MorisatoIncorporated

I personally like the DIY stuff people do, though I would gladly buy one of these gadgets from her if she got a store up and running. Heck, I'm sure these things would be popular enough that one of the current distributers out there might be interested in buying them in bulk from her to sell off their sites.

COMING SOON - EXPECTED ARRIVAL DATE - 23RD SEPTEMBER

How about one with a self feeding 2ml container so we don't have to redrip every few mins :P

As Christopher stated, never a bad idea to schedule a doctor appointment. And best to buy from certified sellers. Another thing to note though is the smokers cold most people get when they quit analogs. After 2 weeks or so the lungs start to get rid of build up and the body gets rid of those nasty toxins from analogs causing some similar symptoms as a cold in some people. Co-worker cold turkey quit cigs and felt horrid for 2 months while his body was getting rid of years of smoking.

Saw the one you posted, looks great. How well is it working out ?

So anyone found out where to get an E-dobit from? The whole PM thing he suggests in the vid sounds a bit underhanded to me, I'd rather have a link I can click and order directly from. Nifty little gadget though. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QzStJhShbo (Edited by admim: fixed video link)

Seems ASH is really trying to make it tough to get liquid and have now made a bad claim about the PG in the liquid. Why don't dumba** people know the difference between PG and DG ? I've yet to find antifreeze in my liquids :P "Quote from the article" PayPal was also warned that: "As the FDA and others have noted, electronic cigarettes pose a wide variety of potential dangers to users, and perhaps also to those around them, both of whom inhale a mixture of nicotine (a dangerous drug) and propylene glycol (which is used in antifreeze and may cause respiratory tract irritation In response, PayPal is no longer facilitating the sale of this product. Facebook has reportedly decided that "we do not allow ads for electronic cigarettes and will not allow the creation of any further Facebook Ads for this product."

Still comes down to responsibility, any of the liquids could be harmful if not used correctly or properly stored out of the reach of younglings.

Think chris was just making a vague reference to how the strength relates to a large quantity and not each drop. So a 10ml bottle of 24mg is just a basic way to look at it. After all, if you take two 10ml bottles of 24mg stuff you don't end up with a 48mg 20ml bottle, its still 24mg. Btw here is a correct statement on the nicotine content of the 54mg liquid as stated by TW Firstly, the strength description: 54mg, indicates a nicotine concentration of 54mg per ml (not per bottle.) This equates to a strength of 5.4% w/v (because there are 1000 mg in 1ml.) It is important to understand this, and that it is the relative proportion of Platinum Ice in your mixed juice, and not the absolute quantity, that will determine the final strength. If you water it down 50:50 with another (nicotine-free) liquid, then the result will contain 27mg/ml, etc., no matter if you are mixing 1 drop of each, or a ml of each, or a litre of each. Now there are approximitly 20 drops per ML and kinda tired so don't want to do the math but if up for finishing my missing train of thought, there are 54mg per ML in the new liquid, 1000mg makes a ML for a strength of 5.4%, 20 drops per ML. Who wants to do the math for me to find how much per drop? Basic math, 54 divide by 20 for 2.7mg a drop sound right?

approximitly 0.12mg per drop in a 10ml bottle of the 24mg strength if each ml is 2.4mg

Never go for free trials off of the radio. At least don't if they ask for a credit card number.

Forgot to add Njoys response to the fda test. http://www.njoythefreedom.com/contactcommerce/images/press_releases/Response%20to%20the%20FDA%20Summary.pdf

U.S. Violates FCTC Tobacco Control Treaty At Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids' Insistence Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids Undermines International Tobacco Control and Displays Blinding Hypocrisy Upon the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids' insistence and as a result of its vigorous lobbying, the United States has violated the World Health Organization's Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) treaty by granting the tobacco industry permanent membership on the scientific advisory panel that will help the FDA implement its tobacco regulations. This violation was first reported by Glantz, Barnes, and Eubanks in their blistering critique of the FDA tobacco legislation (see: Glantz SA, Barnes R, Eubanks SY. Compromise or capitulation? US Food and Drug Administration jurisdiction over tobacco products. PLoS Medicine 2009; 6(7):e1000118). According to the FDA legislation, the Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory Committee shall consist of two members of the tobacco industry, including one representative of the major tobacco companies and one representative of the smaller tobacco companies. However, Article 5.3 of the FCTC treaty states: "Parties should not allow any person employed by the tobacco industry or any entity working to further its interests to be a member of any government body, committee or advisory group that sets or implements tobacco control or public health policy." The Rest of the Story It is shameful that one of the nation's leading tobacco control groups has led the charge to put the U.S. in violation of the FCTC treaty. The FDA has been accused of becoming increasingly politicized and losing its pure science focus. This action by the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids and other anti-smoking groups makes the problem much worse, as it politicizes decisions regarding the most dangerous product that the FDA is being asked to regulate. President Obama, in his inauguration speech, said that under his administration, we would "return science to its rightful place." Thanks to the anti-smoking groups which promoted this bill, the politicization of the FDA is institutionalized, rather than resolved. Not only does the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids' agreement to the tobacco industry representation on the advisory committee clause undermine the entire integrity of the FDA, but it also severely undermines the entire field of international tobacco control. As Glantz et al. write: "The multinational tobacco companies will almost certainly use the precedent in the FDA bill to undermine implementation of the FCTC elsewhere, particularly since leading health advocates in the United States have been publicly defending this provision. Even though the US is not yet a party to the FCTC, US advocates must consider the global public health impacts of their actions here." Nevertheless, as Arlo Guthrie once said, this is not what I've come to talk to you about. What I've come to talk about is hypocrisy. Regardless of one's position on the FCTC treaty itself, we should all be able to agree that it would be blinding hypocrisy for the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids to insist that the U.S. violate the treaty - on the one hand - and for the Campaign to urge countries across the globe to sign, ratify, and implement the provisions of the treaty, on the other hand. Yet that is precisely what the Campaign is doing. The Campaign is waging an initiative to urge countries around the world to ratify and implement the treaty. The Campaign even has an implementation guide on its web site, in which it declares that countries must follow Article 5.3, which is intended to "protect public health policies from tobacco industry influence." Thus, the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids is full of hypocrisy. On the one hand they are telling other countries they must adhere to the FCTC treaty. On the other hand, they negotiated and supported legislation that puts the U.S. in violation of the treaty. Thus, the rest of the story is that the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids knowingly lobbied for a policy to put the U.S. in permanent violation of the FCTC treaty while at the same time demanding that other countries adhere to the policy. That, my friends, is blinding hypocrisy.

I hate how they are misleading people by falsely saying 19 when it was 2. Got the actual fda report. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/ScienceResearch/UCM173250.pdf Now considering the ban, I was happy to see it only pertained to the sale of e-cigarettes to anybody under 19 and also restricts their use in public places that already bar tobacco products, such as bars and restaurants. Could have been much worse. I agree 100% with an age limit and don't overly mind being limited to going to the smoking section if it means we won't end up with a total ban.

In continuation, here is some more info on how a vaporized nicotine device is far safer then the traditional cigarettes. http://www.totallywicked-eliquid.com/news/2009/august/fda-smoke-screen-on-e-cigarettes.html In making its distorted, incomplete and misleading statement, FDA was violating its long-cherished tradition of sticking to sound science as the basis for its policies. And in doing so, it is putting the lives and health of millions of Americans at risk. The truthful part of the FDA statement was that e-cigarettes have not been through formal efficacy and safety tests at the FDA, and they have only been around a few years. But in the press conference, here is what the FDA did not tell you but should have: c Traditional cigarettes are lethal not because of the trace level presence of specific "carcinogens" and "toxins," but because by using them, smokers inhale enormous amounts of smoke -- otherwise known as "products of combustion." It is the inhaled smoke that kills in so many ways -- from cancers, cardiovascular and lung disease, and more. c The cigarette was a relatively obscure product in our society until the invention of a cigarette rolling machine, and sales rose quickly prior to World War I. Before that, tobacco was used relatively safely -- in chew, pipes, cigars -- because little if any smoke was inhaled. Cigarettes changed all of that. c The e-cigarette -- a cigarette-mimicking device made up of a battery, an atomizer and a cartridge -- allows smokers to inhale, getting a dose of the nicotine they crave, and then sending steam out the other end (with little or no odor) to mimic the ritual and feel of smoking normal cigarettes. c The FDA complained that the e-cigarette was a "nicotine-delivery system." Well, it got that much right. But again, it's the smoke that kills, not the nicotine. Yes, nicotine is highly addictive, and it is what keeps the smoker hooked. But getting the nicotine without the smoke is an enormous health advantage for cigarette smokers (the nicotine inserts come in various strengths and the users can adjust them downward as they wish). c The FDA has approved other nicotine-delivery systems in the form of gums and patches -- and they have been abysmal failures. The smoking cessation rates using these devices is less than 15 percent after one year, condemning millions of addicted smokers to a lingering death. We desperately need other alternatives. But the FDA has now joined a long list of so-called public-health organizations -- including the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids and the American Lung Association -- whose collective motto seems to be "quit or die." Not only do they reject e-cigarettes, but they also condemn other smokeless products like snus, which have a mere fraction of the health risks associated with smoking cigarettes. c More than 1 million smokers are now using the e-cigarette -- a product that offers some, if not all, of the "social amenities" of the real thing -- holding the cigarette, taking a drag, seeing a plume of "smoke." The FDA, lacking data that e-cigarettes pose a health hazard, was so desperate, it called on consumers to phone in adverse side effects of e-cigarettes so they could begin to build a case against them and proceed with their intended ban. They neglected, however, to request smokers who successfully quit using the e-cigarette to also call in

Oh thanks for reminding me about energy drinks, they are a drug too :P ok here is whats in my Monster 32 oz energy drink. And yes they are now making huge a** 32oz cans. 27g sugar, 180mg sodium, 1000mg taurine, 200mg ginseng, 2500mg energy blend. Yikes thats a lot of caffeine right there. Dang thing even has a warning on it saying limit to 1 can a day. Hmm, guess I need to cut back on those things if I don't want to keel over from a heart attack. Also checked todays paper, the article was in it. This is gonna be interesting to hear about at work.

Asking for proof is always a good way to go, another step is to compare an actual Scientific Analysis of the e-liquid to an analog cigerette. My usual liquid supplier has posted their tests on liquid. http://www.totallywicked-eliquid.com/about-the-fluid/lab-reports.html Now to find a test on analogs is a bit tougher but we have postings on the site stating the ingredients of them. Now making a comparison on the fda's actions in the past versus current one pertaining to e-cigs, they have allowed many products to be put out on the market without proper testing only later to pull them after major symptoms called for their removal, such as hydroxycut causing liver damage. Here is the part that makes the fda look like they are no longer trying to do whats in the interest of health but rather in the interest of their pockets. They allow items that have not been tested by them on the market and do not bother to pull them or test them unless a serious condition is caused by their use yet they try to ban the use of a product that has not been proven to have any serious risks. Nor have they supplied any viable information to back up any claims that they may be harmful. Suppliers have done testing to prove the amount of what is in their liquid while the fda has only made claims to having tested two products which they were unwilling to put forth the lab results. Now why is it that diet pills which can be harmful to the human body are not required to be tested by them but a product which is a competitor for the age old analogs that kill hundreds of thousands a year are put down and trying to be banned when they could simply ask for proper testing to prove they are of an acceptable quality for use. I would suppose it comes down to money, its not so much that they haven't been proven safer but rather the fda doesn't want to admit that they are no matter how many lab results are put right in from of them. So I would ask, can they prove they aren't safer ? The attorney general is currently making claims that they are worse then smoking analogs but they haven't shown any proof, isn't that slander ? I thought one had to show proof in order to make such claims. BTW, I do like devil advocates, they are great for discussions

Personally think each state should have someone go to the media and give out info on the truth behind the fda tests and the facts about how much safer ecigs are then analogs. If enough information is circulated then we will end up with a bigger chance at preventing our safer alternative from getting banned, I really don't want to resort to going back to analogs. BTW, hope you didn't mind VT being mentioned. Wonder how many new people will check out the boards once they read the paper :P

Just ran across this from the site I've been getting my liquid from and looks like they are going to put out a 54mg liquid made specifically for mixing your own. Seemed rather interesting. Probably a bad idea to vape it straight :P The Worlds first 54mg mixing juice is coming. It will use only Pharmaceutical grade nicotine(Sourced from the company who supply nicorette) and uk sourced Pharma grade PG. Platinum Ice will contain only 5.4% nicotine and 94.6% PG.

I originally had no intention of quitting smoking actually but due to costs of analogs at the time I looked into the e-cig to try it out and ended up loving it. Was a pack a day smoker and went quit analogs the same day my e-cig came in. Don't have plans to quit using my e-cig but has been a great alternative. Sadly if they get banned I'll just end up back on analogs

Not all are lethargic, I talked to "The Day" here in the new england area and they are interested in running a positive story about the E-cigs, just putting stuff together and waiting to hear back from them. To hell with the fda trying to ban us, I'm gonna make it tough for em out here.

I got RY4 from dietsmokes when I got a m401 kit. Hit Chris up for a sample of the dulcis and see how that tastes. Haven't tried it myself but Chris has yet to give bad reviews and he says its pretty great. Also if looking for a stronger nicotine liquid, totallywicked carries the 36mg stuff.

Did the smokeless delight carts taste like those Black and Mild mini cigars ? My old carts used RY4 I believe and thats what the liquid reminded me of.

Even worse is ex-smokers coming over to the smoking section to chirp in their thoughts, they should stay on the non-smoking side and leave the smokers and ever growing vapers I convert alone :P

Usually Ex-smokers are my problem. Always going on about just cold turkey quiting. But I use to like to smoke and had no plans to quit. Vaping is just better all around, healthier and no downside so far. Not to mention a heck of a lot cheaper.