Nicotine free Feellife Korean Blend E LIQUID from Tobacco Series By Feellife
An appreciable concentrate on its own as well as in gourmet recipe, which requires a sufficient maturation time.
This flavor contains tobacco absolute and extract.
Capacity: 10ml,15ml, 30ml, 60ml, 120ml
Nicotine Strength: 0mg/g, 8mg/g, 12mg/g, 18mg/g, 24mg/g
Ingredients: Herbal extract/Glycerol/ Propylene glycol/Flavorings/Nicotine
Bottle type: Child proof cap
Package: top-grade plastic package
Certificates: TUV, MSDS, JRFL, ISO, FDA, GMP, SGS
We produce :
Feellife free nicotine Korean Blend E LIQUID from tobacco series
Feellife 10ml nicotine Korean Blend E LIQUID strength 8mg from tobacco series
Feellife 30ml nicotine Korean Blend E juice strength12mg from tobacco series
Feellife 60ml nicotine Korean Blend E LIQUID strength 16mg from tobacco series
Feellife 30ml nicotine Korean Blend E LIQUID strength 18mg from tobacco series
Feellife 30ml nicotine Djarum Super Korean Blend EJUICE strength 24mg from tobacco series
We want to create the best Tobacco Series e-Liquids possible. Here is our classic Tobacco Series Range: the finest, premium quality, all-natural and pharmaceutically approved ingredients. This is the reason why we are known worldwide for our first-class products.
All e-Liquids undergo independent quality control and are GCC and TPD compliant, with many international certificates. Our production line uses only high-quality and environmentally friendly ingredients. In order to encompass the best flavours possible, we obtain from raw fruit extracts and genuine tobacco extracts. The ingredients used in our products promote the precise taste and natural elements which is to define our Silver Label flavours.
Feellife uses only high-quality and environment-friendly ingredients that are free of harmful substances.
Made in China
Molecular technology secures natural extracts
High-quality pharmaceutical grade solvents
Natural flavour extracts
Fully TPD Compliant
Huge range of flavours
Since set up in 2009, FEELLiFE has focused on the research and development and production of e-liquid, rapidly developed into the top global e-liquid OEM manufacturer, providing high-quality e-liquid products for many well-known e-liquid brands all over the world.
With modern international standard factory, pharmaceutical grade dust-free workshop and assembly line, FEELLiFE make sure every bottle of e-liquid to meet the requirements of high quality.
Factory Address: 202 North California Ave, City of Industry CA 91744 U.S.A.
New Research Bolsters Case for E-Cigarettes
Gallup recently announced that American smoking rates have hit an a record low of 16 percent. Evidence suggests that e-cigarettes deserve some of the credit.
Nearly half a million Americans die each year of cigarettes. That is nearly three times more than the combined number of suicide, overdose and alcohol deaths, whose rise have generated headlines and been attributed to the decline in U.S. life expectancy. Cigarette smoking causes about one in every five deaths in the United States. It’s estimated 1 billion people worldwide will die prematurely in the 21st century due to cigarette smoking.
While government initiatives, including smoking restrictions, higher taxes and education campaigns, have helped cut the national smoking rate by nearly two-thirds over the last half century, one in six Americans still smoke.
Enter the private sector. The advent of e-cigarettes, which the Royal College of Physicians in Britain concludes are 95 percent less harmful than traditional cigarettes, have coincided with the biggest annual drops in cigarette smoking in decades. Just since 2012, when e-cigarettes began becoming popular, smoking rates have fallen by nearly one-quarter.
A new survey conducted by the independent Center for Substance Use Research in Glasgow of e-cigarette users adds to a growing body of evidence suggesting that the negative association between e-cigarettes and smoking is causative, not merely correlative.
The center surveyed nearly 19,000 users of Juul e-cigarettes, which command about half the U.S. market share. Nearly two-thirds of respondents who were current smokers at the time they began using e-cigarettes quit smoking as a result. Compare this quit rate to other nicotine replacement therapies, including gums and patches, of less than 7 percent.
More than half of cigarette smokers in the survey who weren’t able to quit were nevertheless able to cut their cigarette consumption by 50 percent to 99 percent after they began using e-cigarettes.
Meanwhile, just 2 percent of respondents who hadn’t previously smoked cigarettes began doing so after using e-cigarettes. This suggests the gateway effect that e-cigarette critics fear is minimal-to-nonexistent. For every one respondent who started smoking after using an e-cigarette, 137 quit. Many more significantly reduced their consumption.
These results are in line with other research, including an objective study that measured e-cigarette users’ exhaled carbon monoxide and found that two-thirds of participants had quit smoking. Centers for Disease Control data suggests at least 2.5 million American e-cigarette users have quit traditional cigarettes. Dr. Michael Siegel, a preventive-medicine physician at Boston University’s School of Public Health, believes e-cigarettes are the singular technology that could put an end to smoking.
Given these public health implications, you’d think e-cigarettes would be welcomed with open arms by government officials. Yet the opposite is true. The Food and Drug Association’s “Deeming Rule” requires e-cigarettes to comply with an approval process so arduous and expensive that it will — in the FDA’s own estimate — result in 99 percent of products not filing applications. The rule is set to take effect in 2022.
Like so many regulatory justifications, officials claim e-cigarettes must be stringently regulated to protect children. In April, 11 Democratic senators wrote a letter to FDA Commissioner Scott Gottleib stating that e-cigarettes are “putting an entire new generation of children at risk of nicotine addiction and other health consequences.”
It’s true that e-cigarettes have made their way into American high-schools, displacing traditional cigarettes as the most popular method of nicotine consumption. But the best evidence suggests they are hardly an epidemic. Recently released CDC data find that e-cigarette use has fallen among American high-schoolers since 2014, part of a broader drop in nicotine use over recent decades.
David Abrams, a professor at NYU’s College of Global Public Health, chalks up the concern to e-cigarettes being “a sheep in wolf’s clothing.” Another explanation may be that the veterans of the tobacco wars in the 1990s didn’t just retire or change fields but got positions in public health on the lookout for “the next tobacco.” Tobacco company lobbyists, for their part, also have mortgages and kids to send through college, and may see campaigns to regulate e-cigarettes as a way to maintain their dwindling market share. Like smoking, lobbying habits die hard.
Yet anecdotal and empirical data are clear: E-cigarettes are a relatively healthy alternative that help people quit smoking.
Post time: Jul-31-2018
Getting the Vapors Over Vaping
To this lifelong non-smoker, using electronic cigarettes (“vaping”) seems like a desirable and effective tool for weaning nicotine addicts off the toxic clouds of smoke with which they fumigate their lungs. I do understand why an educated observer might disagree — less so why the issue has become intensely partisan.
Smoking has been controversial for centuries. While Sir Walter Raleigh popularized tobacco in England, King James I described smoking as, “A custome lothsome to the eye, hatefull to the Nose, harmefull to the braine, dangerous to the Lungs, and in the blacke stinking fume thereof, neerest resembling the horrible Stigian smoke of the pit that is bottomelesse.”
E-cigarettes, a high-tech creation, were created as a tool for smoking abatement. Evidence suggests they are the single most successful means of weaning smokers off the carcinogen-laced smoke they crave. For vapers, the nicotine arrives via droplets of vapor, often scented with very un-tobacco-like fragrances, such as mango, peppermint, coffee or lemonade. (The well-known carcinogenic effects of smoking come largely from chemicals other than nicotine.)
In particular, e-cigarettes use digital technology to deliver the smoker’s desired nicotine hit far more effectively than delivery mechanisms like nicotine gum and patches. Thus, vaping seems to make it easier to quit smoking than other approaches.
Still, there is controversy. Let’s explore some relevant facts:
First, smoking tobacco poses terrible health hazards for smokers and is likely the largest single cause of preventable deaths. Vaping poses health hazards, too, but far less than those associated with smoking tobacco.
Second, we can categorize several groups whose behavior changes with the introduction of e-cigarettes — in order of desirability. (A) Smokers who shift from smoking to vaping and then quit vaping. (B) Smokers who shift from smoking to vaping. (C) Non-smokers who shift from abstinence to vaping. (D) Non-smokers who shift from abstinence to vaping and then proceed on to smoking.
Third, people have subjective tradeoffs among the four (A), (B), (C), and (D) categories based in part on their perceptions of the relative health hazards of smoking and vaping.
If you think e-cigarettes move lots of people into categories (A) and (B) and very few into (C) and (D), then you probably think vaping is a good thing. If you think very few will use e-cigarettes as an exit ramp — (A) and (B) — and lots will use them as an entry ramp — (C) and (D) — then you probably oppose e-cigarettes.
Then there are the subjective aspects. Smith and Jones might agree that vaping induces 10 smokers to shift to vaping for every one nonsmoker induced to vape. Smith, though, might argue that one nonsmoker-to-vaper is too high a price to pay for those 10 who go from smoking to vaping (particularly if the one is a minor). Jones, in contrast, might see that 10-to-1 ratio as an acceptable tradeoff.
One of the most contentious public policy issues is the range of fragrances. E-cigarette vendors argue that they help smokers lose their taste for tobacco. (Vapers in my office confirm to me that after using the aromatic blends for a while, the smell of tobacco becomes repugnant.) Others, though, argue that the sweet flavors attract nonsmokers — especially those too young legally to smoke or vape.
To repeat, I tend to favor broad use of vaping for smoking cessation. My logic is as follows: The cost of smoking in terms of human misery is enormous. Vaping seems to be the most effective route to smoking cessation. Vaping doesn’t appear to attract a terribly large number of nonsmokers — including the young, and the same goes for the aromas.
I find the data to be compelling, but I understand how one might conclude otherwise.
What is more mysterious is how this particular issue has degenerated into one more hyperpartisan conflagration. With some exceptions, conservatives/Republicans champion vaping and liberals/Democrats hate it. For me, the left’s opposition is all the more peculiar, given their widespread support for dispersing condoms, methadone and clean needles for harm reduction. The same A-B-C-D logic applies to these programs as well as to vaping.
The best explanation for this sharp ideological/partisan divide is one I use with increasing familiarity, “It’s 2018.”