Recent Posts

Or even a smoking lawyer that doesn't want his right to free choice taken away.

ECCA would be happy to fight for vapers everywhere. However what we need is someone who is willing (and able) to be put in front of a camera, microphone and give interviews. Unfortunately until we have someone to volunteer in that role, we simply cannot fulfill that side of it.

I am also all for vapers for jusctice or what ever, and SWOF and VTTV would be great people to perform that role for vapers. If someone steps forward for us, or have a seperate body doing it.

That's not a scapegoat response just we simply don't have anyone (outside the trade) that has put their name forward for this role.

754 MEP's! I wonder what PV they are going to send them? A big mod or a small ego?

Sorry Blownupdolly I went totally off on a tangent. I started off well, and then veered off.

Ok scrictly speaking no they won't. Its similar to cannabis, you can have the bulbs, the humidifiers, heaters and even seeds to grow it, but it only becomes illegal when you actually grow it. Now that is an extreme but the point still remains.

Unless they have some cleverly devised plan, then no you will be able to buy thrm freely. However without being able to get hold of e-liquid (if they ban that and only allow devices containing nicotine) then people won't sell it, becuase there won't be a market for it.

But the big question is, will they allow flavourless nic juice. If so then great, we can get plain nic juice, add flavour to it, and use is on our e-shisha devices

The simple fact is we don't know, and most likely won't know until the day after the TPD goes through (as it stands). MHRA will want to keep what ever they have in mind, right up until they release their proposal (less time for us to build a case).

In theory no, they won't be affected, and from all accounts, in the BBC Radio 4 show the other day, those are exactly what the kids featured were using. It would be virtually impossible to ban the devices themselves. But if they don't allow e-liquid (on its own) then it will be pretty pointless in selling them, unless there is a booming black market for e-liquid. Things will only be made/sold if there is a market for it.

The main problem is, that while most on here now, will no doubt still be able to carry on, if it means storing the nic base in a freezer, or buying it "illegally" on the black market. However its the ones that aren't or the ones that won't be vaping in 3 years time, who will have to suffer with under performing look a likes, and worst of all, non-progressing look a likes, as £200,000 to release a new battery is so expense on top of the initial R&D costs.

Sorry I'm rambling (again) lol. I shall leave it now for tonight before I work myself up any more lol

Do those sit on the ENVI committee? David Dorn said them today, and many times before, but he says them so quickly (and have a crap memory) I can never catch them. 

Taylor and Davies sit on the ENVI committee and have suggested their own amendments to the TPD.

Not just MEP's that are against the TPD or those that are against the regulation of e-cigs.

Cig-a-like will be the only ones available on the market. How can you regulate how much nicotine each puff delivers, when you have loads of different devices, with different ways of heating up the liquid. Now if it was they just wanted to make the juice safe, they can do that in far better ways than going down the medical route (I think the ENVI TPD addresses that). The main problem I can see is this 'loophole' that allows local governments to make them stricter if they like.

Which then goes completely against what ENVI wanted in the first place, which was, to have the same quality of e-cigs across the whole of Europe. They are making it up as they go along, and move the goal posts as they delve deeper into the mess that they have started!

By 2016 there will be well over 3million vapers, (in a free and open market, with no idiots saying don't use them, these can be dangerous!!). If 10% of those people are using PV's like you and me, that would be 300,000 people unable to get a decent hit on e-cigs (once they become medical products) and will either be using up frozen supplies or buying off the black market, which COULD be more harmful than what they THINK it is now.

Everything is down to risk vs benefit. They either make any liquid OR any devices containing liquid medicinal, and leave the not so harmful delivery devices themselves as a general product, or they leave them all as general products, albeit with extra testing in place.

Because as Mr Mean said, the LIQUID contains contaminants and the LIQUID doesn't have the correct nicotine content stated on the label. Either they haven't done their research correctly, (this was taken from their press release) "Scientific and market research into their safety and quality, including how they are used, has underpinned this decision." or they can't/don't know how to regulate anything that doesn't contain nicotine.

What's more, how will they ensure every nicotine containing product has a medicinal license? Again I presume they mean any non-organic nicotine containing product, which would then rule out tobacco, aubergines, tomatoes etc.

Until they finally draw up (I really don't think they are close yet) their final proposal, we won't be any clearer. But I know they will leave this subject now, until the TPD gets passed and then BOOM! they will implement it overnight.

So currently the MHRA are awaiting that loophole in the TPD to then regulate these further. We can't fight the MHRA now, and any arguments we do have, they will just add into their proposal. We need to be fighting ENVI and the TPD and be lobbying for the Taylor, Davies and (2 others I can't remember) amendments which will stop local governments being able to do what the MHRA want to do.

Sorry it's a long one, and mostly ramble, but I needed to vent if I'm honest