Unified Industry Position Statement?

[OneDay]

I think 5% is 5mg??

[lobeydosser]

May 7, 2013 11:50:40 GMT OneDay said:

I think 5% is 5mg??

I was given to understand that 5% is 50mg.
It is 5% of a litre. 5% of a litre is 50ml.
It equates to 50mg per litre.

[Postmodern Smoking]

5% is 50mg per ml

[lobeydosser]

May 7, 2013 12:35:19 GMT Postmodern Smoking said:

5% is 50mg per ml

Straight from the Horses Mouth (so to speak)!

[Brambles]

*sorry*OOPS. I was thinking 5% if 1mg. 1ml is approx 1g SO that is 5% of 1g = 0.05g/ml. = 0.05 x 1000mg/ml = 50mg/ml.
I vape 12 mg/ml which is 1.2% . I just made a mistake in my head.

Yes 5% is more than enough.

[lobeydosser]

May 7, 2013 16:32:55 GMT Brambles said:

*sorry*OOPS. I was thinking 5% if 1mg. 1ml is approx 1g SO that is 5% of 1g = 0.05g/ml. = 0.05 x 1000mg/ml = 50mg/ml.
I vape 12 mg/ml which is 1.2% . I just made a mistake in my head.

Yes 5% is more than enough.

If only I could believe that this was true and they were thinking on making our limit 5%.

Buy I don't. If they do bring in any limits, it will be the lowest they can get away with and I have seen members on here quoting 12mg and lower as a feasible figure.
Well it might be for them but it is a darned sight easier to cut nic base to a lower strength but it is darned difficult to raise it.

I vape at 24mg but I know of members on here that vape at 36mg and advocate 45mg at times.
So 50mg is the lowest feasible nic base strength that would be acceptable and I would rather see the UK stay with its present upper limit of 75mg.

[doodlebug]

Hi, all,

Sorry not to have come back into this discussion sooner, but we are still in Brussels and working on solutions....

Many, many very good points raised so far. I find myself in agreement with most of you!

It may reassure some of you to know that we have submitted positively nauseating amounts of detailed proposals alongside this broader position statement. These include the full text of our Industry Standard of Excellence (approx 100 pages), which details precisely how the existing regulations are applied to electronic cigarette products, and their sales, and their advertising, and their quality and safety standards, etc.

We also provided a draft proposed amendment, again with significant detail, to several 'friendly' MEPs who had asked us for it. After the workshop, we met with Rebecca Taylor's assistant, and we discussed the amendment they are working on. Much of the intricate detail from our draft has been removed, in favour of 'broader strokes' for which they are confident they can get support from enough of the voting members. Rebecca has now tweeted that her amendment has now been submitted, so we shall soon be able to see the detail of it.

We were able to agree with the vast majority of what was being discussed yesterday, but did raise our concerns about the proposed health warning: "This product contains nicotine which is addictive and may damage your health." We pointed out that this was inaccurate and more than a little misleading, which may have negative public health consequences, but in the grand scheme of things, we agreed that it would not be something we would feel the need to fight over or challenge, if the rest of the amendment delivers what we need, i.e. for the Commission to be mandated to go away and do the work it should have done in the first place, and for the existing regulations to be enforced in the meantime.

There was some talk around thresholds. Ultimately, we were told they had decided to abandon including any limit, owing to the near impossibility of getting broad support for any particular number. Clearly, this needs to form part of the Commission's deliberations over the coming years.

I hope we shall all soon find that there is at least one amendment tabled that we can all get behind and support. We shall be continuing to work closely with policy-makers at every level to try to ensure that sensible decisions are made.

However, the credit for any possible victory belongs with all of you: had you not all written such impassioned letters - in such volume!! - to your MEPs, nothing we did could have made such a difference. It is vitally important that you keep this pressure on. Please do continue to write to your MEPs to make sure they know - directly from you - why this matters so much to real, live human beings.

We are a long way from the end of this, but well done, vapers. This community really is a force to be reckoned with!

Cheers,

Katherine

[kibbster]

I don't see anything particularly wrong with those guidelines, if we have to capitulate to the powers that be in unimportant areas so we can hold our ground in others then that's understandable.
At least one side shows the flexibility to compromise - trouble is we seem to be the only side that wants an amicable resolution.
The powers that be (Linda) seem to have made up their minds and come hell or high water they want to push it through.
It's very likely that the best course of action is appeasement for damage control.

The EU want to destroy the industry and force vapers back to tobacco (for the tax no doubt) or to NRT (again for the tax and backhanders.)
To me it's looking less likely that there'll suddenly be a u-turn after all these months and the EU will drop everything and leave us to live our lives as we see fit.
Maybe the best we can hope for is a compromise.

My view on politicians and politics has taken a nose dive this past 5 months now I've actually seen great democracy in action.
And they wonder why voters are apathetic, maybe most people now think what I do.

Not meaning to be negative, but the lies, backhanders, personal agendas and arrogant stupidity I have viewed in the places our laws are made has left me somewhat weary