I think we could use some separation perhaps?

[Ancient Hermit]

Aug 15, 2013 7:28:18 GMT dnglos said:

Aug 15, 2013 6:20:05 GMT markm said:

Don't sit back, and let it happen, don't wait for them to close the door on this, write to your MP/MEP
now and tell them what it means to you. Politicians always listen to the loudest voice, at the moment
that's the one whispering in their ears, we need to get louder folks.

I'm wondering if we should go beyond contacting elected MPs. There's a general election coming up next year, so maybe we should be reminding all the candidates (especially Labour) that e-cig users have votes, as do their friends and families.

Yes, that is exactly the right way to go about this - I thought it last night, knew it would help, had an idea I would maybe type it today, but thankfully you have! We need to tie up the V in Vape with the V in Vote! Make it clear, make it a logo for goodness sake, but get it out there and get it seen. Allowing Vaping is a Vote Winner.

Simply because voting has been made largely meaningless for me now, I feel I could allow myself to be shallow enough (for one election), and vote for any party who has seen the end of this MHRA nonsense any anything else like it. Note that is not a vote for a party that promises to talk about it or sort it later, it's a vote to one that has actually done it! If they want power then that is the price they must pay first for me saying yes for them. 

[4madcats]

Aug 15, 2013 6:56:27 GMT raid2506 said:

One thing people need to understand is this fight is 100% about tax revenue.

If the argument was actually about our health then all tobacco products would be banned as they are deadly.

Unfortunately the income from tax on tobacco goes to a government department which has bigger guns.

So the MHRA are swayed to apply one set of rules to products which return little or no tax revenue and another set to the money maker, tobacco.

How can the argument that e cigs should be banned because they are not proven to be safe not equally be applied to all tobacco products?

Sorry raid2506 but this is not about tax & never has been, wish it was cos it would make life so much easier. In 2010 MHRA first tried to take ecigs down the medical route, why because big P were getting the jitters, they were watching ecigs & could see them getting more effective & they were worried about the potential impact on their multi billion £ NRT profits, so basically they wanted to kneecap ecigs, & what better way to do that but use their own private hit squad in the UK, the MHRA who are funded exclusively by big P, not the government.

That first attempt failed, not because of any rigorous opposition from ecig users but because the RPC, Regulatory Policy Committee, the first step to implementing regulation, kicked it into touch.

In the meantime the Tobacco Products Directive in the EU was rumbling away in the background & had been since 2001, then in 2012 EU health commissioner John Dalli submitted a new draft of the TPD which suddenly included completely banning ecigs & Swedish Snus. Again why, well there's evidence of at least one 60 million euro bribe from big P not necessarily to do with ecigs & god knows how much more from big T possibly up to $80 million. 'backhander' Dalli was forced to resign, but rather then kick his draft proposals out they stuck, they appealed to the evangelistic zealots who would have loved to have banned tobacco completely but couldn't, grandfather rights, severe economic loses to EU countries producing tobacco, blah blah blah, so anything else containing nicotine became their focus. Now they've had to soften their approach somewhat since the initial draft because they've found out ecigs no longer go undefended, so they came out with the idea to give them a medical license . . . sound familiar, no surprise since there is an estimated 40million euros of lobbying being done in the EU by big P

Scroll forward to June of this year & the MHRA announcement it was going to medicinalise ecigs, nothing more then regulation by press because other then that announcement they've done nothing but kick it back to the EU & the TPD who they are expecting to do their dirty work for them. If the TPD goes through the UK will have no choice but to implement it, & that's where the fight is.

[Ancient Hermit]

Aug 15, 2013 12:44:27 GMT 4madcats said:

Aug 15, 2013 6:56:27 GMT raid2506 said:

If the TPD goes through the UK will have no choice but to implement it, & that's where the fight is.

 I don't know about that, and I really do mean that I just don't know one way or another, but what I did read was this, and the doc it links to.

LINK

Now I mentioned this earlier in passing, and got the responsible chap's name a bit wrong, it's a longish read, however it's also a very interesting read, it's in pretty simple largely plain English too.

I am left wondering by having read that. I can see how some of this might not go through as straight forwardly as we seem to be supposing.

Just maybe there is something to work with there. We'd need to do some homework of course.

[4madcats]

Ancient Hermit you could do worse then read www.ecita.org.uk/blog/, they were formed at the back end of the first MHRA attempt back in 2010 and they are heavily involved in fighting the TPD.

Also see this guys comments he's very very good www.clivebates.com/

Between them both they should give you the background, & whats going on right now.

you can also have a peek a www.eccauk.org/ they'er undergoing a restructure at the moment but again some good stuff.

Oops almost forgot ecigssavelives.co.uk/ a site set up & run by vapers

[Ancient Hermit]

Aug 15, 2013 13:17:39 GMT 4madcats said:

Ancient Hermit you could do worse then read www.ecita.org.uk/blog/, they were formed at the back end of the first MHRA attempt back in 2010 and they are heavily involved in fighting the TPD.

Also see this guys comments he's very very good www.clivebates.com/

Between them both they should give you the background, & whats going on right now.

you can also have a peek a www.eccauk.org/ they'er undergoing a restructure at the moment but again some good stuff.

Oops almost forgot ecigssavelives.co.uk/ a site set up & run by vapers

Yes, I followed your link to The Opinion of Sir Francis, and sadly it's coming up 404, but I was able to see that it leads to almost the same place as my earlier link, except that having just followed mine again to test, it worked.

Anyway, what did you think after reading the Opinion? Can you see the slightly grey area we could sensibly look more closely into using? I wonder how we could best make something of that obvious potential?

Clive bates is a fun read for sure. He puts me in mind of a modern day Jasper Carrot!   Very entertaining reading he produces.

Shall of course await with interest to see what happens after the restructure at ECCA.

ecigssaveslives seem to be be doing useful and constructive things.

[4madcats]

Ancient Hermit Sorry try this takes you to the home page & the news tab at the top takes you to the blog

www.ecita.org.uk/

Gone on give me a clue re grey area

[Ancient Hermit]

Pages 9/10/11/12 show some rich soil for digging about in, it keeps getting better as it moves along too.

To understand you need to read it all sadly, but it's worth understanding what you are up against if you are to overcome it I find.

[4madcats]

You mean can nicotine actually be classed as a medicine, that argument is already being made using MHRA's own definition against them

DEFINITIONS:
Products making medical claims, as a general rule, will be regulated either by the Medical Devices
Regulations or by medicines legislation,
The revised definition of a medicine is:
I. Any substance or combination of substances presented as having properties for treating or
preventing disease in human beings; or
II. Any substance or combination of substances which may be used in or administered to human
beings either with a view to restoring, correcting or modifying physiological functions by exerting a
pharmacological, immunological or metabolic action, or to making a medical diagnosis

& the argument is that nicotine has no efficacy, meaning you can't use nicotine to treat or prevent a nicotine addition.

At least 4 EU countries have already tried to go down the medicines route & all have been overturned in the High Courts.

The way this directive is being discussed is literally by committee, there are several committees who make up the whole AGRI agriculture, JURI justice to name but 2, but in the case of the TPD it comes under the lead of ENVI environment, public health & food safety. Not all committees discuss all policies only the ones that come under their scope, & the outside committees discuss vote & feed back to the lead who then has the final vote.

In the case of the TPD the JURI committee told ENVI that it would be illegal to medicinalise Ecigs/Nicotine, ENVI ignored that advice & voted to go ahead with the proposals, so it really is a case of an awful lot of this when ENVI are willing to ignore their own internal legal advice, & all the evidence and arguments that have been put before them to push their points home.

[Ancient Hermit]

The nearer to the end pages you get, you can see quite plainly that the proposal might easily be thrown out of court in the UK as it's is not overly compatible or harmonious from an intentions and aims standpoint. It roundly and rightly ridicules it in some areas. Hold that sort of thing up during electioneering and who ever supports it is going to end up with egg on their face if voters know about things like this, hence making certain it's common knowledge in the way that I have already outlined earlier.

Voters by and large are in possession of common sense. Let them loose with some facts in the nick of time and who knows where it could lead. I can imagine it working out, I bet I'd not be alone in that thought either. Exposure of the facts is key to progress with all this. Just needs putting in the public domain in good time really.

If each of us got just one other to switch to vape and they in turn did the same, then it would not take long at all.

[markm]

Aug 15, 2013 7:28:18 GMT dnglos said:

Aug 15, 2013 6:20:05 GMT markm said:

Don't sit back, and let it happen, don't wait for them to close the door on this, write to your MP/MEP
now and tell them what it means to you. Politicians always listen to the loudest voice, at the moment
that's the one whispering in their ears, we need to get louder folks.

I'm wondering if we should go beyond contacting elected MPs. There's a general election coming up next year, so maybe we should be reminding all the candidates (especially Labour) that e-cig users have votes, as do their friends and families.

That realy would mean sitting back and hoping they notice - and what would you regard success,
if your sitting candidate is voted out they will just be replaced with some one new to the argument,
not sure that's much help is it.

You are right though, writing to them is not enough, ask for a meeting, send them tweets, contact
them on facebook. Tell the story to your local paper. Tell other vapers that they are facing a ban.
Stir it up, make sure we do not go away quietly, don't let politicians take the easy option, make them
understand that the biggest risk to public health is restrictions to vaping.

[neptune]

In my opinion, for vaping to replace smoking, it must not only be cheaper than tobacco, it must be cheaper than BLACK MARKET TOBACCO, the tobacco of choice for about 75% of smokers in my area. That already obsoletes cigalikes, and anything with prefilled carts.

[4madcats]

Aug 15, 2013 16:52:16 GMT neptune said:

In my opinion, for vaping to replace smoking, it must not only be cheaper than tobacco, it must be cheaper than BLACK MARKET TOBACCO, the tobacco of choice for about 75% of smokers in my area. That already obsoletes cigalikes, and anything with prefilled carts.

Absolutely spot on, got a mate I've been trying to convert for months & he's always telling me how he want's to give up, but the problem is he's semi-retired only works part-time & regularly goes abroad for wee breaks & every time he goes him & his missus bring back their full allowance of cigs & baccy, what they don't smoke gets sold on, he's even admitted that he can't even be sure if he's buying genuine cigs their so cheap. 

A big part of his argument for not giving up is that people rely on him to bring they their duty frees & since he's fetching back for them it means he gets his for nothing, no incentive if you don't count your health. I know that's only small scale but it doesn't help 

But there will be no cheap alternative if we lose this fight, even the current cigalikes will seem cheap in comparison.