Dimitri Goes Off on Rant About Dishonest Liquid Vendors

[LouisLeBeau]

I have seen at least one person demand involuntary disclosure. This is not something I can agree with. A company not making a claim to be diketone free should be enough, you don't see the claim, you don't buy, if that concerns you. Demanding that a company put "not tested for diketones" is akin to forcing smokeless tobacco to have the warning "not a safe alternative to cigarettes." At least until there is a confirmed risk from diketones.

In absolutely most cases, I would agree with this. HOWEVER, we have to remember that SOME of the members of ECF are informed enough about this issue to make an intelligent choice. Many I am sure, are not. Now add in the 100's of Thousands of vapers who don't even have a CLUE what a diketone is or why they might want to be concerned about it. Who is looking out for them? Surely not the manufacturers. Surely not the retailers and gas stations, whose only interest is to move product.

I can't even believe myself that I am taking this position. It is NOT consistent with my leanings at all. Problem is, between the B.S. from 5P, and the ridiculous stance of those in Denial here, I am beginning to see that somebody needs to blow a hole through this shroud of nonsense and shine a light on the situation so far more can know the issue, and form an opinion. If DA and AP levels were stated on the bottle, then people would have the opportunity to ask, What is AP and DA? Why do I need to know this? That's why the industry is pushing back on it. Awareness of the issue is NOT their friend. People can't make an educated decision, until they are EDUCATED.

There IS hollering back. Walk into ANY fast food restaurant today that has a clue. On the menu now, is the nutrition information for the choices they have. Why? Oh yeah, Mickey D's WANTS you to know how much FAT and SALT is in their Big Mac. Not. Consumers started asking for this info. Consumer groups and the Govt. took notice. Being slick like they are, they "pro-actively" made pamphlets. But nobody wants to wait until they get to the counter to ask for it, and then stand there studying it while others wait behind them. It didn't work. PUT IT OUT THERE, customers demanded. Consumer groups agreed. The Govt. agreed. It was going to happen whether they liked it or not. So there it is. What customers asked for.

I want to know. If I am in the minority, I can easily live with that. But it isn't very fair to have a vote, if we don't even tell people with a stake, that there is an election or the what and why. I think that we here, in the miniscule minority to even be able to HAVE an opinion, shouldn't be choosing whether or not vapers should know the contents of their juice. I think it's far more prudent to let EVERYONE know whats in their juice, and then let them figure out and decide for themselves if they want to vape that stuff. That's erring on the side of caution. Usually preferred by most, except the reckless and stupid.

 

[Jman8]

Now you are being silly! That is not just their liquid - by your logic you can say the same about every single person who sells 0%. I think I need a break

I'm not being silly. This is the same type of issue as the DA / AP debate.

If all other vendors are claiming zero, but it does in fact have some in there, then they are lying. If they are not providing the actual number via test results, I'd think there'd be an equal level of concern, based mostly on the fact that if they are lying about this, who knows what else they are lying about. I mean, how can they ever be trusted again?

 

[Jman8]

If DA and AP levels were stated on the bottle, then people would have the opportunity to ask, What is AP and DA? Why do I need to know this? That's why the industry is pushing back on it. Awareness of the issue is NOT their friend. People can't make an educated decision, until they are EDUCATED.

Would "this product may contain trace amounts of DA / AP" suffice for you? Or if "trace amounts" is somehow too questionable, then "this product may contain some DA / AP."

If not, why not?

 

[DC2]

When I was a young lad, nothing could harm me.
And I mean nothing.

I was indestructible.
And that feeling continued on into my forties.

Over time I came to understand that my body does not hold up as well under pressure.
Especially as the years advance, and take their toll.

Popcorn Lung may or may not have anything to do with diketones.
And even if it did, one can not be certain about the dynamics of vaping and the level of potential harm.

But I am not going to take that chance on this one.
Not this one.

Because if...

Popcorn Lung, as far as I'm concerned, is worse than cancer.
And I promised my wife I would not die before her.

Would "this product may contain trace amounts of DA / AP" suffice for you? Or if "trace amounts" is somehow too questionable, then "this product may contain some DA / AP."

Informed decisions can not be made without hard numbers.
Even if one has to pick and choose what those numbers mean to them.

 

[englishmick]

I thought your argument regarding Cloud 9 was a bit of a stretch.

You are a master of understatement Sir.

 

[Lessifer]

In absolutely most cases, I would agree with this. HOWEVER, we have to remember that SOME of the members of ECF are informed enough about this issue to make an intelligent choice. Many I am sure, are not. Now add in the 100's of Thousands of vapers who don't even have a CLUE what a diketone is or why they might want to be concerned about it. Who is looking out for them? Surely not the manufacturers. Surely not the retailers and gas stations, whose only interest is to move product.

I can't even believe myself that I am taking this position. It is NOT consistent with my leanings at all. Problem is, between the B.S. from 5P, and the ridiculous stance of those in Denial here, I am beginning to see that somebody needs to blow a hole through this shroud of nonsense and shine a light on the situation so far more can know the issue, and form an opinion. If DA and AP levels were stated on the bottle, then people would have the opportunity to ask, What is AP and DA? Why do I need to know this? That's why the industry is pushing back on it. Awareness of the issue is NOT their friend. People can't make an educated decision, until they are EDUCATED.

There IS hollering back. Walk into ANY fast food restaurant today that has a clue. On the menu now, is the nutrition information for the choices they have. Why? Oh yeah, Mickey D's WANTS you to know how much FAT and SALT is in their Big Mac. Not. Consumers started asking for this info. Consumer groups and the Govt. took notice. Being slick like they are, they "pro-actively" made pamphlets. But nobody wants to wait until they get to the counter to ask for it, and then stand there studying it while others wait behind them. It didn't work. PUT IT OUT THERE, customers demanded. Consumer groups agreed. The Govt. agreed. It was going to happen whether they liked it or not. So there it is. What customers asked for.

I want to know. If I am in the minority, I can easily live with that. But it isn't very fair to have a vote, if we don't even tell people with a stake, that there is an election or the what and why. I think that we here, in the miniscule minority to even be able to HAVE an opinion, shouldn't be choosing whether or not vapers should know the contents of their juice. I think it's far more prudent to let EVERYONE know whats in their juice, and then let them figure out and decide for themselves if they want to vape that stuff. That's erring on the side of caution. Usually preferred by most, except the reckless and stupid.

I don't agree with you, but okay, let's take your approach for a minute.

What ingredients do you want listed? Is it only the ones YOU think are important? Or do you want every chemical that makes up each flavoring component listed? Most flavoring companies don't list all of the components of each flavoring.

In all honesty, there isn't any reason to be any more or less concerned about diketones, in our application, than any other flavoring chemical.

 

[LouisLeBeau]

Would "this product may contain trace amounts of DA / AP" suffice for you? Or if "trace amounts" is somehow too questionable, then "this product may contain some DA / AP."

If not, why not?

Absolutely! It would be a helluva start. At the very least, it would give people an opportunity to find out what those are and understand why they might want to be concerned about them. From there, it would only be a matter of time, little time I'd add, before people started asking the REAL question. How Much and what is a safe amount. We don't really know the answer to the 2nd part, do we. That's a problem. But the first step in solving a problem, is knowing there IS a problem

 

[Lessifer]

For a completely absurd and yet absolutely real outcome of this train wreck, look up California's Proposition 65 Warning Labels.

 

[kates]

My position is as it was on page 39

I think the important thing is that there is a transparency. The situation with D/AP is that in ejuice it is intentionally added above a certain level - with cigarettes it occurs through combustion and couldn't be removed even if they wanted to. Dr F said that at low levels in ejuice/ flavouring (I think around 10ppm?) it is considered a contaminate i.e. is naturally occuring either from certain natural flavours or through the combination of certain ingredients. This is not considered a problem. When the numbers go up it has been intentionally added - either by the flavour manufacturer or the juice maker. It is not accidental. So a level of 0 is unachievable and unrealistic - but a level where it has been intentionally added can be tested for. Certainly in the UK, due to upcoming regulation - minimal DA/AP seems be the aim of most reputable juice makers and I think that intentionally added diketones will probably be banned. (I am also at the moment in favour of disclosure not banning).

I really am going now because I have come down with a serious case of deja-vu.

 

[Jman8]

Informed decisions can not be made without hard numbers.
Even if one has to pick and choose what those numbers mean to them.

If informed decisions cannot be made without hard numbers, then I could see how $330,000 per product is a good thing, for people to make (truly) informed decisions.

Your assertion also just happens to help make the case for C9 as being deceptive, even easier. They are at some point on their site saying zero nic products may contain nicotine, but are surely not providing hard numbers, thus not allowing informed decisions to be made (by your rationale). That they aren't saying it on their sales pages though makes for easier argument of how they are (outright) lying.

 

[LouisLeBeau]

I don't agree with you, but okay, let's take your approach for a minute.

What ingredients do you want listed? Is it only the ones YOU think are important? Or do you want every chemical that makes up each flavoring component listed? Most flavoring companies don't list all of the components of each flavoring.

In all honesty, there isn't any reason to be any more or less concerned about diketones, in our application, than any other flavoring chemical.

Where does this come from? I (with a capital I) am not qualified to know what is important. Diketones have been a concern since I started vaping 3 years ago. WE should want the ingredients that are of concern to the qualified medical people who are studying this field. What THEY are concerned about. Did I really have to state that?

I'm no dictator. I don't want to tell anyone what to do. I am ONLY saying it is right to give the necessary information to people so they can decide for themselves what to do. You can go shopping for a car for your 16 year old daughter and buy whatever the heck you think is cool. Me, I want the NHTSA crash ratings. And I'm darn glad they're available, because it is my daughters LIFE behind that wheel. I'm not desiring any kind of action from anyone, except the information to make an informed decision. NOT wanting someone to provide that? Why?

Edit: And while I am on the subject, Do you know WHY the NHTSA crash ratings are so important? Well, at first blush, it seems obvious. It lets you pick the safest choice. But here's the REAL thing about them. They have become an important part of consumers decision making process. The automakers aren't stupid. So they now have to strive to MAKE these numbers as good as possible to give them an advantage over their competition. That means they are putting FAR more money and research into making the vehicles safer than they would have if those ratings were NOT available to the public. See any correlation there?

 

[DC2]

You are a master of understatement Sir.

Thanks, I try.


It's how I've gotten through six years on this forum with only two minor dings.
One was for an early drug reference, but the other was clearly a direct frontal assault on a poster.


I would dispute the ding I got for the frontal assault, as I feel I was attacking the content of the post.
But I guess calling someone a "sophist" is not appreciated much by the one being called that.

Even if, by definition, being a sophist means the content of your post is at issue.

 

[Jman8]

Absolutely! It would be a helluva start. At the very least, it would give people an opportunity to find out what those are and understand why they might want to be concerned about them. From there, it would only be a matter of time, little time I'd add, before people started asking the REAL question. How Much and what is a safe amount. We don't really know the answer to the 2nd part, do we. That's a problem. But the first step in solving a problem, is knowing there IS a problem

The how much thing, we might never agree on. A person that wants gluten free products, doesn't IMO have right to demand how much gluten are in products they may otherwise enjoy. Then go as far as demand the product list the exact amount of gluten on there, so they can then argue for "informed decision."

There are seemingly some that want zero DA / AP in their product. Some that ate up vendor claims that suggested this as accurate, ya know, cause the vendor said so. Then there are probably so many varying degrees of "acceptable limits" that I don't see how an industry could manage that, much less a vendor. A third party standardization body would certainly claim they have come up with acceptable limits, and for sure some consumers will be okay with this (really not knowing any better).

IMO, the "how much and what is safe amount" inquiries are items to investigate on your own and make determinations that satisfy you. Not expect a vendor to cater to that specific need, though would be very cool if a vendor did. Would be like if I went to DIY person and paid them for stuff they could make for me. They do this. Then I assertively ask them to do more items, like could you just list how much vanilla and strawberry is being used, and what exactly a hint of lemon means. They could cater to my requests. There is argument there that says they could. But I'm guessing they wouldn't, and as they aren't exactly a business, would probably have no issue telling me to bug off.

I guess I am wondering at what point does a vendor have any right to say to a consumer, no I will not be doing that, without being labeled as completely unresponsive to the reasonable requests of the consumer?

 

[Lessifer]

Where does this come from? I (with a capital I) am not qualified to know what is important. Diketones have been a concern since I started vaping 3 years ago. WE should want the ingredients that are of concern to the qualified medical people who are studying this field. What THEY are concerned about. Did I really have to state that?

I'm no dictator. I don't want to tell anyone what to do. I am ONLY saying it is right to give the necessary information to people so they can decide for themselves what to do. You can go shopping for a car for your 16 year old daughter and buy whatever the heck you think is cool. Me, I want the NHTSA crash ratings. And I'm darn glad they're available, because it is my daughters LIFE behind that wheel. I'm not desiring any kind of action from anyone, except the information to make an informed decision. NOT wanting someone to provide that? Why?

I'm not sure if you haven't read all of my posts, or are just not quite understanding.

It's not that I want manufacturers NOT to provide information, I just don't believe in MANDATING that they provide it. If you want that information and they don't provide it, move on. This isn't like an NHTSA crash rating, it's like a carfax report, good to have, not absolutely necessary.

One of the same experts who thinks this is "of concern" also believes that dry burning a coil/pulsing it is the "worst thing one could possibly do." So, are we going to start demanding that coil head manufacturers disclose whether or not the wire was pulsed before wrapping?

Diketones are a concern, they are not a known risk.

 

[YoursTruli]

How is it a stretch? They are advertising liquid with 0 nic. If it contains any nic, then they are lying.

I don't get how this is any different than the current issue. They could rather easily link every sales page to the page where they mention (and imply) that zero doesn't mean zero. That they don't is deception. That they don't publish the exact amount of nicotine (whatever the trace amount is) on zero nic liquid, is very akin to the arguments on DA / AP.

Would be more accurate / transparent to call those zero nic liquids. .02% nicotine or lower. Short of that, and they are engaging in same logic that 5P is currently using. But seemingly getting a free pass, cause of the hoopla around the current issue.

did you even read what you wrote or are you so bent on making a comparison that doesn't even exist to strengthen what ever point you are trying to prove that it does not really matter... obviously they disclosed this as you yourself have pointed out and amazingly no one even asked them to do so they did so voluntarily to inform their customers...so how does that by any stretch equate to being dishonest.

 

[Jman8]

did you even read what you wrote or are you so bent on making a comparison that doesn't even exist to strengthen what ever point you are trying to prove that it does not really matter... obviously they disclosed this as you yourself have pointed out and amazingly no one even asked them to do so they did so voluntarily to inform their customers...so how does that by any stretch equate to being dishonest.

Because they are not doing so on the sales page. The place that is most logical to have that information, and not tucked way down in middle of page that has very little to do with the sale.

On their sale pages for products advertised with nicotine, they include warnings about nicotine. On the sale pages for tobacco flavors advertised with zero nic, no warnings. Yet, why not, if nicotine is poisonous and you already know your zero nic flavors contain some amount of nicotine?

The comparison exists because they are knowingly being deceptive about something they acknowledge as poisonous.

 

[LouisLeBeau]

I'm not sure if you haven't read all of my posts, or are just not quite understanding.

It's not that I want manufacturers NOT to provide information, I just don't believe in MANDATING that they provide it. If you want that information and they don't provide it, move on. This isn't like an NHTSA crash rating, it's like a carfax report, good to have, not absolutely necessary.

One of the same experts who thinks this is "of concern" also believes that dry burning a coil/pulsing it is the "worst thing one could possibly do." So, are we going to start demanding that coil head manufacturers disclose whether or not the wire was pulsed before wrapping?

Diketones are a concern, they are not a known risk.

There you are wrong. Diketones ARE a known risk, in the event of inhaling them. SO FAR we only know that they are an inhalation risk in the case of the food industry. And ONLY because sufficient time and exposure has occurred there. This isn't true of vaping, there has not been enough exposure and time. The flavorings ARE food flavorings. So, Occums Razor again. My money is on them being so.

We both know that Farsalino wandered WAY out of his field of expertise in positing that nonsense about dry burning. We both know he was going to discredit himself WITHIN his own field, when he did that, and that people were going to throw that out there at their convenience. I really didn't expect it of you though.

Do you plan on vaping diketones? If not, why not?! If you do, you might be in for a surprise. If you don't, well, we know now you still might be in for a surprise. And why the hell would my daughter care about NHTSA crash ratings? I'm sure she doesn't plan on crashing...

 

[Jman8]

Do you plan on vaping diketones?

Yes.

I think it is folly to plan on not vaping it, while still planning on vaping.

 

[Mazinny]

I don't agree with you, but okay, let's take your approach for a minute.

What ingredients do you want listed? Is it only the ones YOU think are important? Or do you want every chemical that makes up each flavoring component listed? Most flavoring companies don't list all of the components of each flavoring.

In all honesty, there isn't any reason to be any more or less concerned about diketones, in our application, than any other flavoring chemical.

No difference between a known risk( in a different context ) and an unknown one ?

 

[Lessifer]

There you are wrong. Diketones ARE a known risk, in the event of inhaling them. SO FAR we only know that they are an inhalation risk in the case of the food industry. And ONLY because sufficient time and exposure has occurred there. This isn't true of vaping, there has not been enough exposure and time. The flavorings ARE food flavorings. So, Occums Razor again. My money is on them being so.

We both know that Farsalino wandered WAY out of his field of expertise in positing that nonsense about dry burning. We both know he was going to discredit himself WITHIN his own field, when he did that, and that people were going to throw that out there at their convenience. I really didn't expect it of you though.

Do you plan on vaping diketones? If not, why not?! If you do, you might be in for a surprise. If you don't, well, we know now you still might be in for a surprise. And why the hell would my daughter care about NHTSA crash ratings? I'm sure she doesn't plan on crashing...

My only point in bringing up the dry burn issue is that there are no infallible experts in this field. Yes, he is as close as we have right now, but even he is not infallible. If you read his studies, even he states diketones as "of concern" and not a KNOWN risk, because they are not. It may suck that that is all the information we have at this point, but it doesn't change it.

I will concede that diketones in an industrial flavoring situation are a known risk(even though that's not completely true), BUT that is not a direct correlation to them being a known risk in the vaping application. We may have reason to believe they are, but it is not known, it is entirely possible that vaping diketones is as harmless as eating them.