100% Tobacco Free Nicotine??? Marketing Ploy or Truth?

[Racehorse]

Earlier I sent an email to SQN (the makers of The REAL and NKTR) and I got an email response from them. They said (and I paraphrase),

Yes, you are correct. It should be 0.6%. We unfortunately missed that on the first bottles and boxes that went out. It has since been corrected.

Sorry, but this is all sounding too much like "ad copy" to me.

0.6% being mistaken for 0.06% is just a "typo" right?

And I'm supposed to trust these types of people to do more complex chemistry .

What I'd like to know is can you use a test kit to test the nic level even if synthetic nic? Because if YOU don't know what the level is, and they are saying it's just a typo on the label.........then you really do not know.

Because "taking it on faith" then you may as well just go back to vaping......... whatever.

Also, how to prove it is synthetic nic, and not just some kinda new way to "say things" on web site to sell product? Because calling it non tobacco is of course just a way to try to escape having the product classified as tobacco product (good luck with that)

This may be legit but call me someone who's been foooled one too many times by the marketing blurb and promises

 

[Mr.Mann]

Sorry, but this is all sounding too much like "ad copy" to me.

0.6% being mistaken for 0.06% is just a "typo" right?

And I'm supposed to trust these types of people to do more complex chemistry .

The eliqud company's complex chemistry is making eliquid. Not too complex considering I can do it. The nicotine, as far as I know, is made by another company. My feeling is that as long as they (the eliquid company) didn't try and tell me that 0.06% was correct, I can take it as something that got messed up in the printing of the boxes and labels--after all, you and I both know that sometimes these things are printed elsewhere. Hell, I've had all types of misprints before on my bottles, although in this time we are in now, it should not fly even if it was at the expense of lost monies. I do think they should've had some type of disclaimer or press release stating it was incorrect, but somehow I imagine a decision was made that *no one will notice*. Sad, but I don't think vapers are given a whole bunch of credit.

I am not defending them (as if that could be seen as that), just pointing out that the eliquid company is not a group of scientists that are making synthetic nicotine...at least I hope not.

p.s. I don't really know what "ad copy" is, and a quick google search didn't really help me to understand it in this context.

What I'd like to know is can you use a test kit to test the nic level even if synthetic nic? Because if YOU don't know what the level is, and they are saying it's just a typo on the label.........then you really do not know.

Because "taking it on faith" then you may as well just go back to vaping......... whatever.

Also, how to prove it is synthetic nic, and not just some kinda new way to "say things" on web site to sell product? Because calling it non tobacco is of course just a way to try to escape having the product classified as tobacco product (good luck with that)

This may be legit but call me someone who's been foooled one too many times by the marketing blurb and promises

Just saw you hadn't finished....

I understand and all I can say is that I do have a nic titration kit but I can tell the difference between .3% and .6% just by vaping it, so I surely think I can tell between .6% and .06 mg/mL. .06 is basically 0.

As to whether this can be tested for what it is vs what it isn't. *I don't know exactly how easy it would be to do so, but I imagine it can be, and I think DVap had mentioned something about it in that conversation I linked to (here it is again). I will go back and re-read it. It's really illuminating and I implore anyone reading and interested here to read what was written (him Kurt and Roly were discussing it a few years ago) and although I don't understand most of it, the gist tells me that I must remain skeptical.

*DVap said: "Could a polarimeter distinguish between natural (-)-nicotine and synthetic (-)-nicotine. No, it could not. Doesn't matter how a chemical is produced, if two samples of (-)-nicotine produced naturally and synthetically are pure, they are identical. It does not matter the source, they cannot be distinguished."

 

[Deadkaiser]

Honestly i've seen tons of questionable advertising for ecigs whether it just ignorance and incompetence or intended misrepresentations for personal gain I don't know but its not surprising in the current environment of banner raising, fear mongering and fighting over the rapidly expanding market.

 

[Mr.Mann]

I made a wrong-headed assumption that what SmokeyJoe was referring to, when he said synthetic nic had been produced, had anything to do with this. Maybe, but I have no way of knowing. The more I read on what actual chemists have said on synthetic nic, the more I am pumping the brakes and feeling more confident that it is largely a marketing ploy with no real way--yet--to categorize it as "truth." Right now the claims are just words used to sell eliquid, and at worst, it's untrue--but the burden is on them to show proof of their claims, and they have shown no such thing.

I did get excited at this product and I think now I do understand the "ad copy" comment. I was right there wide-eyed and bushy tailed hoping this could be the answer to something. This industry is maddening at times! I will still try the liquid and my hope is that it tastes good and the nic is as good as what I am used to. Aside from that, I can't google my way to the truth behind what this nic really is or isn't. It could be this and it could be that.

 

[Zenzu]

For anyone that wants more information NextGenLabs is the one that manufactures the TFN also known as PharmaNic. They could provide you with more information including spectral analysis and data sheets.


PharmaNic

Quality Assurance

Attention to Detail

An independent Quality Assurance section (Organic Chemistry Department at University California Irvine UCI) is used to monitor, test and guaranty complete supply chain from chemical compounds to final product purity.

Our quality measuring/monitoring starts from the chemical manufacturers source itself, having their own FDA approved facilities which gives us the highest degree of confidence for producing the purist quality product.

Implementing & updating proper quality systems at all levels assures quality of final products.

Dedicated facility for Nicotine production/manufacturing in operation complying with guidelines.

Excellently designed patents pending process & facilities as well as sufficient infrastructure to produce the Highest Quality Product with all required controls; from procurement, handling, conversion/production/finished product.

Dedicated equipment & production lines provided for “No contamination” & “No Compromise” in product Quality.

All manufacturing equipment is / process qualified / validated & documented.

Highly qualified Organic Chemist’s & experienced employees on staff to monitor all activities.

H1NMR, C13NMR, GCMS, IR, HRMS, MSDS

Purity Validation

Independent analysis performed at The University of California Irvine - Organic Chemistry Department

PharmaNic is an extremely pure form of Tobacco Free Nicotine. PharmaNic is devoid of ALL contaminants.

PharmaNic is 100% tobacco free nicotine, not derived from tobacco leaf, stem or waste dust and is completely devoid of any industrial chemicals.

The purity of PharmaNic is evidenced mainly by the spectroscopic data, and specifically to the Nuclear Magnetic Resonance data (H1NMR and C13NMR) as well as a more traditional Gas Chromatographic analysis, and a state of the art Mass Spectral analysis performed at the University of California Irvine Organic Chemistry Department.

The H1NMR data show the connectivity of the hydrogen atoms of the Nicotine molecule. If there are other molecules present, we would definitely see their resonance and they would appear in this spectra. Also, the integration of the various peaks must account for all the hydrogen atoms on the Nicotine molecule, and if we had any impurities, the integration would not be the correct ratio (2:2:2:3:1:1:1:1:1). Please note the flat baseline, and sharp well-defined peaks. Also, in the carbon NMR (C13NMR), where the number of carbons and position on the spectra are consistent with the structure of nicotine, and nothing else appears in the spectral data, are consistent with the ultra-high purity of PharmaNic.

The GC-MS, where the gas chromatography (GC) is coupled with mass spectrometry (MS), provides for a very sensitive and all-conclusive method for analysis of purity, since any side products would certainly be observed in both or at least in one of the measurements (GC or MS). In the spectral analysis of PharmaNic, please note the absence of ALL impurities, as evidenced by only one peak in the spectra. This is further substantiated by the complete lack of any other absorption (other than instrument noise), as evidenced by the greatly-enlarged baseline expansion that is displayed.