Confused about Diacetyl? You should be - read now

[Bill Godshall]

While I appreciate Oliver's posting at Confused about diacetyl? You should be | Vaping.com
and this discussion, this reminds me of the FSPTCA's nonscientific fear mongering and mandatory reporting (to the FDA, and subsequently communicated to the public) of trace levels of "Hazardous and Potentially Hazardous Constituents" (HPHCs) in cigarettes and smokeless tobacco products (which would also apply to e-cigs under FDA's proposed deeming regulation) except that tobacco prohibitionists and propagandists lobbied for those mandatory reports on HPHCs to further demonize, confuse and scare the public about the relative and comparable risks of different tobacco products.

The situation is also similar to the GMO food scares, and the demand by nonscientific Luddite opponents of GMO to either ban the sale of GMOs, or (when bans cannot be attained) to require labels for GMO foods (so GMO opponents can further confuse, scare and organize boycotts) except that in both of the these examples, vehement opponents of the products are the ones demanding labeling to further achieve their propaganda and policy goals.

Then again, to presume (without any evidence) that the mere presence of diacetyl and/or acetyl propionyl in e-liquid poses health risks for vapers, and to subsequently demand removal of or mandated labeling of those constituents in e-liquid is not much different than to presume (without any evidence) that all vaping is very hazardous, and to subsequently demand e-cigarette prohibition or to mandate fear mongering labels on all e-cigarettes (to confuse and scare consumers and the public about unproven, but potential and hypothetical risks of vaping).

Worst of all, this looks like an issue that Glantz, WHO, US DHHS, other e-cig prohibitionists and Big Tobacco companies could jump on to "divide and conquer" the vaping community and the e-liquid industry.

The burden of scientific proof is (and should be) on those who hypothesize that diacetyl and/or acetyl propionyl (or nicotine, propylene glycol or anything else) in e-liquid poses disease risk(s) to vapers.

 

[Oliver]

Bill, I'm slightly surprised you take that view.

Given what we know about DA/AP in other contexts, they simply must be considered risk factors even if the hazard they pose is not yet quantified.

If this plays out badly as far as regulatory politics are concerned, well then too bad. Vapers are concerned about this, and have the right to know whether these compounds are in the liquids they're using.

Or at least I think they have that right? Perhaps I'm wrong, perhaps they don't. Honestly, I don't know any more.

 

[soulseek]

Bill what are you proposing? That we ignore DA/AP concerns until proven otherwise?

 

[Alien Traveler]

The burden of scientific proof is (and should be) on those who hypothesize that diacetyl and/or acetyl propionyl (or nicotine, propylene glycol or anything else) in e-liquid poses disease risk(s) to vapers.

Ok,ok, I see your point now:
Since nobody will perform a study (with exception of FDA...) we should assume the easiest way: change nothing and treat vapers as guinea pigs and wait for results of their biopsies, in something like 15 years. Then we'll see...

 

[Rossum]

Vapers are concerned about this, and have the right to know whether these compounds are in the liquids they're using.

Or at least I think they have that right? Perhaps I'm wrong, perhaps they don't. Honestly, I don't know any more.

Well, we definitely have the right to refuse to buy products for which no test results are available, and if enough of us exercise that right, most products WILL have test results available..

 

[Racehorse]

Then again, to presume (without any evidence) that the mere presence of diacetyl and/or acetyl propionyl in e-liquid poses health risks for vapers, and to subsequently demand removal of or mandated labeling

In the free market, I get to decide how I spend my money.

If my preference is to eat non-GMO foods, and not vape DAP-laden elquids, with or without scientific proof of what it does or doesn't do, that is my choice.

All I'm asking for is transparency and truthful information.

Don't take my $$ and then send me a product that isn't what you say it is. Because that, for all practical purposes, constitutes consumer fraud.

The burden of scientific proof is (and should be) on those who hypothesize that diacetyl and/or acetyl propionyl (or nicotine, propylene glycol or anything else) in e-liquid poses disease risk(s) to vapers.

That is entirely beside the point, as I explained.

I can elect and choose NOT to eat or inhale anything I wish. Whether it is disease-producing or not. Whether there is any proof or not.

But I certainly have a right, as a consumer, to know what is in the product so I can make an informed decision.

THAT burden of proof is on the maker of any product which is used as intended, i.e. is inhaled or eaten and taken into a human body.

I already vaped stuff that had titanium dioxide in it. I would not have, had I known it was in there.

(how would you "politcize" that, Bill?)

 

[Itshak]

Sure we have every right for pushing industerie to come up with the most
Safe and quality product that can be made,we are the customers after all,
That's how I figure customer service.

For the time maybe vendors could offer some Half cut Flavors/sweetness versions of some
Suspected tastes...just a thought after all some choose to lower NIC to very low..maybe others
Will choose the same for some Flavors.
That until we get better formulated recipes like the Artist Collection
Turned out.

All in all I think it's better knowing for most of us,then kept in the dark,even if major
Health issue don't manifest at all (they didn't up until now !) still the best and safest
Products should allways be on the forefront and demanded buy us,we saw what happen
Not only in tobaco industerie related but also in other like food industeries when we don't
Voice concern and ask loud for better products.

The FDA and such don't always provide a real better secure,some times
The voice of the people and choosing one product on the other turn way more affective.

We see that on the e cig hardware market all the time: when people stop buying or prefer some other clearomizer
RBA RDA or MOD The producer seat and design a better one.

It's the same with juices,if we become more focus and with knowledge to know what to ask for
I bet in the end it may come the same.

I really glad for this thread,I learn a lot and I see serious vendors already taking actions.

cheers

Itshak

 

[Bill Godshall]

Given what we know about DA/AP in other contexts, they simply must be considered risk factors even if the hazard they pose is not yet quantified.

After Swedish snus was found to have (due to pasteurization) lower levels of nitrosamines than US smokeless tobacco products, many tobacco controllers have said the same (for two decades) about nitrosamines (i.e. TSNAs) in smokeless tobacco products (when demanding smokeless tobacco companies to voluntarily remove/reduce TSNAs, and when urging FDA to mandate very low TSNA levels for all smokeless tobacco products). But there is no epidemiological evidence indicating that US smokeless tobacco poses greater cancer risks than Swedish snus, and recent epi studies have found that US smokeless tobacco poses similarly negligible risks as does Swedish snus.

If this plays out badly as far as regulatory politics are concerned, well then too bad.

Except that if/when governments ban flavorings or ban e-liquid, vapers will still be able to obtain flavored e-liquid products (that may contain even higher levels of various constituents) from black market companies that have even less (if any) incentive for ensuring quality control. We'll also see more DIY e-liquid made by vapers, which are likely to pose even higher risks.

While I think concerned vapers should communicate their concerns with e-liquid manufacturers and suppliers, and that concerned vapers shouldn't buy/use products from manufacturers or suppliers they don't trust (or who won't provide the requested info), the last thing the vaping community needs now is for e-cig opponents to use this as wedge issue to divide and conquer.

 

[Mr.Mann]

[huge snip]

The burden of scientific proof is (and should be) on those who hypothesize that diacetyl and/or acetyl propionyl (or nicotine, propylene glycol or anything else) in e-liquid poses disease risk(s) to vapers.

The burden of proof should be on anyone making an objective claim about the products they sell to the public. For a few years the vast majority of eliquid manufacturers made claims about diacetyl's presence in their eliquid -- it was always right there in plain sight on their sites. No agency forced the many that made these claims, but becasue so many did make those claims the industry backed itself into a corner. No nanny did that to us. In our industry the ones that hypothesized and profited from that hypothesis -- that diacetyl was a risk -- were the vendors who marketed their products as free from diacetyl. So who really brought this hypothesis to our industry?

 

[Visus]

I'm not sure it would make any difference. Diketones do not chemically change over time, nor do they break down or increase by any significant amount. Other flavors may be altered by the aging process, but the volume of diketones should remain pretty constant.

Part of the reason they are used as flavoring in microwave popcorn is because they remain at a consistent level of saturation and flavoring over extended periods of time on shelves. You wouldn't want your 4 month old bag of popcorn to taste any different from your fresh bag of popcorn.

Why do you comment on what you do not know? YES diketones grow they are like yeast in the instance of growth.. In beer making they either force growth of diketones or inhibit with using cold filtration the cold filtration is purposely used to hold the diketones/yeast at that level to create their flavor profile then and there. Many wines such as chardonnays let diketones grow to their maximum and inhibit yeast so as to possess a buttery nipple taste profile.. If yeast are allowed to continue they will eat all the diketones and remove the buttery effect. Its a balance for proprietary flavor.. Geesh.. Did you even read up on diketones or thought you were brilliant and know more than scientist postings. They grow and mutate...

Microwave popcorn uses the actual source coding of diacetyl its isolated in suspension and it's growth is inhibited but its still growing albeit slowly..

I also make homemade wine so i did a further study of diketones because of OP and understand a lot more and hopefully it will help my wine gifts..

 

[Racehorse]

the last thing the vaping community needs now is for e-cig opponents to use this as wedge issue to divide and conquer.

It was the last thing the TB horse racing community needed, when the demand for transparency increased. The majority didn't want to give PETA "more ammunition" by reporting abuses, crooked vets and trainers.

Thus, in order to keep the $$ stream intact, used-up, injured horses continued being shot-up with (TOTALLY LEGAL) therapeutic veterinary approved antiflammatories and pain meds, instead of retired or given pasture time to rest and recuperate from injuries/not racing.

Some of those poor creatures broke down during races (and crippled jockeys in the process). That woke a few folks up. Some horses who were no longer fit to race were "disappeared" off the backside in the night, supposedly "given to some nice lady who has a horse rescue org".....and later found starving on the side of the road, or sold by the pound and waiting at New Holland after months of neglect and abuse, now skin and bones, to be slaughtered.

Despite this, the majority were still saying "don't give PETA any ammunition" to those who were writing about it, inside the industry and who also loved horse racing, but wanted it to be *better*.

They were flamed and called names, and told it would be their fault when racing was ended forever.

But those who wanted to do the right thing for the horses and not just for some human's bank account, perservered.

Thankfully, those who cared more about ethical behavior than agenda-driven behavior, pursued improvements (and didn't care who knew about it in the process, or how embarassing it was.......because everyone knew anyway, and PETA would keep picketing the sport before, during, and after anyway.)

Unfortunately, in a few cases, the FEDS finally had to be called in, to raid a few off-site farms and racing tracks like Penn National, when the covering-up got out of hand or the little "hand-slap" fines didn't stop the abuses. (Or should I say, the horrors. ) It was a huge embarrassment, but it did the trick. Jail time, big fines, and licenses suspended for life. Those jerks won't be allowed w/in 10 feet of a living, breathing horse.

As influential people and big name trainers got involved in improvements, people inside the racing industry itself, became more plentiful, it's a vastly better industry than it used to be, (although still a long way to go compared to Hong Kong's ultimately transparent industry) But there are retirement orgs working on pretty much every backside now, veterinary reports being made public, and a lot more of the "right" kind of eyes on it, looking to improve safety for the humans and the horses.

IMHO, you do the right thing, even if it is "to the delight of your enemies."

Just want to say that many of us have been to this rodeo before, Bill, in many different industries.

 

[thewomenfolk]

Generally, I don't like government regulations, but this is one area that needs regulations to protect ejuice consumers.

I wouldn't trust any Vendor to simply 'say' their ejuices are free of diacetyl, etc.

 

[Robino1]

Generally, I don't like government regulations, but this is one area that needs regulations to protect ejuice consumers.

I wouldn't trust any Vendor to simply 'say' their ejuices are free of diacetyl, etc.

I don't know if that is the answer. I do feel that we as consumers can let our voices be known and that vendors will listen. Especially when, not if, we voice those with our money.

 

[aikanae1]

Generally, I don't like government regulations, but this is one area that needs regulations to protect ejuice consumers.

I wouldn't trust any Vendor to simply 'say' their ejuices are free of diacetyl, etc.

I don't understand why anyone would think regulation is intended to address any of this. The FDA wants to ban flavors, they just don't have the authority yet. This is an excuse for them to say "we don't know enough yet" to support banning flavors. The FDA doesn't want more work such as wasting time on screening studies on flavors that is specific to a nusiance small industry (vaping). If anything, that would be their worst nightmare.

Dealing with multi-thousands (and growing) small businesses is another nightmare for them. They are used to and comfortable with a handful of people (revolving door syndrome) to accomplish pretty much whatever they need.

IMO, the path of least resistance is what the vaping industry needs to focus on. I suggested a trade org. to spearhead safety issues that the FDA could work with. I don't give a flying _ _ _ _ whether it's "socialist" or "piglatin". The industry needs to figure out how to fit in within the existing frame, traditional organizing hierarcy - or content with the results.

This includes labeling with 'my little pony' cartoons and using trademarked names of other products - or holding "super hearo" atty contests on facebook (which is a haven for underage vaping groups). We don't have to agree with it, but refusing to acknowledge and work within the established framewook is refusing to take the path of least resistance. All I want to suggest is to 'pick our battles wisely''.

Do I think it's rational that the vaping community has the numbers, power or strength to overthrow the FDA or gov't? Nope, esp. when we can't even convience vapers that federal regulations have nothing to do with public safety or health. Fed regulations are 100% about market control largely because the FDA doesn't want to deal with 100x1k small businesses when they can turn things over to TEVA / big tobacco and be done with it.

That's the way Congress works as well. The investigational study done that has informed Congress of "marketing to children" and all the other garbage was done using TEVA / big tobacco. They didn't consider the independent vaping community. They aren't prepared to see anyone outside of an organization. The structure doesn't exist for anything else and the likelyhood "we" will change that is remote.

 

[aikanae1]

You know 5p advertises they pre-steep using oak barrels, etc. and I'm wondering if that might contribute to the varying levels of diacetyl found. They could be setting up the process and if someone tests it several months later, it could continue to grow based on this article (could happen to anyone). Diacetyl In Beer-Buttery Flavors and Aromas in Homebrew

 

[johnspack]

Switch to
Butyric acid - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[johnspack]

Sounds nasty, but good flavors, and no acetion or ap.

 

[johnspack]

Both TPA DX flavors and Capella V2 flavors are diketone free, but use butyric acid.

 

[johnspack]

I mix using only diketone free flavors, and I mix all of my own flavors. I don't buy .... from Premium vendors who don't even list the lab certicication on the bottle. Mix your own, and be safe. And stay under 100 watts for god sakes.

 

[Almighty]

My adv is capella VC at 15% with 2% DDL from tfa, so im following this thread closely, i will try the capella VC v2 with butyric acid, idk what to expect