Good job Kurt and Cozz! Kurt you're a natural and speaking on something you're passionate about makes for a great interview.
A discussion surronding the BE debacle...
- Thread starter Switched
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
This was a very objective, science-based, interview with no drama and no BE bashing. Points I was directly asked about were:
Did I contact BE before going public? If not, why not?
Just how toxic or fatal IS 272 mg nicotine liquid?
How does GC-MS compare to titration for QC, and when are either appropriate?
What can vendors do in terms of spot checks?
The general question of my qualifications was addressed in the beginning.
What controls do I use for my tests? To me this was the most important and immediate question, because without that my numbers are questionable at best. Glad I was grilled on it.
Does high-level nicotine ever separate in PG or VG?
Where do I see this all going, whether it is some regulating body in the community, or market driven evolution?
How accurate will a kit home-test be, and can you tell relatively small errors in nic level?
Was there a followup between me and Brad, and to what end?
What about other alkaloids in vaping, like lobelline, from lobella?
What has this all been like for me personally?
Perhaps this will generate more questions to me, vendors or other chemists.
Did I contact BE before going public? If not, why not?
Just how toxic or fatal IS 272 mg nicotine liquid?
How does GC-MS compare to titration for QC, and when are either appropriate?
What can vendors do in terms of spot checks?
The general question of my qualifications was addressed in the beginning.
What controls do I use for my tests? To me this was the most important and immediate question, because without that my numbers are questionable at best. Glad I was grilled on it.
Does high-level nicotine ever separate in PG or VG?
Where do I see this all going, whether it is some regulating body in the community, or market driven evolution?
How accurate will a kit home-test be, and can you tell relatively small errors in nic level?
Was there a followup between me and Brad, and to what end?
What about other alkaloids in vaping, like lobelline, from lobella?
What has this all been like for me personally?
Perhaps this will generate more questions to me, vendors or other chemists.
"Does high-level nicotine ever separate in PG or VG?"
Is this still open in your opinion Kurt?
Might it be possible in dehydrated VG (which could exist in industrial / pharma bulk products?)
Or if the liquid gets very cold?
ps: is there a transcript of the show? I have no sound on my computer atm; something wrong with it. Or perhaps you give a brief answer to each of those questions above (1or 2 lines).
Is this still open in your opinion Kurt?
Might it be possible in dehydrated VG (which could exist in industrial / pharma bulk products?)
Or if the liquid gets very cold?
ps: is there a transcript of the show? I have no sound on my computer atm; something wrong with it. Or perhaps you give a brief answer to each of those questions above (1or 2 lines).
Last edited:
I am just trying to get catched up, I tried reading through the Houston thread but man it got crazy in the week or so I've been gone. I know this is the DIY forum, but I am disturbed by the response given by Mrs T here: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/ms-ts-bakery/239814-where-do-you-get-your-nic-mrs-t.html.
Can this still be acceptable post BE? Contrast that to Virgin Vaper's response, which was an immediate response that her nic comes from RTS. I DIY but these 2 vendors make juices I cannot duplicate and (used to) still buy from. Mrs T definitely lost my business and Virgin Vaper gained my unqualified recommendation and custom.
The question, in my mind, now becomes how do we force this industry to adopt a testing standard without allowing any government to interfere? Sure, thanks to (my hero!) Kurt, the kibosh was put on BE's dangerous practice, but it seemed not to have an effect on Mrs T, which I think will be the case going forward. Instead of having to do this exhaustive expose on each vendor, how can we as brother and sister vapers and consumers, impose a testing standard on the industry as a whole. Especially given the international nature of this industry.
Can this still be acceptable post BE? Contrast that to Virgin Vaper's response, which was an immediate response that her nic comes from RTS. I DIY but these 2 vendors make juices I cannot duplicate and (used to) still buy from. Mrs T definitely lost my business and Virgin Vaper gained my unqualified recommendation and custom.
The question, in my mind, now becomes how do we force this industry to adopt a testing standard without allowing any government to interfere? Sure, thanks to (my hero!) Kurt, the kibosh was put on BE's dangerous practice, but it seemed not to have an effect on Mrs T, which I think will be the case going forward. Instead of having to do this exhaustive expose on each vendor, how can we as brother and sister vapers and consumers, impose a testing standard on the industry as a whole. Especially given the international nature of this industry.
I think your response to Mrs. T was innappropriate. She doesn't use BE, and she may choose not to disclose her supplier so other vendors will choose to copy her. It IS within her rights of trade secret to not disclose where she gets her individual ingredients from. Different suppliers' nic is different in quality, purity, and overall experience.
That's like asking her where she buys her flavors. The fact that she doesn't use BE is enough. Outside of that it's really none of our business if there's no problem like there was with BE. Now the real question should have been asking what procedures she'll use in the future if her vendor DOES end up with an issue like this.
I don't see a need to call out vendors for not disclosing their suppliers as long as they answer that they're not using the current problematic supplier. Just my opinion though.
That's like asking her where she buys her flavors. The fact that she doesn't use BE is enough. Outside of that it's really none of our business if there's no problem like there was with BE. Now the real question should have been asking what procedures she'll use in the future if her vendor DOES end up with an issue like this.
I don't see a need to call out vendors for not disclosing their suppliers as long as they answer that they're not using the current problematic supplier. Just my opinion though.
I'm sorry if I offended you but it is MY choice to continue to use her as a vendor and all I did was explain exactly why I wasn't going to continue to do so. It is her choice to remain non-transparent. For me, this is unacceptable post BE.
I am not sure what business you are in but mine is all about trade secrets. Disclosing a supplier is not a trade secret. It is not something we volunteer if we don't need to, however when there is a safety issue whit a supplier in that area, you bet we tell our customers who we use when they ask. If we don't we loose their business.
My customers are other corporations. It is continual irony that corporations are more contentious customers than human customers these days. You can bet that if another corporation were buying juices from Mrs T, they would drop her in a second over this scandal if she didn't tell them who supplies her nicotine.
This is not about knowing who is the supplier, but about being able to check and research that supplier's safety practices.
If you would step outside of your emotional attachment to the vendor (yes, I have it as well for Mrs T) and look at it dispassionately, you would realize you should not buy from them anymore till you can check out the safety practices of the vendor who supplies Mrs T's nicotine.
However, like me, you are free to make your own choices. However, criticizing my post for being "inappropriate" is factually incorrect. Its is very appropriate.
Last edited:
Hmm, would it be acceptable to know that the supplier had x and y credentials, supplied z certification ?
Of course you wouldnt be able to know if it was true but an indeendent body could be a verifier in such cases. Just a sleepy thought ...
It's one role that such a body could perform - making public that certain things were met w/o actual sources being divulged.
Of course you wouldnt be able to know if it was true but an indeendent body could be a verifier in such cases. Just a sleepy thought ...
It's one role that such a body could perform - making public that certain things were met w/o actual sources being divulged.
I was ready to call shenanigans wrt your post considering the climate of late. However, I did my research and will openly state you have not participated here in over a week. I was worried about the time stamps between posts.
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/ms-ts-bakery/242363-changes-quality-control-ms-ts-bakery.html This is Mrs T reply to your Q. Each individual have their own set of standards. In order not to taint the good we are trying to create here, it might be prudent to keep personal comments to ourselves rather than create more drama than is already surrounding this fiasco.
I support your decision explicitly. It is your decision. Personally I do not vape commercially acquired liquids I am 100% DIY, my source of nic is my own business and yes it is clean and can be backed up. The precaution as a vaper is - I purchased a test kit to verify my liquid(s) to put my own mind at ease..
In closing, there is a very fine line we need to walk here and we must be terribly careful not to drag good people in the mud or bundle them all in the same boat. A list of safe vendors can be found here GrimmGreenIndustries That being said, I am having some very strong reservations wrt RTS comments of late... If you do not know what I am talking about, you have not done your homework well, and for that one demerit.
Disclaimer: I have no dog in this fight, I am but a mere conscientious observer and I hope that my opinions have been presented objectively.
Last edited:
Being the OP of this thread, I would like all new folks participating to have at least read Kurt's thread http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...we-have-problem-nic-titration-results-27.html I agree it is a long read but a necessity in my opinion if you wish to participate here (new comers to the discussion). This thread and the 2 other testing threads were created to have a continued but separate discussion of valid points in the aftermath of the BE debacle.
By doing so, this should maintain the thread uncluttered and prevent having to repeat information already posted. These threads are for brainstorming and finding a way as a community on where to go from here. This thread and the others are viewed by vendors and many have and are stepping up to the plate.
Depending on the size of the operation will determine the testing mechanism required VTTalk – Box Elder We don't even have an organization yet, this discussion will hopefully spur its creation. Based on the discussion with Kurt, their is a strong group of vendors looking into this. <----- That's the positive that has come out of this.
In order to see a type of trade association born, the momentum following the fiasco needs to be sustained and hopefully that is what we are doing here, and the other threads related to the debacle.
As stated please keep personal comments wrt vendors out of the discussion as they serve no useful purpose than to create drama IMO. These types of conversations is best left between the two discussing parties and IMO should only surface when explicitly asked about. Once again IMO there is a large difference between offering information and promoting personal comments, especially playing A against B.
Anyone wishing to discuss this further can PM me for clarification
Thank you all for your consideration.
By doing so, this should maintain the thread uncluttered and prevent having to repeat information already posted. These threads are for brainstorming and finding a way as a community on where to go from here. This thread and the others are viewed by vendors and many have and are stepping up to the plate.
Depending on the size of the operation will determine the testing mechanism required VTTalk – Box Elder We don't even have an organization yet, this discussion will hopefully spur its creation. Based on the discussion with Kurt, their is a strong group of vendors looking into this. <----- That's the positive that has come out of this.
In order to see a type of trade association born, the momentum following the fiasco needs to be sustained and hopefully that is what we are doing here, and the other threads related to the debacle.
As stated please keep personal comments wrt vendors out of the discussion as they serve no useful purpose than to create drama IMO. These types of conversations is best left between the two discussing parties and IMO should only surface when explicitly asked about. Once again IMO there is a large difference between offering information and promoting personal comments, especially playing A against B.
Anyone wishing to discuss this further can PM me for clarification
Thank you all for your consideration.
Switched, I agree. It seems that we are seeing what could become the birth of a new system of checks, or trade association, for this market.
It is still very early in the process, but I am encouraged by the response by vendors to Kurt's work and the questions and comments I have seen from many vendors to date. The broadcasts and other communities have been very good at getting the information spread around.
BTW: While I cannot find it now, I did see a commenter on a news site using Kurt's data to "prove" their point that all nicotine use was evil and E-cig's were the worst. While the commenter did a very poor job of framing their "argument" it showed me that the "Anti's" are also watching this, not just us. I wish I could remember what site I saw that comment thread...
It is still very early in the process, but I am encouraged by the response by vendors to Kurt's work and the questions and comments I have seen from many vendors to date. The broadcasts and other communities have been very good at getting the information spread around.
BTW: While I cannot find it now, I did see a commenter on a news site using Kurt's data to "prove" their point that all nicotine use was evil and E-cig's were the worst. While the commenter did a very poor job of framing their "argument" it showed me that the "Anti's" are also watching this, not just us. I wish I could remember what site I saw that comment thread...
It doesn't surprise me Hoosier. The unfortunate side to all this is the spin they are going to toss from this, as usual conjecture an innuendo
I'm lost as to the concern of using home test kits yielding a 20% skew is a major concern here. The core of the issue was 250mg NIC being sold as 100mg NIC. 150% variance at those levels obviously could yield NIC poisoning. 20% variance at 6-24MG advertised levels, isn't going to affect a consumer in any way, other than not knowing the "Exact mg" of NIC in their product. I think consumers aren't going to sweat that a bit.
We have purchased 250mg NIC in quantity, and always tested. But, our main goal in testing, was to insure that we weren't getting ripped off by the supplier (knowingly or otherwise).. We had heard back in 2009 that some suppliers were passing off NIC as 100mg, and it was much lower. We have only dealt with one supplier, and have always been happy with the product. (Not BE).
We have purchased 250mg NIC in quantity, and always tested. But, our main goal in testing, was to insure that we weren't getting ripped off by the supplier (knowingly or otherwise).. We had heard back in 2009 that some suppliers were passing off NIC as 100mg, and it was much lower. We have only dealt with one supplier, and have always been happy with the product. (Not BE).
Using a larger 2ml sample, the kit is closer to 5% error if done carefully (unflavored nic base).
It needs to be reiterated that the quality of BE nicotine is not the issue. The tone of some of the posts around ECF is leading people to believe it was bad nicotine. The quality was never an issue, the inaccuracy of the nicotine concentration is the issue. In fact Kurt said the reason for his initial tests was to find out why BE nicotine was better than others. If you could confirm the nicotine concentration, why would you be opposed to using the BE product?
Don't get me wrong I have concerns about the BE product, but not from a nicotine quality stand point. If I had bought BE nicotine I certainly wouldn't throw it out. Test it yourself or have it tested for nicotine percentage and vape away. If a vendor was/is using BE nicotine to mix with and could verify nicotine concentration level, I wouldn't have any issue with buying the stuff. In fact according to Kurt's tests it would be a quality vape.
A lot of people are just now becoming aware of this situation and all concerns should be directed toward the accuracy of nicotine content and not the quality of the nicotine.
Don't get me wrong I have concerns about the BE product, but not from a nicotine quality stand point. If I had bought BE nicotine I certainly wouldn't throw it out. Test it yourself or have it tested for nicotine percentage and vape away. If a vendor was/is using BE nicotine to mix with and could verify nicotine concentration level, I wouldn't have any issue with buying the stuff. In fact according to Kurt's tests it would be a quality vape.
A lot of people are just now becoming aware of this situation and all concerns should be directed toward the accuracy of nicotine content and not the quality of the nicotine.
Precisely! In fact, as long as I know the correct nic level, I am actually using BE for some of my DIYs still. Nothing wrong with that liquid, other than the labeled nic level, and that is all. Other than the 272 mg I still have...not using that for anything other than evidence, if the need arises.
I knew posting my results would get the eye of the antz and they might use it against us. But for the record, my concern for people that might unknowingly have gotten 272 mg outweighed whatever slings and arrows the antz might hurl our way. We need to remind them that more people have been sent to the ER for using the patch incorrectly than we will probably ever see in this community, including with this debacle. And a gentle reminder that Chantix is still on the market, messing people's heads up. The established cessation industry has an awful track record, both in safety and efficacy. With us, they may have a lot of "could haves" they feel they can throw. But we have a LOT of "verified haves" we can throw back, including deaths.
Last edited:
THIS consumer wants Quality Control....if I buy 24mg. juice from a vendor, it should be 24 mg. not 20% highter (not 28.8 mg) that is not too much to expect. IMO
- Status
Similar threads
