed directive overturned is after the morons pass it.


If they were taken to the European court of human rights I cant see them winning it, they are denying me/us the basic right to choose the delivery system of nicotine a substance that is not banned, for 39 years (and can still do legally if I so choose) I chose to use tobacco products for the delivery of my nicotine, now they have/are taken away that right, while not banning the use of nicotine, it is a legally used drug and I demand the right to chose what ever delivery system I want not what they say I can use, they cannot stop me using fags and have no idea how much nicotine I consumed (or care) whether I smoked 6 or 66 fags a day, now they are telling me if I don’t want to vape a max of 4mg I have to get a prescription to do something I did for 39 years without any restriction, I have no intension a getting a prescription to do what smokers can do without restriction or what I did up until May 20th.


So their action is a blatant abuse of our human rights, taking away our choice to administer a legal substance. That cant be legal or allowed and hopefully a court would overturn their decision.

was.deevey

Look we know that this is about capturing nicotine for the pharmaceutical industry, they have already done this with homeopathic and natural remedies and now want the nic market.

I have no issues with the pharmaceutical industry making the nicotine juice, in fact that aspect of it will probably be a good thing as we'll know exactly what we're getting in its purest form - they already do it anyhow, so its not like they need new labs to actually manufacture it @ medical grades.

However the pharmacy industry getting involved with what is currently an "adult gratification product", e-cigs, just like the currently legal killer fags and alcohol is beyond me.... its like them selling watered down ethanol as an alternative to vodka.

How long will it take for them to design design "safe" e-cigs that have all the current pleasure aspects of the current ones ?

What price will they be ?

I wont be affected personalty, I use a rebuild-able atty and diy juice so all I need to sort is a source of nic base, shouldn't be too hard from China,

I would not be too sure of that, it would be classed the same as importing prescription pills from canada and no doubt customs will be watching for the liquid.

DubTony

Pharmacia (the then owners of Nicorette) successfully lobbied to have nicotine containing products changed to OTC (over the counter) status not requiring a prescription. They also, unsuccessfully, lobbied to have those products available in places where cigarettes were sold, i.e. newsagents etc.
It makes me wonder just how much influence the tobacco companies have, or is it simply the massive taxes provided by tobacco consumption that makes it OK to sell cigarettes everywhere? (I've read that British smokers provide almost 4 times in taxes what it costs to treat smoking related diseases).
There's no doubt though, that governments have an issue with competing nicotine products. It's kind of ironic that the tax gathering, killer products are sold with little control, while the alternatives, that are much less damaging to health are/will be subject to stringent regulation.

Personally I've tried every NRT product on the market to help me quit cigarettes. Using e-cigs has been the first time I've ever managed for any significant period.

newmark

kiffy

newmark wrote: »

Where the hell did they get the figure of 2,000 active vapers :eek:
Has the UK got more than 325 times more vapers than Ireland, when they only have about 15 times the population. I would have thought Irish vapers were well into 5 figures

was.deevey

It also says the medium Vaper uses 12mg which is also not quite right as the proposed legislation is 4mg TOTAL in a container, not 4ml per ml

Whats with the "is not a smoking substitute" ? .. surely the point is that vaping IS a better long term Smoking alternative or substitute, but should be distinguished from a medicinal device designed to wean you off the fags (which in 90% of cases doesn't work anyhow).

At least the cause is getting some press though

tommy2bad

Yes it's a bit confusing but what she meant by that was that ecigs are not a smoking substitute in the sense that patches or gum is i.e. supplying nic as you wean off. Their something to use instead of smoking.
Funny that Emmer reassured us that they were not banning them when no one accused them of banning. The reply I got from Nessa Childers (also a labor member) had the same reassurance which led me to believe she didn't read my email as I never mentioned a ban or even hinted at one. Methinks theirs a party line on this and Emmer checked it before the quote was given. The crutch bit is all hers I'm afraid.
@Was; It's worse than you think the 4 is a concentration limit, 2 is the limit on any container i.e. 1/2 ml, a detail that means only prefilled cartos and whatever the opposite of XL is, XSmall I suppose. Oh isn't that what the tobacco companies have invested in.....hmmmm I wonder.

kiffy

tommy2bad wrote: »

It's worse than you think the 4 is a concentration limit, 2 is the limit on any container i.e. 1/2 ml, a detail that means only prefilled cartos and whatever the opposite of XL is, XSmall I suppose. Oh isn't that what the tobacco companies have invested in.....hmmmm I wonder.

Not much difference really Tommy 2 or 4 = shi.t or sh.ite
4mg/ml in a 0.5 ml carto, aahh not too bad then will only get through 10 or 12 a day at my liquid rate :mad:

was.deevey

4mg/ml in a 0.5 ml carto, aahh not too bad then will only get through 10 or 12 a day at my liquid rate

Dont forget that awesome burning taste from one outta three

kiffy

was.deevey wrote: »

Dont forget that awesome burning taste from one outta three

Can't wait Wes
Who needs a 30ml bottle of juice that contains 720 mg of nic when soon enough that same bottle will contain just 2mg Luvly Jublee.
Wonder will the price be 360 times cheaper as well

was.deevey

The 100ml bottles of Nic I order have 10000mg in them :-O

kiffy

was.deevey wrote: »

The 100ml bottles of Nic I order have 10000mg in them :-O

That's some fecking throat hit beats my 6mg Maeve

was.deevey

Edit .... not a good idea on a topic about EU directives and such.

ZeRoY

Vaperus wrote: »

Posted on the UK Site

For people who are smoking 30 plus a day 4mg is as much use as a chocolate fireguard
For people who are smoking 20 plus a day 4mg is as much use as a chocolate fireguard.
For people who are smoking 10 plus a day 4mg is as much use as a chocolate fireguard.
For people who are smoking 5 plus a day 4mg is as much use as a chocolate fireguard.
For people who are smoking 2 silkcut a day 4mg = result

Have you tried? And by this I mean try for more than a week say? using 18mg vapouriz at the minute planning on getting down to 11mg also and lower after this .... surely thats the answer? going lower and lower overtime to get down to 4mg which will likely remain legal, etc... ?

ZeRoY

was.deevey wrote: »

It also says the medium Vaper uses 12mg which is also not quite right as the proposed legislation is 4mg TOTAL in a container, not 4ml per ml

The first thing to do when reading those announcement on Website other than the source is to find the source article - In this case its Article 18 of the proposed directive com_2012_788 located HERE

On Page 39 you will find Article 18, extract:

The following nicotine-containing products may only be placed on the market if they were authorised pursuant to Directive 2001/83/EC:
(a) products with a nicotine level exceeding 2 mg per unit, or
(b) products with a nicotine concentration exceeding 4 mg per ml or
(c) products whose intended use results in a mean maximum peak plasma
concentration exceeding 4 ng of nicotine per ml

More OFFICIAL reading HERE

ZeRoY

kiffy wrote: »

That's some fecking throat hit beats my 6mg Maeve

The e-liquid bases are the ingredients that create the visible vapor and the “throat hit” NOT NICOTINE.

tommy2bad

ZeRoY wrote: »

The e-liquid bases are the ingredients that create the visible vapor and the “throat hit” NOT NICOTINE.

No, nicotine causes TH, no doubt about it. It can be replicated with some pepper type stuff but that wont satisfies a nic craving.

grindle

ZeRoY wrote: »

.... surely thats the answer? going lower and lower overtime to get down to 4mg which will likely remain legal, etc... ?

What kind of an attitude is that?

"Jump!"

"How high?"

Why should we just bend over and accept illegitimate nonsense rules? Seriously, why?

"Oh, the government says not to, so..."

What?!?

Honestly, if you can't see the implicit mind-prolapse involved in just accepting whatever some money-grubbing popularity-prostitute decides is okay for you...
Very sad times we live in when we're willing to accept dogshít for dinner.

ZeRoY

tommy2bad wrote: »

No, nicotine causes TH, no doubt about it. It can be replicated with some pepper type stuff but that wont satisfies a nic craving.

Nicotine might have a taste ok but its not what is creating the TH. The TH is provided by the base liquid composition, PG or VG based or even a MIX of both. Flavouring and also Increasing or decreasing Nicotine might result in different TH levels but again its not what causes it. My sources? Just about every FAQs from Vaping sites?

ZeRoY

grindle wrote: »

Why should we just bend over and accept illegitimate nonsense rules? Seriously, why?

Because it needs to be proved to be a nonsense rule first. Hence why I'm asking "have you tried" to the poster.

When I switched to Ecig it took me a good few days to get accommodated and even while using the Ecig I still had cravings for first few days - which leads me to think the amount of nicotine in Cigarettes was way higher than Ecigs. Guess what? I got used to it. What I mostly like is the act of smoking/vaping - not the nicotine.

Just to be clear on this, I am on "your" side - cannot even believe they want to touch the vaping sector (although it needs regulation) and leaving the regular cigs alone ... - I merely want to know how bad it would be IF it gets to the 4mg per ml limitation.

tommy2bad

ZeRoY wrote: »

Because it needs to be proved to be a nonsense rule first. Hence why I'm asking "have you tried" to the poster.

When I switched to Ecig it took me a good few days to get accommodated and even while using the Ecig I still had cravings for first few days - which leads me to think the amount of nicotine in Cigarettes was way higher than Ecigs. Guess what? I got used to it. What I mostly like is the act of smoking/vaping - not the nicotine.

Just to be clear on this, I am on "your" side - cannot even believe they want to touch the vaping sector (although it needs regulation) and leaving the regular cigs alone ... - I merely want to know how bad it would be IF it gets to the 4mg per ml limitation.

Haven't got the links to hand but so far the research shows a correlation between nic content and effectiveness of ecigs as smoking abstinence tools.
Yes, tolerance to nic exists and ecigs can be used to reduce this, I'v done it myself.
This isn't just about us, it's about ecigs remaining a viable alternative for smokers to avail of. The proposed regulation will make general market ecigs ineffective as an alternative and authorized ecigs too restricted to be viable for anyone but the determined quitter. It's a repeat of the misguided ban on snus that has made a safer alternative to smoking unavailable to millions off European citizens.

grindle

ZeRoY wrote: »

I merely want to know how bad it would be IF it gets to the 4mg per ml limitation.

Abysmal for me. I've tried all variants of juices through my DIYing and the lowest mg I can go to is 12mg and the airhole has to be facing away from the coil. Barely any vapour produced, and I have to suck the shít out of the thing all day.
As an ex 10-a-day smoker, the jump in lip-time needed to vape through 5mls of juice at that strength is just way waaaaaaay too much for me.
At 20-24mg with dual coils I'm using around 2-3mls a day and don't have to have it Velcroed to my face.
Which is besides the point you've raised. They have to prove something is wrong in order to legitimately ban or neuter it, not myself or any other vaper having to disprove that their out-of-thin-air notion that it's bad is wrong.
That's empiricism for ya!
If something has been tested and shows good results, how on earth is it our imperative to disprove that something is wrong?
That's the opposite of logic!

Regarding your idea about throathit, I've DIYed a fuckton of combinations and the vast the majority is from nicotine and/or it's the largest root cause.
After that, aiding and abbetting, airhole (mis-)alignment (less vapour buffering the nicotine pushing to the back of your throat), alcohol (drys the back of the throat in crackly way because that's what vapourised alcohol does), whatever wonder-extract is in bitextra, chilli, cinnamon (which more warm the back of the throat than provide that grainy hit), or conversely minty flavours (tingling the back of your throat by cooling it down and then the nicotine hits cool throat... Also increases the uptake of nicotine).
PG has no throathit to me but definitely feels dryish (in comparison to normal ejuice and VG) - a higher concentration allows the feeling of the nicotine or alcohol hit more because it's less viscous and is less of a buffer or pillow to the throat than VG.
VG has a very definite, soothing, precisely-zero-throathit kind of throathit.
I'd like to see your sources re: just about every FAQ from vaping sites that say nicotine isn't the greatest contributor to throathit.

kiffy

tommy2bad wrote: »

No, nicotine causes TH, no doubt about it. It can be replicated with some pepper type stuff but that wont satisfies a nic craving.

What pepper type stuff is that Tommy? sounds promising for low nic vapers like me if I knew what is actually is, what about Vodka? Though I'd imagine both would make a big difference to the original taste.

Just tried some Saxa white pepper in a V Nano and couldn't stop sneezing