Dimitri Goes Off on Rant About Dishonest Liquid Vendors

[DC2]

I'll go with... "Simply Duplicity"

I'm sure you meant to say Simply Duplicity, LLC

 

[YoursTruli]

Some don't see to "get" that it doesn't matter if DAP is bad for you, any more than it matters if GMOs are bad for you.

As a consumer, I don't have to wait decades for an answer to that. All I need to do is say that I don't want to vape DAP and I don't want to eat GMOs.

So don't sell me something and say it's not those things, when it is. That is consumer fraud, plain and simple.

This ♥

 

[Lessifer]

It leaves us where we keep saying we want to be: A new industry that wants and needs to be self-regulated.

Which I'm pretty sure requires more than empty excuses or a plethora of advertising copy.



Some don't see to "get" that it doesn't matter if DAP is bad for you, any more than it matters if GMOs are bad for you.

As a consumer, I don't have to wait decades for an answer to that. All I need to do is say that I don't want to vape DAP and I don't want to eat GMOs.

So don't sell me something and say it's not those things, when it is. That is consumer fraud, plain and simple.

What part of my posts makes you think I'm not okay with you asking whether or not it's there? Or not buying it if it can't be verified that it's not there? Or someone making the claim that it's not there, when it is? Or did you just quote my post as a starting point?

In this case, where so little is actually *known for sure*, I don't think the gov't is in any position to say how much can be there -- but they're certainly in the position to require listing of ingredients.

I fall into the category of, if it's in there, period, I won't buy it -- as I said before, equivocation of "how deadly" seems ridiculous to me. Like those things on food that say "produced in a factory with x, y, and z" -- if I was allergic to x, y or z, I wouldn't buy that product. If I saw some indication that there were ANY diketones in an ejuice, I simply wouldn't buy it, nevermind how much or how little. I do that now, with flavors. "Trace amounts" are still more than 0.

But I think there does need to be some regulation that if diketones are present, in any quantity, it should be noted -- those who don't care, buy all you like! I don't care, but I'm not going to buy it. I can't be an informed consumer, if I'm not informed. That's why I went to DIY -- flavor mfr's are more likely to know, more likely to tell, and less likely to lie about it -- they were around before vaping, and would still be around even if vaping went kaput tomorrow - god forbid.

Andria

Here's how I see it, if it does not explicitly say "diketone free" with a link to certified lab results, I assume there are diketones present. Is that not acceptable?

ETA: Especially since we've seen that we can't take vendor claims at face value. If you don't see a lab result, assume it's in there.

 

[Robert Cromwell]

i for one believe the labs results are accurate.
that's not the problem.
the problem is were the samples traced and
documented with a chain of custody that can be
used in a court of law from manufacture, packaging,sale,
shipping, receiving and preparation to be sent to the lab.
the samples the lab received were most certainly
analysed correctly.
everyone is assuming 5P's tests are inacurate.
that would mean they rigged their samples.
on the other hand everyone thinks Cloud9 and
Vapersharks test results are accurate and thus
5P and other vendors are the villainy of the e-cig world.
something is not right here.

regards
mike

C9 had nothing to gain and profit to lose by showing false high results on 5P juice.
5P had profits to protect and lies to cover by at least sitting on their test results and squelching the test results of others on their juice....
But in the long run they lose more profits than their testing and reformulations would have cost them.
Just my take on it.

 

[AndriaD]

Here's how I see it, if it does not explicitly say "diketone free" with a link to certified lab results, I assume there are diketones present. Is that not acceptable?

ETA: Especially since we've seen that we can't take vendor claims at face value. If you don't see a lab result, assume it's in there.

That would be acceptable to me, certainly; but we live in a world where it's apparently not commonly understood that coffee, when fresh-poured, is hot -- at least it must not be common knowledge, since McDs feels obliged to print "Caution: contents is hot" on every coffee cup -- so that they don't get sued AGAIN when some doofus dumps it into their lap. In that world, purely for liability issues, any ejuice maker who knows there's diketones in there should feel obliged to note that fact on their pkging. Because as sure as I'm sitting here typing, someone will vape some of it, then find it contains diketones, and sue -- because it didn't say it was there, on the pkg!

Andria

 

[Lessifer]

That would be acceptable to me, certainly; but we live in a world where it's apparently not commonly understood that coffee, when fresh-poured, is hot -- at least it must not be common knowledge, since McDs feels obliged to print "Caution: contents is hot" on every coffee cup -- so that they don't get sued AGAIN when some doofus dumps it into their lap. In that world, purely for liability issues, any ejuice maker who knows there's diketones in there should feel obliged to note that fact on their pkging. Because as sure as I'm sitting here typing, someone will vape some of it, then find it contains diketones, and sue -- because it didn't say it was there, on the pkg!

Andria

Oh, I have no doubt that once lawyers get involved, there will be a lot of warnings, as long as someone can prove harm.

Of course that doesn't actually solve anything. In the case of the hot coffee, McD actually has a policy of making the coffee hotter than most people can comfortably drink it, so that it will still be hot by the time you get to wherever you are going. The result of that lawsuit was not that McD makes their coffee any less hot(safer), but instead there is now a mostly unnecessary warning, making it harder to sue them in the future.

If the results of all of this are that all liquids carry a warning of "May contain diketones" are any of us any safer? If that were to become the norm, and I had a liquid that I formulated and tested as diketone free, I'd still put that label on there as a CYA. Then it becomes as informative as a prop 65 warning.

 

[Jman8]

Well Jman, you've done a heck of a job making the other sides argument.

We're all on the same bus. Perhaps on the other side of the aisle, but the same bus. You want to drive on the other side of the yellow line (diketones) with the headlights off(disclosure), because it's POSSIBLE we won't get in an accident and you like the other side better, and you have the right to do what you want. I think it's foolish.

I think it foolish how you are characterizing the other side of the argument. Not that this will change how you frame the other side, but I tried to refrain from that, and now well, you opened that can of worms back up.

Your side of the aisle wants FDA to drive the bus, but says you don't, when your arguments amount to what FDA is precisely up to. Because it's POSSIBLE that a vaper might one day die from B.O. and who's to blame for that, other than the company who forced the consumer to buy their product and intentionally harmed them by intentionally lying about their added ingredients, that you ordered. No wait, that you were forced to order.

But you are right, we are all in it together.

Score one for Team ANTZ.

 

[Jman8]

HAHAHA!!!! REALLY? REALLY? That's your idea of the primary solution to this?

It is. Given the ridiculous level of concern, it is easily the best consideration.

That those of us that don't want Diketones in our juice just not vape? Or DIY?

Or do your own testing. Or ask vendors what their stance is, plus other possible, respectful requests.

The solution you all appear to be suggesting (putting it as nicely and accurately as I can is): industry / vendors, must be made aware that consumers will not tolerate any DA / AP in liquid. We need a campaign that is writing, talking, calling, social networking with the industry so they are clear on this. Anything more than zero DA / AP is unacceptable. Unless Dr. F. or someone tells us of an acceptable limit, then okay, some DA / AP is okay.

Next vendors must test all their liquids, and any combination of liquids they might offer for sale. At $200 a pop, that ought to be easy. If you make a thousand or more flavor combos, oh well. Might be costly, but you're in the big boys game now and you are either serious about the issue we all made you aware of, or you deserve to go out of business for your lack of quality assurances. Heck just basic assurances. Won't anyone think of the children?

Next vendors must publish full results of these lab results. Publish them on their website. If anything changes slightly about the particular eLiquid, do another test, and publish the results. Duh! And because my Aunt Edna doesn't have that internet thing just yet, you're going to have to publish dem results in way that is accessible to everyone. Labels would be best. Packages for eLiquid ought to contain mini pamphlets so that we all can make the most informed decision possible. No wait, they ought to mail those out to me before I purchase. And when I purchase. And after I purchase, in case I ever want another order. Anyway, the costs for the publications will be really cheap, cause what's paper cost? Pennies. And a webpage? Pennies. If you can't keep up in the market, oh well, sucks to be you.

And if somehow after all this, vapers still get B.O. or some other malady, well that's just because we didn't get to them in time to mandate these effective control measures. If only the Jmans of the community would've listened to us earlier. Little Johnny might still be with us. Won't anyone think of the children? But seriously, if a vaper does get hurt, I'd 100% blame the vendor for their product and decision to sell it. The vaper obviously didn't do anything wrong, and is not responsible for their decisions to vape. I heard BT got them addicted to nic in the first place.

 

[Woofer]

Yeah just think, 5P would have to sell 300 mls of juice to cover the lab costs, oh the burden.

 

[skoony]

C9 had nothing to gain and profit to lose by showing false high results on 5P juice.
5P had profits to protect and lies to cover by at least sitting on their test results and squelching the test results of others on their juice....
But in the long run they lose more profits than their testing and reformulations would have cost them.
Just my take on it.

yes they do.the bottom line.
do not tell me you are that ignorant.
regards
mike

 

[skoony]

this is not over.
unlike some that rest upon popcorn lung,
i will continually research the the issues
and bring back to this thread and those like this
the real issues.
to boldly go where no other vaper has gone before.
regards
mike

 

[BigEgo]

Some don't see to "get" that it doesn't matter if DAP is bad for you, any more than it matters if GMOs are bad for you.

As a consumer, I don't have to wait decades for an answer to that. All I need to do is say that I don't want to vape DAP and I don't want to eat GMOs.

There's a big difference in DAP and GMO's. There's is no real science that says GMO's are harmful to human health, while there is a lot of science that says DA/AP are harmful when inhaled.

 

[Robert Cromwell]

yes they do.the bottom line.
do not tell me you are that ignorant.
regards
mike

HUH? C9 removed a lucrative good selling product from their inventory = profit lost.
Like if stores stopped selling Mt Dew.

 

[skoony]

HUH? C9 removed a lucrative good selling product from their inventory = profit lost.
Like if stores stopped selling Mt Dew.

explain to me as if i was a five year old why
one would spend money if not for a return on
the investment.
regards
mike

 

[skoony]

There's a big difference in DAP and GMO's. There's is no real science that says GMO's are harmful to human health, while there is a lot of science that says DA/AP are harmful when inhaled.

to well defined workers in the food processing industry.
regards
mike

 

[Robert Cromwell]

explain to me as if i was a five year old why
one would spend money if not for a return on
the investment.
regards
mike

When you buy a MT Dew are you making an investment? No but whomever sells it to you is making a profit. Same with ejuice. C9 no sell 5P ejuice which people want they no make profit.
Do you make a profit not selling something?

I am ignorant on lots of things, but I am not stupid.

 

[zoiDman]

explain to me as if i was a five year old why
one would spend money if not for a return on
the investment.
regards
mike

Not sure Exactly what you are Saying?

But If it mean Cloud9 spending Money on a Laboratory Test, could it be that they Wanted the Public to know for Health Reasons?

Sure, Money Drives the World. But if I felt that High Levels of AP are Harming People. And Felt that Vapers Should Know. Is it so Out of the Question that I would Spend 200 Bucks on a Lab Report to Alert Vapers?

Just one Possibility.

 

[Robert Cromwell]

Not sure Exactly what you are Saying?

But If it mean Cloud9 spending Money on a Laboratory Test, could it be that they Wanted the Public to know for Health Reasons?

Sure, Money Drives the World. But if I felt that High Levels of AP are Harming People. And Felt that Vapers Should Know. Is it so Out of the Question that I would Spend 200 Bucks on a Lab Report to Alert Vapers?

Just one Possibility.

I think C9's testing is also driven by upcoming EU regulations.
So yes staying out of trouble and in business is a ROI from the testing I suppose.

 

[zoiDman]

I think C9's testing is also driven by upcoming EU regulations.
So yes staying out of trouble and in business is a ROI from the testing I suppose.

I think it could also be Revenge. Or Spite. Or Release of Legal Liability.

Hell, maybe they needed More Expenses to Offset Profits for their Tax Basis.

Could be A Lot of Things. Or a Combination(s) their Of.

 

[Robert Cromwell]

I think it could also be Revenge. Or Spite. Or Release of Legal Liability.

Hell, maybe they needed More Expenses to Offset Profits for their Tax Basis.

Could be A Lot of Things. Or a Combination(s) their Of.

Yep. We are all ignorant of all of their reasons and motives. We can deduce some but without being in their meetings we can only guess for the most part.