A discussion surronding the BE debacle...

[Switched]

This thread is to discuss extremely valuable points for possibly ways ahead. I openly admit that Houston... grew larger than life but some of the issues being raised are valid points for which I wish to see them debated in a amiable manner, in order that this particular brain storm provides ideas for vendors or future vendors alike. The blood pressure cuff needs to remain alive IMO if we are going to get anywhere in this industry by doing what is done best, taking the pulse.

@oldsoldier...

If this thread is not suitable then please educate us where this important discussion can take place? If unsuitable, please feel free to delete it.

 

[bassthumper]

Don't worry switched-- I'm trying to have something done about it.

 

[bassthumper]

All I have to say is when it comes to the business of POISON, you need to be CAREFUL! One little OOPS could lead to one HUGE LOSS OF LIFE!

 

[carpedebass]

Switched, I can sure see the point of a thread of this nature. Hopefully it will remain active. There are many, many facets that have been opened up. The first of which, in my opinion is how or if we can regulate our industry from the inside.

 

[oldsoldier]

This thread is to discuss extremely valuable points for possibly ways ahead. I openly admit that Houston... grew larger than life but some of the issues being raised are valid points for which I wish to see them debated in a amiable manner, in order that this particular brain storm provides ideas for vendors or future vendors alike. The blood pressure cuff needs to remain alive IMO if we are going to get anywhere in this industry by doing what is done best, taking the pulse.

@oldsoldier...

If this thread is not suitable then please educate us where this important discussion can take place? If unsuitable, please feel free to delete it.

This is perfectly fine. The BE thread got spammed to the point the scientific content of the thread was overwhelmed by the other issues. carry on.

 

[uba egar320]

OK, got a question about all of this. Should the end user be expected to test their own juice for a while? Seeing as I haven't really seen many threads(or I have missed them) listing retailers that could have juice with to much nic? Is there ever going to be "A" thread(or is there already) that has info on who is selling BE nic in their juice? The last thread got so large, I gave up on it. I apologize if this is a question that got asked every other page or so.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Switched]

*SNIPPED from the other thread. blueknight69 posted the following.

Rena Kay,

Your voice HAS been heard. Visit Box Elder Chemical Supply's website and you will see that any nicotine product you click on indicates it is out of stock - has been for days. Visit Gourmet Vapor's website and clearly in white contrasting text on any flavor you click on you will see that they are using nicotine from My Freedom Smokes. I am sure you can contact MFS to verify this. I recall that Kurt raves about MFS's liquid.

You, meaning the community have demanded change much like the current movements in America; you have been heard. Brad WANTS to earn your trust back and is making necessary changes, many of them the result of this forum.

You should all be proud that your voices have created a new era for your industry. Unfortunately, BE was the catalyst for this change. No longer can ANY of your suppliers operate in the dark. Accountability to you all as a consumer force is real and it works. But if you want it to work then you must LET it work. If a company is called to the carpet on some really important issues and they make real changes to fix them then they should be commended for hearing the voices of those who are responsible for their existence. If they fail to do so, they will fail. I have seen what you folks can do as a group.

On the same note, if a company makes the positive changes and they are still driven out this makes for a failed process and you may then be the very destruction of your industry despite your good intentions.

You can believe that BE knows their future if there is another issue like this. To take that a step further, ALL suppliers should know by now that BE blazed this trail and they will all be held to the standards set here. I am with you all that the industry now has a new call to action. But you have got to assure a company that there are good things that come from this community if they respond favorably. I agree that BE should have acted sooner but they have come to realize this and you can be assured they now hold themselves to your high standards.

Nick

Nick I support in part what you are saying here, however consumer confidence is at an all time low and no amount of window dressing is going to persuade folks otherwise. We the consumers are not has calloused as we may have portrayed ourselves or perhaps what you believe. This incident (the aftermath) could have been avoided quite simply, yet none of that has taken place and please note that is not we the consumers that sunk Brad's ship, he scuttled his own ship prior to, during and in the aftermath of the interview. I am bringing you these relevant facts as they were presented to us. Notwithstanding that he is your friend, do we truly know our friends, spouses?

Notwithstanding of what happened behind the scenes prior to this mess being made public, once public the following actions should have taken place:

• immediately cease and desist all operations until you can get to the bottom of it. This information should have been posted on the BE website. Some thing like it has been brought to our attention that a certain batch of nicotine maybe problematic. Until we can ascertain the scope of the problem, BE will discontinue sales to ensure public safety, until an internal audit can locate the problem if indeed one exists. This is not an admission of guilt but a demonstration of due diligence;
• increase consumer trust providing them (on a need to know basis) if there is/was a problem with reasonable updates, discuss what was found, institute recalls if required and assure the public that necessary steps have been taken to insure the continued safety of its consumers. e.g we discovered an isolated incident and new/safer protocols are now in place to prevent any the re-occurrence.

Personally I am not prosecuting Brad, I am appalled at his business practices, prior to, during and in the aftermath. His lack of accountability in this debacle is what has eroded consumer confidence and trust. His leadership in this fiasco has been all but non existent. Whilst I admire your loyalty towards a friend, transparency in the future is what we seek, no, demand. Not window dressing!

 

[Switched]

This is perfectly fine. The BE thread got spammed to the point the scientific content of the thread was overwhelmed by the other issues. carry on.

Thanks Sgt

 

[rkayw]

Thank you Switched!
I was typing a response to Nick's address to me when the other thread was closed. I will leave it at what you posted here in response to him.

Good luck guys.

 

[CaminoDiablo]

What I would like to see from any vendor or company you buy from a certification of the amount of nicotine that is in your juice. One that states that it has been tested and they back their product. This should happen from the maker of the nicotine to the vendor to the consumer. I know it might cause problems as many vendors buy in bulk but with a batch number, they would only have to test one bottle. Just my two cents.....sorry if this isn't the place to post this but since the BE problem I'm concerned.

 

[markfm]

DIY mixers can test their own nic base reasonably, as it appears that many nic base suppliers sell an unmodified nic base (not tweaked with any acids or other things that would adjust the PH of the nic base).

End-use consumers of eliquid, however, may have a tough time of trying to use the readily available low-cost home test. At least some flavorinigs may skew the results signicantly low. I just made some 15mg/ml eliquid, from known, tested, nic base, that tests at 11 mg/ml. If I was an end user testing the liquid I might think that I was being supplied 11 mg/ml when I had paid for 15, but it really is 15 -- just that the flavorings (from a popular supplier, quality flavorings) skewed the test.

So, for the time being, at-home test of final eliquids is kind of iffy. Without knowing the underlying flavorings used by a given vendor in a given eliquid, and whether those flavorings skew the results (and by how much), you don't have a benchmark.

 

[Switched]

OK, got a question about all of this. Should the end user be expected to test their own juice for a while? Seeing as I haven't really seen many threads(or I have missed them) listing retailers that could have juice with to much nic? Is there ever going to be "A" thread(or is there already) that has info on who is selling BE nic in their juice? The last thread got so large, I gave up on it. I apologize if this is a question that got asked every other page or so.

Thanks in advance.

In the perfect world no. This fiasco has brought to light some very important safety and health issues. These issues are a greater risk IMO in the non DIY community where the majority of folks buy commercial liquids.

If I take myself for example, I have special vaping needs and only vape my liquids. I have always had a reputable source for nicotine and never chased sales<---- this is another issue that could be the precursor to many problems. OTOH I have ordered a testing kit to test my bases as I dilute from 100mg. As stated I have confidence in my source, and should something go askew I would be in touch with my vendor. I have never had a problem of having any issues resolved with a reasonable time frame > 24hrs.

To date we have come to understand that BE supplied at least Gourmet Vaper and Honeyville. Both these vendors are subsidiaries to BE. No other vendor has openly admitted sourcing there nic from BE and I can't say I blame them, a little irresponsible IMO, but if they are reasonably sure their liquid is fine then I am fine with that. However, if they are not going to come out of the closet, I would expect at a minimum to destroy all BE holdings and source for replacement nicotine.

This has been a learning experience for all, and a reminder of how due diligence is a small pricew to pay in the overall scheme of things . Do I want to see BE fail? Emphatically no! Why! because they can re-surface as another company.

I would much rather see BE take the required steps to re-institute consumer confidence than to go belly up and reforming under a different name, because as given that the sky is blue, BE will re-surface as a different entity. That I do not want to see.

 

[markfm]

... but with a batch number, they would only have to test one bottle...

Unfortunately, for it to be a "would", the higher level source that the intermediate vendor buys from would themselves have to have good QC. "Batch number" would need to mean one actual instance of creating some nic base, at whatever mg/ml.

The results posted in the other thread indicated that the as-labeled eliquid tied to one of the Lots was off of nominal by varying %. That would mean that either the same Lot # had been asigned to different events of creating the intermediate fairly high level nic base, else there was an error in that the higher-level lot # was carried through, but no new number assigned when the lower-level nic base (the final product sold) was created. Those measured values just don't show consistency in how far off they were from nominal, so at least in the BE case knowing that you had lot 256 or 257 wouldn't let you know what you were actually getting in any given bottle.

 

[carpedebass]

OK, so as far as a self regulating community...does anyone see any problems with the community in general policing itself? I think we've already seen a valid effort of us doing so. I'd like to think we did learn some lessons in doing so, however.

The CEO immediately questioned the handling protocol with the high sample...as I would have had I been in his place. So I would like to offer for discussion, the following example.

Buyer A purchases 100 mg/ml nicotine liquid in VG from vendor A. Vendor A ships liquid. Buyer A performs a BB titration of liquid upon receipt and discovers the liquid to be 250 mg/ml. (Sound familiar?)

Now...here's where things get critical in my opinion.

How can we, the DIY community, hold this vendor's feet to the fire without the possibility of terms such as "sabotage" or "contamination" or "someone could have spiked that liquid" coming up?

There are no lot numbers on the liquid, it is labeled 100 mg/ml, and is VG base. How do we proceed from here?

 

[Hoosier]

OK, so as far as a self regulating community...does anyone see any problems with the community in general policing itself? I think we've already seen a valid effort of us doing so. I'd like to think we did learn some lessons in doing so, however.

The CEO immediately questioned the handling protocol with the high sample...as I would have had I been in his place. So I would like to offer for discussion, the following example.

Buyer A purchases 100 mg/ml nicotine liquid in VG from vendor A. Vendor A ships liquid. Buyer A performs a BB titration of liquid upon receipt and discovers the liquid to be 250 mg/ml. (Sound familiar?)

Now...here's where things get critical in my opinion.

How can we, the DIY community, hold this vendor's feet to the fire without the possibility of terms such as "sabotage" or "contamination" or "someone could have spiked that liquid" coming up?

There are no lot numbers on the liquid, it is labeled 100 mg/ml, and is VG base. How do we proceed from here?

The only thing that comes to my mind is unedited video, with date stamp, from the moment of opening the box to reading the result. Actually a bit of a pain as I know I do not have any good video capture equipment sitting around.

And how many folks would go through that process?

Finding something that wrong with your supply is bad enough, but then having to defend yourself just adds insult to the whole thing...

 

[Spazmelda]

OK, so as far as a self regulating community...does anyone see any problems with the community in general policing itself? I think we've already seen a valid effort of us doing so. I'd like to think we did learn some lessons in doing so, however.

The CEO immediately questioned the handling protocol with the high sample...as I would have had I been in his place. So I would like to offer for discussion, the following example.

Buyer A purchases 100 mg/ml nicotine liquid in VG from vendor A. Vendor A ships liquid. Buyer A performs a BB titration of liquid upon receipt and discovers the liquid to be 250 mg/ml. (Sound familiar?)

Now...here's where things get critical in my opinion.

How can we, the DIY community, hold this vendor's feet to the fire without the possibility of terms such as "sabotage" or "contamination" or "someone could have spiked that liquid" coming up?

There are no lot numbers on the liquid, it is labeled 100 mg/ml, and is VG base. How do we proceed from here?

Yep, this is the sticking point. There's basically no way for the end user to do a valid test on the product without this being used as a defense. We could only hope that if the problem was widespread other customers would find similar problems with the same lot number.

Now, if the provider doesn't have any test results to back up the validity of their nicotine and labeling, their crying sabotage is equally useless as well.

 

[carpedebass]

The only thing that comes to my mind is unedited video, with date stamp, from the moment of opening the box to reading the result. Actually a bit of a pain as I know I do not have any good video capture equipment sitting around.

And how many folks would go through that process?

Finding something that wrong with your supply is bad enough, but then having to defend yourself just adds insult to the whole thing...

I agree. Most people are not going to go through all that trouble. Especially when the heat of this dies down some.

Now, if the provider doesn't have any test results to back up the validity of their nicotine and labeling, their crying sabotage is equally useless as well.

I think that's an extremely valid point, Spazzy. But how do we remove the ability for that argument? Is it possible?

 

[markfm]

Fundamentally it goes back to the nic base creator having decent QC and CM. If you assign a unique identifier (the CM), to a certain set of bottles of product, they should all indeed be from one evolution of creating that nic base batch. If you are making that batch, you should be testing it prior to release (the QC). If a batch size is fairly large, several samples should be taken, to ensure a consistent (even) concentration of the nic, homogenous liquid.

An end user should never actually have the chance to see that bad high (or low) bottle, if you have done your QC on the lot with the same identifying number. Alternately, if someone does come up with an off measurement, randomly checking another bottle of that # should show the same error, unless it is a case of a really bad mixing job, where different bottles with the same # have different concentrations.

If the above happens, decent CM and QC checks, there shouldn't be an opportunity for finger-pointing.

 

[Switched]

OK, so as far as a self regulating community...does anyone see any problems with the community in general policing itself? I think we've already seen a valid effort of us doing so. I'd like to think we did learn some lessons in doing so, however.

The CEO immediately questioned the handling protocol with the high sample...as I would have had I been in his place. So I would like to offer for discussion, the following example.

Buyer A purchases 100 mg/ml nicotine liquid in VG from vendor A. Vendor A ships liquid. Buyer A performs a BB titration of liquid upon receipt and discovers the liquid to be 250 mg/ml. (Sound familiar?)

Now...here's where things get critical in my opinion.

How can we, the DIY community, hold this vendor's feet to the fire without the possibility of terms such as "sabotage" or "contamination" or "someone could have spiked that liquid" coming up?

There are no lot numbers on the liquid, it is labeled 100 mg/ml, and is VG base. How do we proceed from here?

IMMHO the answer to that is no.

However, do we want government to regulate us? Once again no. So how do we accomplish this?

The UK has a regulating body in place called ECITA Electronic Cigarette Trade Association that is working within present trade standards in the UK etc...

To be a certified vendor from ECITA = CSA stamp, you must be found in compliance with industry standards, which entitles ECITA to randomly test any of its members at any time to ensure compliance, and if found to be non compliant take appropriate action as deemed necessary to ensure further compliance but no limited to withdrawal of membership. <----- This ensures vendors maintain compliance because once you had the seal of compliance from the regulating body and loose it, no consumer will ever trust you as a vendor again.

That is the short and sweet, the hifistud or Katherine Devlynn (the nun) can fill in the details.

 

[uba egar320]

In the perfect world no. This fiasco has brought to light some very important safety and health issues. These issues are a greater risk IMO in the non DIY community where the majority of folks buy commercial liquids.

If I take myself for example, I have special vaping needs and only vape my liquids. I have always had a reputable source for nicotine and never chased sales<---- this is another issue that could be the precursor to many problems. OTOH I have ordered a testing kit to test my bases as I dilute from 100mg. As stated I have confidence in my source, and should something go askew I would be in touch with my vendor. I have never had a problem of having any issues resolved with a reasonable time frame > 24hrs.

To date we have come to understand that BE supplied at least Gourmet Vaper and Honeyville. Both these vendors are subsidiaries to BE. No other vendor has openly admitted sourcing there nic from BE and I can't say I blame them, a little irresponsible IMO, but if they are reasonably sure their liquid is fine then I am fine with that. However, if they are not going to come out of the closet, I would expect at a minimum to destroy all BE holdings and source for replacement nicotine.

This has been a learning experience for all, and a reminder of how due diligence is a small pricew to pay in the overall scheme of things . Do I want to see BE fail? Emphatically no! Why! because they can re-surface as another company.

I would much rather see BE take the required steps to re-institute consumer confidence than to go belly up and reforming under a different name, because as given that the sky is blue, BE will re-surface as a different entity. That I do not want to see.

Thanks a lot.