Common Sense and the Unknown

[rolygate]

The Ploom is a butane device, so you will be breathing in carbon monoxide. It's why you can't use any butane/propane heater in a small enclosed area - plenty of people have been killed that way. It makes no difference that it is a catalytic heater. Burning any fossil fuel produces a liter of water vapor per kilo of fuel, plus enough CO to kill people in a small space. It's why when used, wrongly, in an RV or boat, they make the place wringing wet and lethal to breathe - so you have to open a window, which defeats the purpose.

Heated tobacco, as in a hookah, is probably safer than burning it, but why do it when you can just inhale the pure alkaloids in a water or glycol base (as in an e-cig)? That must be orders of magnitude safer.

Yes, we are the guinea pigs, but it is very hard to imagine a situation where vaping is on average less than 100 times safer than smoking. Personally I think that by being careful there is no reason it should not be 10,000 safer than smoking - but it's up to the individual to sort that out.

There is tremendous pressure on vendors to supply the cheapest possible materials with the highest amount of flavoring. That is clearly not a safe basis for supply of materials that might be inhaled in large quantities for decades. Some of the liquids out there should not be used and I have my own proof of that.

My lungs are exceptionally sensitive and will not tolerate anything with potential issues. Example: I can't smoke more than 4 or 5 cigarettes a day without starting to get bronchitis.

I've gravitated to 100% VG as it has no issues for me as long as the brand itself is good. I tried one all-VG liquid and the result nearly had me in hospital unable to breathe before the end of the week - far, far more dangerous to me than any PG I've tried, or any strong cigarettes. Some flavors irritate my lungs badly, as well. So I think it is probably safe to say that VG has less issues than PG - but this absolutely does not apply to all brands. And in fact it may only apply to a very few.

I'm happy to use two well-known VG brands and I stick to them. No matter how much I vape, there are no issues - provided the flavors are of a mild type or at a low percentage.

So as far as I'm concerned, on the subject of how safe or how dangerous vaping is: be careful and sensible and I see no problem. In fact I would have no problem with someone suggesting it's 10,000 times safer than smoking, when controlled in that way.

But: buy the cheapest stuff you can get, and/or with fiery flavors that a flame swallower would flinch at, and you could be making problems for yourself down the road.

Just my opinion of course - but I do have some extremely sensitive testing equipment, which many don't

 

[paladinx]

Rolygate,

Yeah after thinking about it, not sure I would want to suck on something that has butane heating it up.. Sounds like you could be breathing in fumes.. I have no idea how it works though.. its not igniting it or causing a fire, but its creating heat somehow.

What you say I find kind of ironic in a sense.. I think maybe in the perfect world or the perfect e-liquid and devices maybe we can say something is 1,000,000 times safer,, but than you go to say that one week you almost went to the hospital over bad juice.. All of these inconsistencies factor in.. Someone going to E-cigs for the first time to quit smoking doesn't want to end up in the hospital or getting some kind of bad lung infection. What if there is an error and someone puts in 10x the amount of nicotine by mistake or the juice wasn't cut right.. Someone could actually even die over a mistake like that.
So tell me, what juices do you use now that you trust and are not getting any symptoms from? I would love to hear your recommendations. Sorry if you already posted them previously.. Sometimes I forget who posts what. But I would be interested in hearing it.

regards

 

[rolygate]

I can't give public recommendation or criticism, for various reasons, sorry. In a way that's a shame because I know where the bodies are buried - but that's, um, politics.

Pay top whack for your liquid and get it from a place where it's made in a real lab, and supervised by people with professor in front of their name; and/or with a team of 20 or 30 people who would be out of a job if there was a whisper their stuff is not as good as it should be. That's one way of playing safe.

 

[kinabaloo]

Couple of points :

My gut feeling says the figure is closer to 100 than 10,000. Still amazing !

@Roly - are you suggesting that a suspect is a forum funder? Wouldn't that be contrary to the notion that the forum serves to protect its members ? Or can that be ruled out and all suppliers who are forum sponsors pass your trust test ? Or perhaps you mean that you and the forum are not identical?

I'd suggest not going by price but by reputation and feedback; and avoid the novelty mixes.

Personally I wouldn't touch any liquid with vitamins, herbs, aspartame, sacharrine, sucralose, stevia, citric acid, has a sediment, is dark colored, has layers, smells off, looks hazy, tastes bad or causes adverse reactions.

 

[rolygate]

I have come to the conclusion that if you play safe, the risk is likely to be very low. But the problem is to identify what is 'safe'.

For a person interested in that route, I think that research will eventually lead them to the best options in that regard. I have no problem with the idea that careful control of what is inhaled can lead to a very, very low risk. After all, if one were to say e-cigs only have a hundredth of the risk of tobacco cigarettes, that is the equivalent of saying they are far more dangerous than Snus, which are proven to have a risk several times lower than that.

I tend to believe that e-cigs cannot be as safe as Snus, due to the inhalation issues for some individuals - but only when taken as an average for all users with all products in all quantities of consumption. For those who consume materials responsibly (that is, not in huge amounts, with the lowest amount of flavoring necessary, and with attention paid to the quality of the product), it seems to me that e-cigs can equal the very low risk of Snus. A Snus user has virtually the same risk as a non-smoker (someone who has totally quit).

But, to be honest, it doesn't seem to me that ultimate safety is of much interest to most people. When I see an overwhelming number of questions like, "Where can I find the cheapest e-liquid?", or statements like, "XXXX of Hong Kong has e-liquid at $2 for 30ml this week, get it while you can", then I feel that I'm probably out of step with the majority. You are either preaching to the converted or arguing against a mob of bargain hunters - so it's probably best to forget it...

As regards problems of various kinds, including quality issues, we normally have a quiet word with those involved and suggest they fix it. It tends to work better that way.

And it is also worth remembering that I am apparently concerned about things that nobody else gives a fig for, and it may not be worth the hassle. I've been banging on for ages about the lamentable lack of published testing of the finished retail product, and the obvious deduction from that fact: either the vendors don't know what is in their finished product or the results are too embarrassing to publish. So it is probably best if I drop the subject.

From my own perspective it seems unwise to inhale large quantities of cheap, untested materials for decades - and then expect there to be no consequences. I made the decision to use less materials, with less flavoring, and try to get the best quality available. But everyone has a different viewpoint on this, and I absolutely respect anyone's right to buy at the lowest price, use liquid with 30% flavoring, and hope for the best. As long as they don't come back in ten years and say, "Vaping did me in". Vaping didn't - your choices did.

 

[paladinx]

@Roly,
But do you see where things are right now that shouldn't be? When you say "as long as you play it safe".. Well I am sure many people first learn about e-cigs at their local mall or a gas station etc. A lot don't even know what is in the liquid or where it even comes from. I have no idea who uses a lab and who doesn't. I have no idea if someone who says they are making USA juice is simply mixing the solution in a bucket in their backyard. I have no idea 100 percent what every ingredient or chemical might be in the e-liquid. Perhaps it is easier for someone who is a web site manager on a forum to know what or what not to do specifically.. or even have the ability to form an opinion on such matters. And I believe someone in your position should state who is doing the good job even more. It sounds like a lot of trial and error, tons of research and speculation to form an opinion on the "safe" way. I am sure most people aren't even thinking along these lines. So than overall, how safe is it? If there was a strong quality control standard that people had to adhere to and we didn't have to worry or guess about who has a team of specialists making their juice or a lab etc.. Things would be A LOT better to me.

I do feel that the politics is what ruins everything. Someone in your position should be able to say hey X and Y company produce very high quality juice.. It would be a form of regulation we don't have in the market.

And I don't agree with snus users having the same risk as non smokers. A lot of studies done on snus have been either directly or indirectly funded by the tobacco companies in Sweden.. I am not suggesting they are very dangerous products, but I think its naive to think it carries no risk at all. There was a HUGE study done on snus that suggested cardiovascular risk was significantly higher in snus users. later studies done that were much smaller and funded by different people tried to rule this study out.. There were some problems with the study, but using the huge number of people and the amount of years, I still believe that study holds some weight today.. Consuming tons of nicotine daily will have an effect. A positive and negative effect just like any other drug..

Life isn't safe,, breathing isn't safe.. The only thing we can do is minimize our risk, but unfortunately, Money and politics makes it more difficult because everyone has their own interests at heart. But you know what.. If e-cig vendors/producers are able to sell their products regardless of the quality and safety of them because they pay an advertising fee.. When people start getting sick in another 5 or 10 years.. It will hurt the entire industry.

Oh and a side note, I asked a friend of mine who owns a ploom about inhaling the butane fumes.. He said that the it is totally closed off from the butane so no fumes go through. And that he never tasted or smelled it.. My guess is its sealed off completely and the butane just heats up the metal which vaporizes the pods. But I heard they are very tedious to use.. U have to refill the tanks like every 3 uses and the pods constantly.. etc.

 

[kinabaloo]

@Roly

Your comments suggest a bias against producers in the East that is backed by nothing other than 'lower cost'. So I wonder if this is just a general attitude (not that uncommon among forum folk, given the propaganda fed daily in the MSM) or do you have links to any producers of e-liquid?

Surely you remember when it was discovered that a TW liquid has a quite different nic content from the label (while the DeKang liquids were on the mark) and the 'bad' liquid period that JC went through. Not much evidence there that higher cost = better quality.

 

[paladinx]

kinabalooo,

For all we know, or for all I know, buying juice from China might be the safest bet.. Who really knows? Perhaps the Chinese, despite some past reputations have highly controlled facilities that are making things right to spec in a controlled environment. I remember Leaford posted a video from china while back showing the facilities and they did look top notch. On the flip side,, We might read made in USA as safer when in reality it could be someone in their basement mixing .... in a dirty bucket just throwing random .... in there without any accurate testing or measurements. So I mean we could look at this situation in many different ways.. I think that is why some people are opting to do it all themselves to know for sure.

This is my main point. How can we make all these beneficial health claims when the very basics of what we are using has so many variables and question marks. Everything is speculation and opinion, and everyone seems to have their own agenda. Do we really want to be guinea pigs and see who gets sick from what juice to know? We don't even know for certain if inhaling just PG or VG long term has any negative effects on our organs. And thats the very basics.. Forget about flavors, the devices themselves and everything else. I am not trying to be negative, or be anti anything.. I am using an e-cig as I write this.. I even just did a review on the Volt e-cig. All I am saying is, as it stands, it seems like a bunch of guess work and trial and error. Lets ....in nail down the people who are doing this right.. lets get them tested by a totally un-biased source.. Lets do the right ....ing thing and everyone buy from these people who have been tested and doing the right thing and than others will be forced to follow suit and develop some kind of standard.

 

[rolygate]

@paladinx
OK, several points here to address.

@Roly,
But do you see where things are right now that shouldn't be? When you say "as long as you play it safe".. Well I am sure many people first learn about e-cigs at their local mall or a gas station etc. A lot don't even know what is in the liquid or where it even comes from. I have no idea who uses a lab and who doesn't. I have no idea if someone who says they are making USA juice is simply mixing the solution in a bucket in their backyard. I have no idea 100 percent what every ingredient or chemical might be in the e-liquid. Perhaps it is easier for someone who is a web site manager on a forum to know what or what not to do specifically.. or even have the ability to form an opinion on such matters.

What you say is true - I do see a lot of trade, community, political and commercial info. Of course I have my own opinions. However, those opinions are clearly not held by others - for example I despair at the lack of organisation by the US trade; the lack of observable quality controls by vendors anywhere and everywhere; the way people seem to want to buy at the lowest possible price even though that must inevitably have health implications for some/many/most; the way people in the UK seem to think everything will be alright even though pharma and government agencies are determined to have e-cigs banned; the complete apathy about the same situation in the EU, which has even more serious consequences; etc. So in the end it's best if I keep quiet, if I'm out of step with so many people...

And I believe someone in your position should state who is doing the good job even more. It sounds like a lot of trial and error, tons of research and speculation to form an opinion on the "safe" way. I am sure most people aren't even thinking along these lines. So than overall, how safe is it? If there was a strong quality control standard that people had to adhere to and we didn't have to worry or guess about who has a team of specialists making their juice or a lab etc.. Things would be A LOT better to me.

There are major issues here. In reality, it has to be community groups that provide this form of leadership. In practice I am in an impossible position here because everything I do offends someone somewhere - so I'm walking on thin ice. In contrast, a community association can do exactly what you describe, with no comebacks. In the UK, ECCA has started down that road, and is discussing a Seal of Approval for vendors. This will, probably, eventually have a quality control (and therefore finished product published GC-MS results) compliance requirement.

I do feel that the politics is what ruins everything. Someone in your position should be able to say hey X and Y company produce very high quality juice. It would be a form of regulation we don't have in the market.

Because of my position, that is exactly what I cannot say.

And I don't agree with snus users having the same risk as non smokers. A lot of studies done on snus have been either directly or indirectly funded by the tobacco companies in Sweden. I am not suggesting they are very dangerous products, but I think its naive to think it carries no risk at all. There was a HUGE study done on snus that suggested cardiovascular risk was significantly higher in snus users. later studies done that were much smaller and funded by different people tried to rule this study out.. There were some problems with the study, but using the huge number of people and the amount of years, I still believe that study holds some weight today.

I am simply going on the collected work of the various experts who have commented, such as Rodu, Siegel, Phillips and Bergen - as I have no specialist knowledge in this area. Their collected opinion is that the difference between quitting totally or switching to Snus is so insignificant that it can be ignored (a paraphrase of a quote from one of them). They must know what they, and that's their opinion. Take the study by Peter Lee of South London, for example (the medical statistics expert) - he's done several, but I mean the one which was a meta-analysis of 61 clinical trials and surveys of large numbers of Snus users over decades. The conclusion was that Snus use has such a low risk it is not significant. An individual might decide they have a pre-disposition to cardiac or stroke issues and not use Snus, but even so, the risk is hundreds of times less than smoking.

[edit]

Consuming tons of nicotine daily will have an effect. A positive and negative effect just like any other drug.

I absolutely agree. In fact, I think this is one of the two things that will eventually bite us: lung issues for some people, and long-term nic consumption issues for some. But let's be fair - responsible consumption of consumer stimulants, or indeed any product, is a matter for the individual. Some will overdo it, and the result is their fault and no one else's.

The basic problem I see with e-cigs here, though, is that it is so easy for anyone to over-consume nic over the long term. Especially when you consider that there is a group of people who display no symptoms whatsoever of nic OD (until it's serious of course). For those who start to feel it when they overdo things on 12mg, I don't think there's much of a risk; but for those who can take any amount of 36mg without even knowing it (and the folks who do 48 and even 60mg), there might be a comeback. Even so the numbers will be tiny compared to smoking morbidity/mortality - so perhaps there's nothing to worry about. Unless you're the one who gets the A-Fib, of course.

Life isn't safe,, breathing isn't safe.. The only thing we can do is minimize our risk, but unfortunately, Money and politics makes it more difficult because everyone has their own interests at heart. But you know what.. If e-cig vendors/producers are able to sell their products regardless of the quality and safety of them because they pay an advertising fee.. When people start getting sick in another 5 or 10 years.. It will hurt the entire industry.

I agree, but it is extremely difficult for me to simply publish everything I hear. This is what I mean by 'politics'. There is a balance to be drawn and the issues are far more complex than it appears on the surface. That is one reason why I have pushed strongly for community groups to be formed, and to move forward. They can do what I cannot.

Oh and a side note, I asked a friend of mine who owns a ploom about inhaling the butane fumes.. He said that the it is totally closed off from the butane so no fumes go through. And that he never tasted or smelled it.. My guess is its sealed off completely and the butane just heats up the metal which vaporizes the pods. But I heard they are very tedious to use.. U have to refill the tanks like every 3 uses and the pods constantly.. etc.

That's actually very interesting. I have to admit that I haven't tried one. But even if there is no CO in the the inhaled airstream, you must realise it is going to be more risky than an e-cig. It seems similar to a hookah, in effect. The only possible benefit I can see is that you get all the WTAs, including nicotine. But there have to be safer routes than this: WTA-inclusive e-liquid, or Snus, for example. I see no major problem with WTA liquid.

 

[rolygate]

@Kinabaloo
I do have personal experience of QC issues in China, the UK and US (and knowledge of business in Asia and the West). My opinions are based on that experience. I have also seen analyses of liquids from various sources including unpublished lab results from FDA seized materials, the contents of which were confirmed as correct by the firms concerned, and which were never made public.

My personal choice is to buy the most expensive e-liquid made in the UK (of which there is a choice of two sources). But that's just my choice and unless someone of your standing asks me a direct question on this, it's normally kept quiet.

 

[paladinx]

"the way people seem to want to buy at the lowest possible price even though that must inevitably
have health implications for some/many/most;"

Well again, that could be due to ignorance. Some might not care about the risks, but I think most people care because why would they quit smoking to begin with and use this alternative? I would say the majority are doing it because they believe it to be safer. No matter where you buy your e-cigs from, many companies, if not all, continuously make the claim that these are safe alternatives to smoking cigarettes. Even on TV commercials they say all you are breathing in is water vapor.. So people figure hey e-cigs are completely safe, and buy whatever juice from whoever. Those who do buy cheap juice who are educated on the matter might have a difference of opinion.. As i said previously they might actually feel more comfortable getting juice from a facility in China.. Ex. Leafords video on Chinese produced E-liquid.



:"In practice I am in an impossible position here because everything I do offends someone somewhere"

Well money and politics.. However I see nothing wrong with a list or recommendations of producers who are taking the extra effort or initiative. If certain producers are using known labs or procedures that can be documented, why shouldn't they get recognition over others who do not do the same. maybe there should be different standards in places like these where companies come market and make a profit besides paying advertising and marketing fees. I think everyone who has a vested interest in this business should realize collectively that if people start getting sick or if law suits start happening everyone is going to lose out. i mean this isn't big pharma or big tobacco with billions of dollars to lobby with. The majority are regular people who open up a website,, import stuff from china put a brand on it and resell it at a marked up price. Pleasing everyone who pays a fee to be here without caring or looking into the products they are selling will be the down fall of the industry in my opinion.

And again I am not speaking of personal opinion, I am talking about validating those who go the extra step to make sure the products they sell are as safe as they can be. One slip up of too much nicotine could KILL someone. All the FDA will need is a couple of deaths or diseases directly linked to these things and we are finished. Snus got where it is partly because they took the extra step of setting up their own quality control guidelines.

theres gonna be a time within the next few years to a decade where we are not going to be able to write off every side effect from vaping as an allergic reaction to PG.. or that it is in someones head, or that they are just suffering from cigarette withdrawals. We might actually start seeing some negative effects as years go by and people are chain vaping for years.. My hope is that everything turns out the way we believe and it is a much safer alternative.. But we should all try to make sure that result is more likely than not.. and part of that is setting up ethical/production guidelines of some sort instead of monetary ones.


I do have personal experience of QC issues in China, the UK and US (and knowledge of business in Asia and the West). My opinions are based on that experience. I have also seen analyses of liquids from various sources including unpublished lab results from FDA seized materials, the contents of which were confirmed as correct by the firms concerned, and which were never made public.

"""I do have personal experience of QC issues in China, the UK and US (and knowledge of business in Asia and the West). My opinions are based on that experience. I have also seen analyses of liquids from various sources including unpublished lab results from FDA seized materials, the contents of which were confirmed as correct by the firms concerned, and which were never made public."""

Does this information ever get disclosed to us? it sounds like valuable information thats being kept secret. I mean its scary to me that someone of your position, whether you own/co-own or moderate this huge source on e-cigs has all this information they could contribute to help everyone make better decisions and it has to be hush-hush to cover everyone's asses.

 

[rolygate]

"the way people seem to want to buy at the lowest possible price even though that must inevitably have health implications for some/many/most;"

Well again, that could be due to ignorance. Some might not care about the risks, but I think most people care because why would they quit smoking to begin with and use this alternative? I would say the majority are doing it because they believe it to be safer.

No doubt. But it seems to me that people think any use of e-cigs is very safe. That may be the case, of course, but I tend to believe that is not entirely true.

And also it is worth pointing out that when I've engaged in arguments on this before, people said very clearly that in their view it didn't matter - vaping is so much safer than smoking that quality (and therefore cost) is not an issue. This was the clear message I got, and there are some very loud voices with this opinion.

"In practice I am in an impossible position here because everything I do offends someone somewhere"

Well money and politics.. However I see nothing wrong with a list or recommendations of producers who are taking the extra effort or initiative. If certain producers are using known labs or procedures that can be documented, why shouldn't they get recognition over others who do not do the same. maybe there should be different standards in places like these where companies come market and make a profit besides paying advertising and marketing fees. I think everyone who has a vested interest in this business should realize collectively that if people start getting sick or if law suits start happening everyone is going to lose out. i mean this isn't big pharma or big tobacco with billions of dollars to lobby with. The majority are regular people who open up a website,, import stuff from china put a brand on it and resell it at a marked up price. Pleasing everyone who pays a fee to be here without caring or looking into the products they are selling will be the down fall of the industry in my opinion.

I agree but there are reasons unconnected with money, that I can't be in the forefront of any major drive to 'promote quality' or 'expose wrongdoers'. This is why you need to join your national consumer association, and demand they deliver what you, the consumer, want. If that is some kind of quality score, good. But you might find you are fighting an uphill battle when somebody finds out that to actually deliver proven quality, the cost of the product rises. As I've said again and again, the loudest voices are those who want the cheapest possible product and sod the consequences.

theres gonna be a time within the next few years to a decade where we are not going to be able to write off every side effect from vaping as an allergic reaction to PG.. or that it is in someones head, or that they are just suffering from cigarette withdrawals. We might actually start seeing some negative effects as years go by and people are chain vaping for years.. My hope is that everything turns out the way we believe and it is a much safer alternative.. But we should all try to make sure that result is more likely than not.. and part of that is setting up ethical/production guidelines of some sort instead of monetary ones.

Hmm, it seems to me that you are implying I do what I do purely for monetary reasons. If that were the case I wouldn't have spent thousands of hours on all sorts of efforts connected with vaping and its future. There are plenty of business managers in this industry who go home at 5 o/c and that's it for them. I don't belong to that crowd and I resent any inference that I do.

The problem with politics - which is any mediation between trade, consumer and government - is that there are no simple answers. There is a balance to be struck, and the aim is to push that balance in your favor. Tipping the whole lot over is not a good result. I take a softly-softly approach and aim to make no enemies but plenty of goodwill. In the end, that works better than telling the trade how to run their business, or telling buyers what they need, or telling government staff they are nuts. All those things could indeed be done, but nobody - but nobody - likes the cold, hard truth. And that's the way it is.

 

[paladinx]

Again, we are talking about ignorance.. They want the cheaper prices because they believe the risk is still minimal. And those who are selling it, want to sell it on their terms.

Lets say hypothetically the truth of the matter is the health risks were great and they were aware that vaping the wrong juice could be just as deadly as cigarettes or worse. You mean to tell me these people still wouldn't care?? They don't care because the information available is limited and anyone can form an opinion based on nothing. Especially in a very Pro-vaping community.. Again I stand by what I said, If people actually believed there was a very real danger, why would they want to quit smoking in the first place. People come here gungho dismissing anyone with symptoms and everyone goes out of their way to stress all the positives of vaping and how much safer it is than cigarettes but when it comes to disclosing information about possible dangers or bad production.. oh well than there is a cause for hush hush and politics right? but if its good for business no one has any reservations for saying anything..

My statement about money was in general, and not directly aimed towards you I feel in a way you are dancing around the subject in the most politically correct way possible and I agree it gets hairy between govt/sellers/ etc.. The reason being is that no one has the people in their best interest.. That is the problem with the whole world right now, and why economies are in a crisis..

The bottom line.. to me.. If joe shmoes e-juice.com or x,y chinese factory is having some kind of major quality control issues or there is something wrong that you or anyone else knows about, how does that information get to us? You just said you have inside information about test results, and quality control problems and didn't mention any names or any specifics. How does information like this get to us so that perhaps people would be better informed and possibly even be willing to spend a few more bucks to make the product safer? Like I said before.. If people start getting sick in five years from now and it is linked with e-cigarettes.. what do you believe will happen to the industry and this web site?

 

[paladinx]

Thanks for responding to me and not deleting my posts as well. I respect that, and I am not trying to antagonize anyone or go after anybody. This site is great the community is great, the whole endeavor is great, but business is business at the end of the day.. and I would love to see people try and do something they normally never do.. To actually have and market a product that is a safer alternative and makes its success by actually staying true to its purpose and claims because history repeats way too often.

 

[rolygate]

There is no reason for me to delete any of these posts, it is one of the most interesting discussions I've had for a while.

You are probably unusual in that you see quality/safety as an important, or the most important, factor. If that is the case, I agree with you. But such a group is in the minority - why else would the clamor be for the cheapest possible e-liquid? I'm an old engineer and I don't think I have ever seen a case where it was possible to produce very high quality at very low cost. It's why a Bentley costs more than a Wartburg. To say it's possible in the e-cig industry seems extremely naive to me. For that reason I'm prepared to pay more, but I recognise that some don't want to. That's OK.

But it seems unfair for those people to then come back in twenty years and say, "I'm ill - and vaping did it". Oh no it didn't, chum - your choices did it.

In the end, the only way for people to get what they need is to have a big, powerful voice. There is no way to achieve anything without strength, without power. This is why consumer associations need widespread support. If they had it, they could negotiate on behalf of the buyer.

I think you are probably attributing more power to me than I have. All I have is the power to destroy what little good has been achieved so far - and I'm not going to do that.

This is a marathon not a sprint. We all need to ensure we're still there at the finish line.

 

[kinabaloo]

Thanks Roly for your answers. I might comment further but don't feel any great need to do so atm.

If issues get addressed that's good enough for me; no point in naming and shaming when there is willingness to put things right - agreed there.

 

[paladinx]

People always hear from vendors, suppliers and every other marketing platform that ecigs are 1,000000 times safer than cigarettes and all you are inhaling is water vapor.. IF people aren't made aware of the information they need to know, how could they be liable for making an informed decision?. What are their opinions really based on? maybe what they WANT to believe?
The whole selling point from the very beginning of e-cigarettes was marketing themselves as a SAFE or safer alternative. That is the super highlight of these devices.. The whole damn sales pitch. It is not that people don't care about their health or safety.. Of course they do.. they wouldn't be trying to quit smoking in the first place.. it is the fact they have a blind faith and believe that these things are unconditionally safe.. And maybe they are.. and they are right, but if there is information out there that says otherwise, and they never were made aware of it,,, isn't someone responsible? And shouldn't we try to correct the problems if there are ones,, before someone does get sick? Like I said this forum and community does a lot to tell people how much safer the devices are, but it doesn't seem like people are willing to do anything to better them or provide negative information if it exists, or try to create some kind of incentive for better quality standards...

what good is it if this industry gains a lot of money and momentum but in five years they link disease to the devices and have a reason to ban them completely or take control over it.

Snus has quality standards, but we don't have to pay 100 dollars a can, its still very cheaply priced... As the E-cig market continues to grow.. there should be something in place.. the least we can do right now is try to create responsibility where they are marketing their products and making profits. If companies are using labs, if they have invested money to provide more information or tests on their juice,, if they are taking the extra initiative for the consumer or something tangible or measurable,, it should be praised and given merit..
And I am talking about something tangible, not wild claims or who pays the most money, or the biggest vendor..

 

[rolygate]

Part of me agrees with you, but part of me says that it is pointless trying to convince people to ask for the best.

I've written an article on a 'hypoallergenic approach' to vaping, partly for my own satisfaction, partly because there are so many posts reporting various adverse reactions and asking for advice. That article will eventually go in the InfoPages, when we develop a magazine section in it. But I fully expect the main reaction to it will be the tinfoil hat type of criticism - unnecessary ideas promoted by someone who is going too far. That's been my experience so far.

Look at the diacetyl issue: many people are rightly concerned about it, but an equal number vociferously dismissed the whole idea as unmitigated rubbish. I believe a reasonable person would conclude that the evidence points toward every molecule of diacetyl destroying a microscopically small amount of lung tissue. Since that damage is irreversible, it seems a good idea, to me, to limit the amount of diacetyl inhaled - or remove it completely. But you need to understand that a large number of people not only could not care less about this, but make sure everyone else knows they think it all rubbish.

You may well believe that a sensible approach to risk is a good idea, with the idea of limiting it. That's certainly what I believe, at least for my own personal situation. But you need to understand that there are a large number of people out there who not only don't care about this, but believe that any talk of risk or health issues or quality regulations in connection with vaping materials is dangerous heresy that should be silenced, especially in the 'vaping press'.

So efforts to promote better products (which to me means products that are safer due to proven quality controls) will be supported by some but condemned by many. That is the quandary. As a vaping resource we should present both points of view, but as soon as one seems to be promoted more than the other, howls of protest will arise.

It's very easy to choose what you consider the best buy in e-liquids - there is so much choice. However it would be suicidal for ECF to tell people what we think is the 'best' e-liquid, and especially the 'worst' of the makes we at least allow to be promoted here. (We do exclude many as we don't think they are the right material to present to our members - so in that respect, we are doing some policing.) First of all our own staff would not agree on this point. Secondly 50% of members might agree but the other 50% would up sticks and go somewhere else for advice that looked more palatable. And thirdly, most of the vendors would accuse us of favoritism and make their displeasure known. So what exactly should we do? Answer: provide a ton of resources and let people make up their own mind.

The job of a consumer association is to bite that bullet - not a community and trade resource. I can't stress enough that people need to organise, and their best chance of getting the best deal is a strong consumer association. The consumer groups are out there, waiting, in theory, to hear your concerns. They need your help and support, and in return they can fight your battles. People need to ask themselves: when did I last donate some cash to my national e-cig community group? When did I last volunteer some time to help it? And then, finally: when did I last ask them to look at an issue I consider important? Because they are there for you and that is what they are there for.

...it is the fact they have a blind faith and belief that these things are unconditionally safe.. And maybe they are.. and they are right, but if there is information out there that says otherwise, and they never were made aware of it,,, isn't someone responsible? And shouldn't we try to correct the problems before someone does get sick? Like I said this forum and community does a lot to tell people how much safer the devices are, but it doesn't seem like people are willing to do anything to better them or provide negative information if it exists, or try to create some kind of incentive for better quality standards...

There is no factual basis for advice on what is 'good' or 'bad' in e-liquid choices. There is little research. No vendors publish a regular full analysis of a finished retail product (which is the only test worth seeing). There is gradual progress as a result of gentle pressure, though - but two things hold this process back: (a) the very large number of people who want the cheapest deal possible and will always go for a bargain no matter what the implications are; and (b) the fact that the consumer has no voice and no power. Perhaps nothing can really be achieved until one or both those factors begin to see some change.

This is a very, very new activity and market area, and in many ways like the wild west. People who want to change it for the better, without losing the whole thing to iron-fisted government regulation, are working quietly in the background. The best way to help them is to join your consumer group and make your voice heard.

 

[revolver]

Rolygate:

I was wondering if there was a chance of you sending me a PM including a list of TIPS sort of on what could be considered "safe vaping" according to your experience and impressions...
Meaning: Including tips such as: For example: I would avoid diacetyl because in my opinion... I would not vape VG over x Volts because... ETC.

Also including a list of the vendors you consider the most reliable safe-standards wise and any other related info which may come in handy...

I would really appreciate if you could do this or point me in the right direction here...

Thanks...

=)

 

[paladinx]

@Roly,

I appreciate your time and your responses.. I know you don't have to humor one single person ranting and babbling.. I appreciate it. Btw what is diacetyl? I am sort of new here again, and haven't been keeping up.. Is this a chemical in all liquids or only in particular flavors?

It sounds like we must have some kind of religious E-cult on our hands. Blind faith or just stupidity.. Everyone should want to make sure that quitting smoking and forming a new habit/addiction is as safe as it can be.. They must think they know all the answers or something. That is very troubling to hear.

I understand how you cannot choose favorites, or tell people who you like the best personally or where to buy.. I am not suggesting that. . I was suggesting something more generalized.. A list of vendors who are actually taking the extra initiative to help improve their products. If Janty for example spent their money getting a lab test done or something far and beyond what they legally had to do, they should be recognized.. Perhaps a generalized list.. NOT of favorites.. but of vendors who are doing X, Y , or Z.. it would only be informative purposes. LIke how you have a list of vendors who have coupon codes?? Why can't there be a list of vendors who are doing things that are making a difference. Or those who are getting their liquid tested etc.

If 50 percent of people agree with me or think like me,, than 50 percent of the customers will go to a juice/supplier who is taking the extra initiative with their products. The other 50 percent will be buying stuff spread out through many vendors.. So if the companies who are doing the right thing start being recognized and start making more profits and getting more buyers even if its 50 percent.. The others might want to consider doing the same thing when they start losing profits.. Most companies and people will copycat when something becomes successful. That is why we see 1000 singing competition shows on television, or 1,000 reality shows.. It only takes one person to take a big risk and have success and you will find everyone else following suit.

There is ALOT of information.. It is very overwhelming for someone new to e-cigs who hasn't read a billion threads. I think the entire e-cig community is MUCH bigger than just this forum or people who are into this hobby a lot.. Most people use e-cigs from their local mall or stores and have no idea about all this information.. I been on here awhile and I have no idea and never heard of diacetyl.. I don' tknow how to avoid it,, what it is etc..

I will say it again, all vendors out there,, from the mall kiosks to television commercials are telling people this is a safe device and all you are inhaling is water vapor.. These are the official claims of e-cigs in general. So if there is information out there to the contrary.. how is this community or these devices any better than the tobacco industry? Didn't they do the same thing, tell people cigarettes were fine for you on commercials and TV ads while there was information that suggested contrary that people never knew about? Anyway I think we are giving the FDA tons of reasons to go after us when we make all these health safety claims that cannot be backed up..like oh its just water vapor, and now there is even a chemical I never heard about.


@Revolver..

I would like to know this information too.. If a lot of people don't give a .... about it that is their choice, but for those who do care, they should be able to receive this information. As long as the information is public, than those who are aware of it can make their own decisions.