Is the whole scandal with da and ap overblown? Some numbers inside
- Thread starter Vapey_McVape
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Yes. I don't eat fast food at all; or soda. Believe it or not, some vapers are health conscience...
The only fact I see is that you made a personal statement about your own observation and suggest that this is a generally valid observation about facts. Which it is not.
Even if it were true and could be proven ("no known cases"): This would not tell much about possible long term effects. Not having any symptoms at present does not mean that this will not be the case in x years - this is something every ex-smokers knows. COPD did not happen after 5-6 years.
It is fine with me if your observation convinces you. What I don't agree with is the generalization via statements about facts that are none.
I would be very much against a tax levied against a product in the case where there was not a single known example of significant and permanent harm done much less a statistically meaningful number of harmed persons.
The linkage between tobacco and lung cancer, heart disease and etc were established by epidemiological studies. Studies of real harm. Some people argue the details of those studies but at least people were known to be getting sick that were also smoking. That is decidedly not the case here at the present time.
There are no *known* concerns here, there is only theory. We are not popcorn factory workers. If the gov't can tax excessively based on unproven theory, we are all in great trouble and it extends well beyond vaping. And non-vapers should be particularly concerned with that idea. But they won't be. Voters and citizens never think that deeply. They will be satisfied that they, personally, are not being taxed. This time. They won't think about next time when the idea of taxes based on theoretical harm become precedent.
CDC ran an ad about some dual user that vaped, quit, kept smoking and died of (or was terminally ill due to) failed lung function.
I bring this up because I think we can expect opposition to bring forth more people claiming harm (damaged lungs) due to vaping and because I am one that disputes the data on harms around smoking. I do not see it as harmless, but do see opposition as over reaching in how they reach their conclusions of harmfulness. Seriously, anyone reading this, go check on how data of "smoker deaths" are calculated to realize what sort of, world wide, propaganda machine we are up against. Even vapers cite these numbers as if they are "fact" without backing up that fact. They base it on what they were told, and well again, I invite anyone to go do research on this "fact" to see how utterly made up, out of thin air, that it is.
Was just thinking yesterday how the first vaper that dies is going to ruin it for the rest of us. I say that facetiously, but also with some seriousness, because it almost won't matter how that death occurs, for vaping to be blamed as "contributing factor." One day, in the not so distant future, they'll have stats on "how many vapers die annually" with the follow up meme of 'vaping kills."
It would seem the discussion meets a consistent stalemate, for one side thinks the other is saying, "vaping is completely harmless." And the other side thinks the other is saying, "it is completely harmful." Of course there are many degrees in between, and many who will argue about the degrees in between, but it seems like these two positions pop up routinely in these type of threads, especially when "facts" are being discussed.
Me, I think it is relatively harmless. I mean water kills people, so that's not completely harmless, but in shared reality, it is relatively harmless. You can drink it, bathe in it, for many many years. But eventually, all people who have drank water, will die. I am not aware of any exceptions to this. Plus there are those that will drown in it, and/or OD on it because drinking too much water at one time is, how you say, harmful/deadly.
But like @VNeil is repeatedly saying, I find it incredibly difficult to get behind assertions of vaping is harmful, potentially harmful, when there is so very little data currently existing to lead a reasonable person in that direction. By this sort of logic, there is literally zero substances / activities / behaviors on planet earth that are without (potential) harm.
Subscription Center | ChicagoBusiness.com
CA State Controller: State has $8.5 BILLION Cash Deficit, Gov. Brown Calls That a Surplus | Watchdog Wire - California
N.J. budget shortfall was $275 million worse than Christie thought, document shows | NJ.com
Do you see the trend ?
They haven't even combined the ejuice sales which would be more than double the amount of sales.
E-cigs sales on fire while tobacco cigarettes decline - Fortune
CA State Controller: State has $8.5 BILLION Cash Deficit, Gov. Brown Calls That a Surplus | Watchdog Wire - California
N.J. budget shortfall was $275 million worse than Christie thought, document shows | NJ.com
Do you see the trend ?
They haven't even combined the ejuice sales which would be more than double the amount of sales.
E-cigs sales on fire while tobacco cigarettes decline - Fortune
Two comments....
One, If you disagree with my observations then disprove them with links to cases of vaping related lung damage. If neither you nor anyone else can dredge up cases of vaping related lung damage then I find it impossible for my observation not to meet the test of "generally valid". Either disprove it with cases or give it up.
Second, I have said several times that in regard to diketones, the damage to popcorn factory workers was "immediate", detected within one year of employment at the mixing stations. The entire case of diketones is predicated on the experience of popcorn workers. You cannot pick and choose facts you find convenient. Or, present your reasoning why vaping is different and why diketones inhaled via vaping might take decades to cause noticeable harm when it takes only a year in a popcorn factory.
This thread is about diketones and popcorn lung disease. It is NOT about COPD. Personally I refuse to get sidetracked into COPD arguments. I'm having enough trouble getting people to see what is in front of their noses. However, any argument that vaping might cause COPD would be quite tortured in light of the fact that most or all vapers with COPD report significant return of lung function, or at least apparent lung function, in terms of ability to physically exert themselves.
Once again, you are refusing to accept a simple observational fact I made. You cannot dispute it, yet you refuse to accept it, using straw man arguments to try to deflect away from a simple observational truth. The emperor has no clothes yet you avert your eyes and refuse to accept that simple truth. There are no known cases of significant and permanent vaping related lung damage and you and your friends have been unable to provide a single link to dispute that.
Any critically thinking person must admit that the known facts simply do not fit the theories suggesting harm.
the problem is we are inhaling it. we don't know the dose.
we need long term studies.
why are the vendors not testing for this?
regards
mike
How long is this required long term study? I doubt I'll live another 20 years, regardless if I vape, so I'm not sure I have time! The study will be great for my grandkids though, in their early 30s by then.
You could do a rough back of the envelope worst case calculation to see if you are even close to the limit of 700mg/kg.
Let's assume a specific gravity of 1.0 for the concentrate (PG runs about 1.04, this is back of the envelope)
Assume a minimum body weight of 50 kg (110LBs for Americans, a fairly petite woman, average guy would weigh 50% more or better)
0.7 * 50 = 35g = 35 ml
That's 35ml of concentrate and that may drastically underestimate it since I'm assuming 100% flavoring where I think the typical flavoring is suspended at around 10% or so in a PG solution. So possibly very worst case.
Typically single vape flavorings do not exceed 15% of total eJuice, and more typically 10%. At 15%, that's 233ml of eJuice, at a minimum, for a petite woman. For a more average 160lb guy, more like 340ml of juice.
If my back of the envelope calculation has no serious flaws, I think we are ok because most of us vape far less than 233-340ml/day
ETA: My calculation is truly worst case, assuming *ALL* the flavoring is retained on inhale. The truth is more like 10%, with 90% expelled in the "cloud". But we don't need to even go there and make that estimate.
Last edited:
I do question the idea that the exposure with factory workers was (likely) a constant and how that compares to non-factory setting. Every breath that was taken, was taking in the PPM. With vaping, it is taking in PPM during puffs, and then periods of taking in something close to zero during normal breathing. Normal breathing in the factory would be PPM going into lungs.
I don't think this equals no chance of any risk for vapers (or smokers, or anyone else inhaling these compounds outside of factories), but do think the consistent/constant exposure arguably matters to how the condition arises.
I also think "damage to lungs" is something that occurs with most, if not all, humans from the moment they leave the womb. I think irreversible damage is something that is plausibly occurring with all people, and would seem to be ignorance to deny this as contributing factor that is also entirely unlikely to be determined via controlled studies. I do think science has attempted to account for this in its own way and will continue to take it into account, but will likely minimize this sort of influence as it is not something that can be firmly established via controlled studies.
From what I recall Dr. F. stating (and I just recently re-immersed myself in much of what he had to say on this topic), he believes flavor manufacturers are the ones to do the testing / provide test results. So, when he says "industry," I believe he means flavoring industry and not eLiquid industry. I think if flavor industry will not be doing such tests, that Dr. F. (and likely many others) thinks that eLiquid vendors ought to be doing the test, if for no other reason than disclosure.
From the moment a flavor is produced, to the moment it is ingested, I think it would be prudent for everyone to do testing due to consumer concern around this. Even if person/company before you provided lab results, I think it prudent to do own testing, for several reasons. Most importantly, because then you will be in the know, rather than relying on trust. I think the person that is ingesting it, and is truly concerned is, by far, the most sensible person in the chain to do the testing. I do think it helpful for others to do the testing, but if they do and user does not, then user is not really knowledgable about existence of compound and is essentially relying on trust.
If it is impractical for user to do testing, then that's on science partially. It ought to be practical to do the testing. From my recent research of Dr. F. info, I am aware of fact that many consumers are doing own testing, and thus isn't inherently impractical for consumers to do this. But I do realize if consumer has say 80 flavors currently in stock, and limited budget, that it wouldn't be feasible for them to do own testing. Likewise, if vendor has 300 flavors in stock, and limited budget, it might not be feasible for that vendor to do own testing, regardless of consumer demand.
For practical purposes, and for keeping costs down, it would be ideal for flavoring manufacturer to do the test, and then just trust that as "good enough" for everyone else going forward. But "practical" is going to have limitations that highly health conscious people would rightfully scrutinize as plausibly insufficient.
I also think the substitute or really any alternative to the perceived issue are items that are in category of, "we don't really know" and/or "we do not have long term studies on this." We do know that in the 6+ years of millions of people vaping, many of which have inhaled some amount of DA/AP that there have not been lots of cases of harm associated with vaping. Arguably, there have been so few to even consider vaping as potentially harmful. Yet, we don't know if these same people (and all potential users) won't contract something that is indeed harmful and widespread among users. Likewise, we don't know that if we make changes now, thinking we are doing something right, that this too won't lead to widespread harm 20 years down the road. Thus, it truly is a gamble either way.
OP asked for my thoughts about this, and this is mostly what I think about the DA / AP issue. I would've started with ANTZ factor as I see that as almost more important with regards to this issue than anything. I brought it up in previous post, and hint at it here in final paragraphs because I think it will have significant impact in how this issue is framed, dealt with and (possibly) resolved. I think when we vapers say it is harmful and doesn't need to be in there, it is but a short step to realize the same could be said about nicotine. Nicotine is not harmless, nor does anyone "need" it to vape if vaping for healthy reasons. But as that is highly debatable in the vaping community, and as flavors are truly near the top for why vaping is so enjoyable/popular, then I think vapers ought to really really really scrutinize motives for monkeying with entire industry based on something that even Dr. F. has said is a very rare condition to contract.
Bottom line: I see it as an inflated concern that will likely be with us for a long time to come, and that won't be the only ingredient/compound where we have this sort of discussion.
There are some fairly simple tests for diacetyl one can do at home. They are related to home brewing, but the principle is the same,but it seems AP is actually far worse than diacetyl...
ETA:
Were you asking why Vendors were Not Testing for Da and AP?
Or were you Asking about Testing for that Citrus Flavoring you Linked to?
And your evidence to that effect? In terms of actual harm done to human vapers, not organic chemistry theory.
But in 6 years of live studies, no humans were harmed. My sympathies to the rats. Rats should not vape those flavorings, for sure.
You seem to think so. Can you cite a study where vapers have been vaping e-liquid with high amounts of AP for the past 6 years? Especially with the way new vapers are vaping? Rats are far tougher than people. If it affects them I can't imagine the damage it does to humans...
looks good but,your going by digesting not inhalation.How long is this required long term study? I doubt I'll live another 20 years, regardless if I vape, so I'm not sure I have time! The study will be great for my grandkids though, in their early 30s by then.
You could do a rough back of the envelope worst case calculation to see if you are even close to the limit of 700mg/kg.
Let's assume a specific gravity of 1.0 for the concentrate (PG runs about 1.04, this is back of the envelope)
Assume a minimum body weight of 50 kg (110LBs for Americans, a fairly petite woman, average guy would weigh 50% more or better)
0.7 * 50 = 35g = 35 ml
That's 35ml of concentrate and that may drastically underestimate it since I'm assuming 100% flavoring where I think the typical flavoring is suspended at around 10% or so in a PG solution. So possibly very worst case.
Typically single vape flavorings do not exceed 15% of total eJuice, and more typically 10%. At 15%, that's 233ml of eJuice, at a minimum, for a petite woman. For a more average 160lb guy, more like 340ml of juice.
If my back of the envelope calculation has no serious flaws, I think we are ok because most of us vape far less than 233-340ml/day
ETA: My calculation is truly worst case, assuming *ALL* the flavoring is retained on inhale. The truth is more like 10%, with 90% expelled in the "cloud". But we don't need to even go there and make that estimate.
there could be totally different reactions going on.
we have no idea what inhalation would do to the
lungs or liver. until thoroughly tested I believe citrus
flavors should be avoided.
regards
mike
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
