VTTV meets Linda McAvan MEP

[whipitup]

Wot Mark said!

 

[KulrMeStoopid]

Good pornmouth tho'

View attachment 9515

lol shameful you!

 

[Mawsley]

View attachment 9515

lol shameful you!

I'm struggling to spot the difference.

Will only move on issues when physically forced to, head full of air, totally plastic when it comes to opinions...

 

[Cabbo]

Be nice. I think the main problem is that both sides seem to misunderstand the other. From what this woman has said it appears that the plan is to integrate vaporizers into existing legislation to some extent, but modify the legislation to apply to ecigs (like their classification as medicine despite the devices being no more than delivery systems for cessation aids - from a medical standpoint at least). They are trying to treat these devices as new and unique products with medical benefits that need to be regulated, but the only way to do that in this country is to integrate them into the complex health system which has been developing for a long time. I seriously doubt that the intent is to take the soul out of vaporizers and try to create a monopoly. I expect the ultimate outcome is that devices will have to follow certain regulations which do nothing more than ensure their safety, so we'll have generally higher quality wicks and liquids. There's bound to be one or two fuck ups on account of the widely varied perceptions of these devices, but the truth shall out. If I'm missing something important here, please explain it to me. I'm pretty new to this whole thing.

 

[KulrMeStoopid]

medical regulations are impossibly expensive and unnecessary. Putting them as medical devices, will ensure that at least 80% of ecig vendors will be shut down. Only pharmacists or those very rich will be able to sell or even afford the prices to get MA for each e-liquid on the market.


theres a whole bunch of other things too but I will write more later

 

[steffijade]

Be nice. I think the main problem is that both sides seem to misunderstand the other. From what this woman has said it appears that the plan is to integrate vaporizers into existing legislation to some extent, but modify the legislation to apply to ecigs (like their classification as medicine despite the devices being no more than delivery systems for cessation aids - from a medical standpoint at least). They are trying to treat these devices as new and unique products with medical benefits that need to be regulated, but the only way to do that in this country is to integrate them into the complex health system which has been developing for a long time. I seriously doubt that the intent is to take the soul out of vaporizers and try to create a monopoly. I expect the ultimate outcome is that devices will have to follow certain regulations which do nothing more than ensure their safety, so we'll have generally higher quality wicks and liquids. There's bound to be one or two fuck ups on account of the widely varied perceptions of these devices, but the truth shall out. If I'm missing something important here, please explain it to me. I'm pretty new to this whole thing.

With respect, yes, you are pretty new to this whole thing if you believe that there is no sinister intent behind proposed regulation.

Vaping devices are already adequately regulated in the same way that any other consumer device is regulated. If there is an issue regarding safety, then that issue lies with the effective enforcement of those current regulations.

Ask yourself why the powers that be want to restrict access to vaping devices when tobacco and cigarettes which are proven to be harmful to health remain freely accessible.

There have been attempts world wide to classify vaping devices as both tobacco products and medicines when they are in actual fact, neither. They do not contain tobacco and they are not marketed as having medicinal properties. Also, if they are classed as a medicine, then what disease are they supposed to be curing?

Latest government estimates state that 1.3 million people in the UK currently use vaping devices, the vast majority of whom are former smokers. That is 1.3 million people who were contributing vast sums of money through the application of tobacco taxation but are now only contributing money through VAT at a much reduced rate. This represents a significant loss of revenue for the government (who are the major stakeholder in tobacco products in this country because they receive the largest proportion of cash from every cigarette purchased), the tobacco companies and also the pharmaceutical companies that make millions of pounds every year selling 'traditional' NRT products that have a DISMAL long term success rate.

All three of these interests are losing income to vaping and it is in their financial interests to perpetuate tobacco smoking to protect their income streams. If this sounds far fetched the just look at the current furore surrounding the alleged lobbying of government by tobacco companies. It's a sad fact that corruption is widespread the world over and individuals that can bring influence to bear have been found to pervert things for personal gain. Remember MPs expenses? cash for questions? cash for honours? and can it be mere coincidence that both current and former government ministers are given highly lucrative sinecures by large corporations with vested interests? Is it also coincidence that the MHRA, who are also proposing restrictive regulation, are largely funded by vested interests within the pharmaceutical industry?

I think not.

A lot of scientific data is being deliberately ignored/cherry picked/subverted to back up the spurious arguments for deliberately oppressive extra regulation. The people making the decisions that will affect all current and perhaps more importantly, potential future vapers, are ill informed and the checks and balances that are supposed to be built into the decision making process are being subverted as proposed legislation is rushed through without proper consultation.

These are just a few points that you can find out for yourself if you're prepared to actually take the time to do a little research.

I strongly suggest that you arm yourself with a few facts before meekly accepting that restrictive regulation is both a necessity and an inevitability.

 

[Mark]

Found this on FB this morning, worth a watch

http://sensible-design.co.uk/redheadfullofsteam/2013/07/24/e-cigs-lies-and-videotape/

 

[ZT]

medical regulations are impossibly expensive and unnecessary. Putting them as medical devices, will ensure that at least 80% of ecig vendors will be shut down. Only pharmacists or those very rich will be able to sell or even afford the prices to get MA for each e-liquid on the market.


theres a whole bunch of other things too but I will write more later

What Meg said, this legislation ultimately puts ecigs by dint of its cost and regulations into the hands of big pharma and big tobacco.

then take a look at the interests of the mhra and people sat on various councils that are voting for this and tell me it's not hostile monopolising.

 

[Roadhoguk]

Music is mostly used within a film as either an emotional stirrer or to hide audio imperfections (hiss, crackle etc etc ), and listening to to clip above it was clear that there was a problem with the recorded audio levels and standard, it is sometimes far better to hide embedded hissing and the like with music than the constant background hiss that really gets irritating after a while.

 

[VaperCaper]

It seems Clive Bates has watched this interview, and his blog about it makes excellent reading.

http://www.clivebates.com/?p=1387