I tried to provide the link. It's to a pdf. I think that's why it didn't work. I googled united Kingdom permitted ingredients tobacco
Its the TMA.org link.
Unsmokable Samuel Gawith
- Thread starter mariorossi
- Start date
SmokingPipes.com Updates
Watch for Updates Twice a Week
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
Site Sponsors
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
- Status
Its the TMA.org link.
If they say they don’t use it, and it’s reported as such, then I have to take it at face value.
Your circular argument based on some obtuse document with no references doesn’t convince me.
Do you have a link to a current British law that says glycerol is not allowed in pipe tobacco?
No I sure don’t... what’s your point.
The OP stated that he though the cause of his problem may have been humicants. Other responded that that may or may not be the case, some citing certain references.
Others offered perhaps a different methodology for preparing said tobacco that might prove more favorable.
Without said link am I in contempt of Pipesmagazine...?
I would like a recess to further research the case threads in the annals of Pipesmagazine on this matter...
I did not posit that Gawith uses additives. I said that it is inaccurate to state that additives are not allowed in tobacco in the UK. That's all.
Google
PERMITTED ADDITIVES TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS IN THE UNITED KINGDOM which is the name of the government publication.
Follow the TMA pdf link and read the legislation for yourself. (or stick your head in the sand)
PERMITTED ADDITIVES TO TOBACCO PRODUCTS IN THE UNITED KINGDOM which is the name of the government publication.
Follow the TMA pdf link and read the legislation for yourself. (or stick your head in the sand)
That’s strange. I just smoked fvf for the first time expecting to experience some horror like this. I left one flake out in the sun for 20 minutes. Crumbled it up and smoked it. Was perfectly dry and flavorful
I've always wondered why Gawith tobacco is sold with so much moisture in it. Could it be that when they first started selling their blends most smokers just decanted from the tin to a pouch? So the moist tobacco would stay fresh for longer?
Personally, I don’t think that their tobacco is any more moist that any other manufacturers. There’s a limit to how much moisture you can have before it starts to mold.
Most of the Gawith tobacco that is sold now is relatively fresh (1-2 months old) since there such a demand for it.
A couple of years ago it might have sat at a distributors for several months or more. It’s my perception that tobacco that sits for several months or years tends to feel more “dry” and smokes better. How that happens I don’t know... I recently opened a 20 year old tin of SG Medium Flake, and while there was sort of a dried goop on the paper, it had enough moisture yet smoked just fine right out of the tin. But I’ve noticed the same thing with other manufacturers tobaccos.
Most of the Gawith tobacco that is sold now is relatively fresh (1-2 months old) since there such a demand for it.
A couple of years ago it might have sat at a distributors for several months or more. It’s my perception that tobacco that sits for several months or years tends to feel more “dry” and smokes better. How that happens I don’t know... I recently opened a 20 year old tin of SG Medium Flake, and while there was sort of a dried goop on the paper, it had enough moisture yet smoked just fine right out of the tin. But I’ve noticed the same thing with other manufacturers tobaccos.
So I asked if you had a link.
Well, rajangan said that humectants were allowed, and gave a link with a specific document. You said they weren’t allowed, provided no link, no document, and replied dismissively.
I was just following the thread, and trying to come to a conclusion for myself, wanting to learn from it.
No, it’s just hypocritical.
I would bet 10 to a penny that the owner of the shop added glycerine or some other humectant to give it a longer shelf "life".
that's what I was wondering..
and why I was sort of asking if the box was sealed.. ?
You know, that totally makes sense. The guy/woman might have gotten complaints that the tobacco is too dry and difficult to rehydrate, had some returns, lost some money, so they came up with a "brilliant" idea.
I would bet their turnover is very slow for that blend. Hence, the added humectants. I do think it is dirty. I wonder if the MFGer would approve. I doubt it.
Terrible! That’s the only reason that makes sense for why an SG flake wouldn't dry. They come wet, but water-wet, not humectant wet. The 250g packs come in a ziploc-style bag in a box - easily opened and “sealed” back up.
- Status