Acetyl Proprionyl, Diacetyl, Acetoine HELP

[we2rcool]

" just I've been pm'd by forum members that making a lot of huff about this WILL damage the industry big time"

I don't believe it's threads like this that may damage the industry, although the public posting of Dr Farsalinos testing may. If e-juice makers (all of them) had been more cautious about the concentrates that they used the testing may not have shown a disastrous 69% having diacetyl.

It's threads like this, as you've just proven, that are giving vendors a push to be more cautious, which will ultimately be better for the vaping community.

We could be all hush hush about bad tests and Flavour vendors not being forthright, and that might be better for FDA reasons, but at who's expense? my health? I don't want to be vaping diacetyl if I don't have to, and I don't want to be told "Diacetyl Free" if that's false.

No one would have anything to talk about on a forum thread; the results of Dr. F's testing would never have the potential to expose something that is hidden;and no e-juice vendor would ever have to spend a penny...if those responsible for including diacetyl/diketones in their flavors were responsible enough to simply label the ingredients that are known inhalation risks. The buck starts with the flavoring vendors/manufacturer and ends with them.

'Seems to me that if a majority of e-liquid vendors would email the major vendors and simply say...we're not buying another ml of flavor until we see proof of ingredients and let them know that they're going to post the same on their own websites...it wouldn't take long at all for manufacturer/vendors to rustle through their files, find what ingredients they use and in what amounts (which they should already know anyway), convey that information back to the e-liquid vendors, and start whatever verification process or testing may be necessary.

It is not the "fault" of any end-user that discovers a potentially harmful ingredient if/when the authorities take issue with the same. It is the fault of those using & including them and improperly/inadequately labeling their products.

Blaming an innocent victim and/or holding the end-user responsible for exposing "whatever" is not only illogical, it's just plain wrong.

Flavor manufacturers who have knowingly sold flavors to the vaping community (and profited immensely) should have adequately disclosed & labeled the 'inhalation risk chemicals' years ago.

Besides, this thread (or any other thread) isn't bringing anything to the authorities attention that they don't already know - or have the intent of finding out.

 

[we2rcool]

It's unethical of them to hide behind that language. "not responsible..." when they explicitly market their products to vapers.

...because it should be said again.

 

[Hermit]

One thing that might help a lot to avoid excessive regulation would be if the industry appeared to be doing everything it could to ensure safety, and that's only true of a small proportion of companies. For example:

... When they ran out of butterscotch, they switched to another vendor. ...

... is clearly not doing everything they could, or rather, not in as timely a manner as they could have!

The problem for any wild-west idealists out there is that this does require some kind of Approval system - either by regulation or within the industry - so that statements about the absence of certain chemicals can be validated by some independant 3rd party, without revealing trade secret recipes etc. As already said, it would be sufficient for a company to only buy Approved flavourings etc, and have proper procedures to avoid contamination. So the onus lies with the flavour manufacturers. I'm not saying they're swimming in cash, but they are getting a massive boost in revenue from vaping. Small juice vendors could possibly self-certify (with the threat of random inspection).

Perhaps Approval isn't the right mechanism... what we really want is for vendors to be required to state which flavours / juices contain certain chemicals, and that's a list that might grow. 'Approval' is maybe too static for that scenario.

I have no qualms about placing _proportionate_ burden on vendors. That should be their expectation given the safety issues. The worry is that excessive regulation will be brought in by poorly informed politicians. This thread does nothing but inform about our concerns, in detail, and I see that as a positive.

 

[Racehorse]

Dr. Konstantinos Farsalinos test
Preliminary results of over 150 flavours tested showed 69% contained Diacetyl.
Vapers Place - Show Schedule and Replays

Over 1/2 the flavors tested, in other words.

I don't understand the SSS (shoot, shovel, shutup, what they do to stray dogs where I used to live) stuff. It's draconian to think that way.

Just put it out there, be honest.

I don't understand the part about harming the industry ........ what about harm to me? We know diacetyls are not the healthiest thing to put in lungs. Its not a matter of preference, it's fact.

As for medical journals, I've noticed a lot of lay persons don't have *access* to those, unless they belong to the journal or a medical assoc. Why can't the report be text so we can see it, after all I am buying this stuff, I feel entitled to the report by supproting the industry with my hard earned $$.

I'm sure Dr. F is honest, he has his credentials and wants to be taken seriously and I know he is earnest. But IMHO this info should be shared w/vapers, eveyrone who reads a medical journal isn't a vaper... but WE are.



Or, to make things really simple: for those who don't think it's harmful. That's fine. How about this:
"as a customer, I don't want to vape any diacetyls or acetoins. Can you sell me some juice that has been shown / tested to definitely not have this? "

I go out to eat in restaurants all the time, I ask the waitperson to ask teh chef not to put butter or sour cream sauce on my shrimp. No problem! I'm paying for it, shouldn't I be able to have it the way I want?

 

[ImperfectFuture]

" just I've been pm'd by forum members that making a lot of huff about this WILL damage the industry big time"

I don't believe it's threads like this that may damage the industry, although the public posting of Dr Farsalinos testing may. If e-juice makers (all of them) had been more cautious about the concentrates that they used the testing may not have shown a disastrous 69% having diacetyl.

It's threads like this, as you've just proven, that are giving vendors a push to be more cautious, which will ultimately be better for the vaping community.

We could be all hush hush about bad tests and Flavour vendors not being forthright, and that might be better for FDA reasons, but at who's expense? my health? I don't want to be vaping diacetyl if I don't have to, and I don't want to be told "Diacetyl Free" if that's false.

The problem is the expense, as pointed out later in this thread. Vendors in the US have a tendency to NOT want to lower costs for other vendors (I pay attention to financial analysts via stock market, and they say - "while competition is good for the consumer, it's bad for stock prices, while M&A -mergers- are bad for the consumer, they are good for companies bottom line, stock prices". Guess what the majority of 401ks, TPA's,, retirement accounts, managed money accounts, Roth ira's, etc are invested in the US, I do have a Canadian finance book by Gail van oxlade! and your retirement, etc accounts aren't invested the same way). Another question, I do enjoy the test results from the Canadian vendors, but then, why don't they buy flavoring from Canadian companies?

You made a false assumption, when I started reading this thread, prior to researching, I posted links for various diacetyl threads and test results, and the claim that flavor west was used for MBV, in MBV and related threads for regular flavor (general eliquids) threads. This is so newer folks would know. I then proceeded with research on the butterscotch and cream flavors, which I verified were no longer provided by mbv, even if it was unintentional.

The phone calls were related to the links in the other threads, but those are long buried now. However, many more thousands saw those links in the other threads than saw the links in the DIY forums. I posted my research results in all threads I posted the warning. If you wish to find those and related FDA posts, check out my posting history.

PS: my own uncertified science, there is no diacetyl flavor in the butterscotch by MBV. I got good at tasting when they over chemicalized a few juices. Also, Halo has some butter smooth flavor, so I wouldn't be surprised if they were using flavorwest! Or had some acetoins in the mix. BUT, while upper management neither confirms nor denies (after my initial inquires) their suppliers, they admit to switching after FW ran out (wonder if that is when the questionable chemical showed up). Halo won't tell you squat. And they make more money than flavor west.

The problem with the suppliers providing the info, is that still doesn't satisfy what you want from this thread, which is full disclosure. You would first need this to be regulated under the FDA, (such as food labeling is), and then put it to a vote (such as gmt labeling). The only winners in that scenario is BT.

Vendors don't (and won't) provide supplier names. WHY? Because they want you to buy from them (this post has been dedicated to capitalism, and see hiw the FDA fits into more with that scenario than anti capitalism, see the TSA of 1998, and the MSA that is current, then extrapolate to why ecigs were granted by congress in 2009 ti be classified as tobacco products.

PPS: as much as you want to separate the two, you can't. There will be regulation if you want this route. Just saying, you will pay. Tis up to you, but MOST vapors aren't DIY'ing it, and the major industries are fighting the regs. And many vapors don't agree with the fear from diacetyl, since it is in current cigarettes (not my personal opinion, just my quick survey from threads in general e smoking and new member forums.

As a test, post some topics in the clearomizer, apv, FDA, etc. forums. If what you are aiming for here is what the general populace wants, no problemo? But, methinks you will see the same replies I saw in the new member thread. ESPECIALLY in the FDA forum. Otherwise, do the best research you can, but if someone doesn't want to give you the info, this doesn't automatically make them guilty. You would need to provide the test results to back up a claim. And "I can taste it" is fear mongering, ESPECIALLY if others that know the taste CAN't taste it (and don't underestimate the ingenuity of the vendors).

 

[ImperfectFuture]

One thing that might help a lot to avoid excessive regulation would be if the industry appeared to be doing everything it could to ensure safety, and that's only true of a small proportion of companies. For example:



... is clearly not doing everything they could, or rather, not in as timely a manner as they could have!

The problem for any wild-west idealists out there is that this does require some kind of Approval system - either by regulation or within the industry - so that statements about the absence of certain chemicals can be validated by some independant 3rd party, without revealing trade secret recipes etc. As already said, it would be sufficient for a company to only buy Approved flavourings etc, and have proper procedures to avoid contamination. So the onus lies with the flavour manufacturers. I'm not saying they're swimming in cash, but they are getting a massive boost in revenue from vaping. Small juice vendors could possibly self-certify (with the threat of random inspection).

Perhaps Approval isn't the right mechanism... what we really want is for vendors to be required to state which flavours / juices contain certain chemicals, and that's a list that might grow. 'Approval' is maybe too static for that scenario.

I have no qualms about placing _proportionate_ burden on vendors. That should be their expectation given the safety issues. The worry is that excessive regulation will be brought in by poorly informed politicians. This thread does nothing but inform about our concerns, in detail, and I see that as a positive.

They won't use this as positive, regulators are using everything they can, they even used a picture from white cloud flings face book as marketing to children (there goes ine company, since they only sell to 18 or above, but that didn't matter. I don't recall lorillard being brought up with their commercials). This is the senate hearing called for by action from casaa. The CDC will jump on this before anyone had a chance to bring about wishfull proposals that the industry won't have time to implement (see earlier post).

DOES ANYINE HERE ACTUALLY READ THE PROPOSALS, LISTEN TO THE PODCASTS THAT SAY REGUALTION IS COMING, THUS ELIMINATING THE COMPANIES, SUCH AS FLAVOR ART, FROM THE PICTURE, LIKE WHITE CLOUD (because they are lower priced?). HAS ANYINE VERIFIED FLAVOR ARTS REGULATION PLAN? Has anyone actually read the FDA forum here, long thread in where are the vendor reactions? I know personally that vendors listened to Sfasta before us, and their meeting was filled with lawyers. They are preparing with testing. Those documents will be given to the FDA, not to you.

Everyone claims they have the right to know, how's that working for y'all on the gno issue (which I voted for?). Big money won that ine too. You want to fight the regs? Get it so you can see the test results? Get in the FDA forum, otherwise we are regulated. They are already killing companies. They called white cloud the wild west. If you REALLY think MBV is trying to kill you slowly just for profit, then we do need regs. But you win't see the test results. (I've been aware of the FDA since the pet food recalls of 2007, the regs didn't save millions if cats and digs, my mom lost some, cause she doesn't do Internet. I was lucky, using cheap food not on recall list, since the cats vomited the recalled food prior to the affected dates, also cheap food. I have since switched to wellness, Weruva, and just this month stopped feeding dry food).

In the above examples, certain chemicals were causing acute renal failure, and they were used in protein supplements, listed as corn gluten, showed up later in the other glutens as more testing proceeded. Diacetyl shows up in ecigs, how big was the industry in 2009, really? They ask for intros due to medicnak, because of harmful ingredients. Sued, and court says can get control if tobacco product.

So here we are, and it's for the children, you want testing? FDA regs, if you don't want your favorite companies eliminated, then fight the regs first. Otherwise, the diacetyl IS ENOGH FOR THEM TO DEMAND REGS AS SOON AS THE DEEMING REGS ARE APPROVED, WHICH IS NOT 2 YEARS FROM NOW (do read the FDA threads, and read the deeming regs, so you know if which you speak, and then take a stand).

It's not bad if you want regs, there are posters that want regs. You will find yourselves in the VAST minority, which is why the savvier posters from the FDA threads aren't chiming in, except the occasional post that disagrees with you (and me lately). And when the lawsuits commence? Diacetyl possibilities in ANY ELIQUIDS will be used by the Justice Dpartment (defending the FDA, for those not aware).

That is why I was pm'd.

 

[ImperfectFuture]

Over 1/2 the flavors tested, in other words.

I don't understand the SSS (shoot, shovel, shutup, what they do to stray dogs where I used to live) stuff. It's draconian to think that way.

Just put it out there, be honest.

I don't understand the part about harming the industry ........ what about harm to me? We know diacetyls are not the healthiest thing to put in lungs. Its not a matter of preference, it's fact.

As for medical journals, I've noticed a lot of lay persons don't have *access* to those, unless they belong to the journal or a medical assoc. Why can't the report be text so we can see it, after all I am buying this stuff, I feel entitled to the report by supproting the industry with my hard earned $$.

I'm sure Dr. F is honest, he has his credentials and wants to be taken seriously and I know he is earnest. But IMHO this info should be shared w/vapers, eveyrone who reads a medical journal isn't a vaper... but WE are.



Or, to make things really simple: for those who don't think it's harmful. That's fine. How about this:
"as a customer, I don't want to vape any diacetyls or acetoins. Can you sell me some juice that has been shown / tested to definitely not have this? "

I go out to eat in restaurants all the time, I ask the waitperson to ask teh chef not to put butter or sour cream sauce on my shrimp. No problem! I'm paying for it, shouldn't I be able to have it the way I want?

It will be available (since we paid for it), if you read his blog, after it's accepted, and I just gave you why it harms, because industry, by default, is for profit. Those against regulations, see it as harming, those for, don't. They didn't win on gmo's, though many studies showed links to altered RNA from gmo's. Do you believe in a right to know there?

Anyway, here's the scoop. Some butterscotch, some vanilla, all custard notes (which is why MBV's vanilla custard has the lowest rating of all their ejuices. I saw when someone introduced that flavor, everyone wanted to jump on board, the biggest sales went to the greatest desert vape, and MBV Lost on that one). Read the list on TPA, and you will get a good idea. Avoid said flavors (though personally, I don't worry about mbv and small amounts of Halo as a mixer, since MBV's custard flavors are rated REALLY low, but neither are giving out the name of their current suppliers).

 

[Racehorse]

It's not bad if you want regs, there are posters that want regs.

I don't require regs. Just disclosure.

If that could be done w/out regs, fine.

But----I think it is rather naive that some issue gag orders because BT and FDA have veritable armies of research people both scientific and otherwise fields, attorneys, etc. They know everything there is to know already. ...........and then some. Many years ago when BT decided to get into the vape industry they had tons of information not just from actuaries and accountants, but from the aforementioned professionals.......they don't invest millions on a lark. They know everything about ecigs there is to know. While we are busy doing studies on 159 liquids I can almost bet they have a few roomfuls of papers and tests already........

really.

They have huge resources in terms of manpower.

It's not a question of keeping any secrets at this point. That horse left the barn way back probably before 2010. Now, it's just a matter of how much $$ there is to be made and more importantly, who gets it.

 

[we2rcool]

Holy-moly.

This issue is extremely simple.

There are chemicals that are known inhalation risks being used in products meant for inhalation.

The manuafacturers & resellers know this, or know it's possible...or they should.

Those products are knowingly being sold to people that inhale them...without adequate testing & full disclosure of the results.

The majority of vapers have no clue at all, or think 'trace amounts' are harmless (when 'trace amounts' exceed NIOSH's Recommended Exposure Limit by hundreds, thousands or millions of ppb).

Regardless of...

...the FDA, stocks, bonds, committees, iras, capitalism, governments, business models, accountants, bottom line, or any other philosophical bag of farts (which have been posted throughout this thread, not just recently)...

...either manufacturers & vendors of these products have a moral & ethical obligation to identify 'inhalation risk chemicals' in products they sell for inhalation to inhalers, or they don't.

They do. But they're not doing it.

And every vaper that unknowingly "trusts, buys & vapes" may be doing damage to their lungs that won't show up for years...without their knowledge and/or without their informed consent. Same ethics as Big Tobacco.

It needs to stop already. These companies have the moral and ethical responsibility (and perhaps legal) to test, disclose, and let the vaping community have the basic human right of 'informed choice'.

Simple as that.

 

[we2rcool]

I don't require regs. Just disclosure.

If that could be done w/out regs, fine.

But----I think it is rather naive that some issue gag orders because BT and FDA have veritable armies of research people both scientific and otherwise fields, attorneys, etc. They know everything there is to know already. ...........and then some. Many years ago when BT decided to get into the vape industry they had tons of information not just from actuaries and accountants, but from the aforementioned professionals.......they don't invest millions on a lark. They know everything about ecigs there is to know. While we are busy doing studies on 159 liquids I can almost bet they have a few roomfuls of papers and tests already........

really.

They have huge resources in terms of manpower.

It's not a question of keeping any secrets at this point. That horse left the barn way back probably before 2010. Now, it's just a matter of how much $$ there is to be made and more importantly, who gets it.

^^^ Bingo ^^^

 

[we2rcool]

And when the lawsuits commence? Diacetyl possibilities in ANY ELIQUIDS will be used by the Justice Dpartment (defending the FDA, for those not aware).

...which is exactly why the manufacturers & vendors should have protected themselves (and the entire vaping community), by testing for and identifying and/or eliminating those chemicals YEARS ago.

 

[Hermit]

DOES ANYINE HERE ACTUALLY READ...

Yes, I've read quite a bit regarding the proposals etc etc and what's going on over there, with despair. I'm a Brit, so I can't join that fight. The EU fight is hardly any better. Everywhere though, the main topics of debate are still around 'children using', 'looks like smoke', 'sweet flavours', 'nicotine', 'medical device', 'gateway'. That a couple of chemicals are used in some flavours, but which aren't required to vape, isn't going to affect the battle in any major way - 'they' want simple, absolute, media-friendly soundbites. “If you're explaining, you're losing”. If using these chemicals could be put into the past tense or at least not kept secret, which is perfectly feasible and what many want, it wouldn't affect the battle at all.

Anyway, this thread is NOT about politics. I apologise to everyone for continuing the tangent.

 

[ImperfectFuture]

Yes, I've read quite a bit regarding the proposals etc etc and what's going on over there, with despair. I'm a Brit, so I can't join that fight. The EU fight is hardly any better. Everywhere though, the main topics of debate are still around 'children using', 'looks like smoke', 'sweet flavours', 'nicotine', 'medical device', 'gateway'. That a couple of chemicals are used in some flavours, but which aren't required to vape, isn't going to affect the battle in any major way - 'they' want simple, absolute, media-friendly soundbites. “If you're explaining, you're losing”. If using these chemicals could be put into the past tense or at least not kept secret, which is perfectly feasible and what many want, it wouldn't affect the battle at all.

Anyway, this thread is NOT about politics. I apologise to everyone for continuing the tangent.

Simple quote, those the ones you list fit adequately so far, in a challenge lawsuit, they bring out ALL the horses. Diacetyl in eliquids will be in there. I started vaping in feb, so I didn't get the diacetyl flavors (again, just lucky). The thread IS about what is going on, so is involved in politics, since what you want is not likely to happen, EVEN IF the suppliers give adequate test results.

1. The vendors will not pay for other vendor results.

2. The reason is, the prominent vendors are getting ready with plans b, and c. Plan b, get the test results required by the FDA. To know what those are: Vape Team Live Smoke Free Radio Episode 3. Plan c, if taxing regulations go into affect, the vendors move or close (yes, there are those). In addition, this is competitive industry. Hence the capitalism explanation. I'm personally knowledgeable that this isn't a long term solution, a modified version with evolve (the human condition is evolution, it's just those that are resistance to change, see the roman empire for additional inputs in current repetitive, addictive behavior).

3. Despite objections to what is felt about my OPINIONS in the subject, I started all for clear right to know. But without the supplier knowledge, we won't. Also, there is a feeling (see farwests example described above), that if they do full disclosure (and even change the liquids if diacetyl is found, due to the millions sold, there will be no recall of previous liquids purchased. The buyer would need to know by looking on the web site.

(see MBV's handling of citrus, not handled the same way by any other vendor - could be wrong here, don't know if this warning is on ecig express site:
Cinnamon Roll E Juice Baker Vapor - Mt Baker Vapor - Electronic Cigarettes )

Mbv pulled the cinnamon during the problem. Why would you not think they would pull flavor west flavorings once this issue was brought up? How many flavors did you see drop off their list? Anyone contact halo, or was no contact because they don't do the DIY flavoring?

4. Too much was being repeated over and ove about purchasing from flavor art and TPA, and I still wanted to know why the Canadians with the published test results were not looking for a Canadian supplier?

 

[flowerpots]

... (the human condition is evolution, it's just those that are resistance to change, see the roman empire for additional inputs in current repetitive, addictive behavior).

Deserves repeating...

 

[vangrl27]

The problem is the expense, as pointed out later in this thread. Vendors in the US have a tendency to NOT want to lower costs for other vendors (I pay attention to financial analysts via stock market, and they say - "while competition is good for the consumer, it's bad for stock prices, while M&A -mergers- are bad for the consumer, they are good for companies bottom line, stock prices". Guess what the majority of 401ks, TPA's,, retirement accounts, managed money accounts, Roth ira's, etc are invested in the US, I do have a Canadian finance book by Gail van oxlade! and your retirement, etc accounts aren't invested the same way). Another question, I do enjoy the test results from the Canadian vendors, but then, why don't they buy flavoring from Canadian companies?

You made a false assumption, when I started reading this thread, prior to researching, I posted links for various diacetyl threads and test results, and the claim that flavor west was used for MBV, in MBV and related threads for regular flavor (general eliquids) threads. This is so newer folks would know. I then proceeded with research on the butterscotch and cream flavors, which I verified were no longer provided by mbv, even if it was unintentional.

The phone calls were related to the links in the other threads, but those are long buried now. However, many more thousands saw those links in the other threads than saw the links in the DIY forums. I posted my research results in all threads I posted the warning. If you wish to find those and related FDA posts, check out my posting history.

PS: my own uncertified science, there is no diacetyl flavor in the butterscotch by MBV. I got good at tasting when they over chemicalized a few juices. Also, Halo has some butter smooth flavor, so I wouldn't be surprised if they were using flavorwest! Or had some acetoins in the mix. BUT, while upper management neither confirms nor denies (after my initial inquires) their suppliers, they admit to switching after FW ran out (wonder if that is when the questionable chemical showed up). Halo won't tell you squat. And they make more money than flavor west.

The problem with the suppliers providing the info, is that still doesn't satisfy what you want from this thread, which is full disclosure. You would first need this to be regulated under the FDA, (such as food labeling is), and then put it to a vote (such as gmt labeling). The only winners in that scenario is BT.

Vendors don't (and won't) provide supplier names. WHY? Because they want you to buy from them (this post has been dedicated to capitalism, and see hiw the FDA fits into more with that scenario than anti capitalism, see the TSA of 1998, and the MSA that is current, then extrapolate to why ecigs were granted by congress in 2009 ti be classified as tobacco products.

PPS: as much as you want to separate the two, you can't. There will be regulation if you want this route. Just saying, you will pay. Tis up to you, but MOST vapors aren't DIY'ing it, and the major industries are fighting the regs. And many vapors don't agree with the fear from diacetyl, since it is in current cigarettes (not my personal opinion, just my quick survey from threads in general e smoking and new member forums.

As a test, post some topics in the clearomizer, apv, FDA, etc. forums. If what you are aiming for here is what the general populace wants, no problemo? But, methinks you will see the same replies I saw in the new member thread. ESPECIALLY in the FDA forum. Otherwise, do the best research you can, but if someone doesn't want to give you the info, this doesn't automatically make them guilty. You would need to provide the test results to back up a claim. And "I can taste it" is fear mongering, ESPECIALLY if others that know the taste CAN't taste it (and don't underestimate the ingenuity of the vendors).

"You made a false assumption"

I'm not sure if this was directed at me? and if it's in regards to MBV?

I did post in this thread (way back when the F.W lab test was posted), that MBV, contrary to popular belief, does not use F.W Butterscotch

 

[vangrl27]

"You made a false assumption"

I'm not sure if this was directed at me? and if it's in regards to MBV?

I did post in this thread (way back when the F.W lab test was posted), that MBV, contrary to popular belief, does not use F.W Butterscotch

Also, there are no Canadian Flavour suppliers that I know of

 

[ImperfectFuture]

...which is exactly why the manufacturers & vendors should have protected themselves (and the entire vaping community), by testing for and identifying and/or eliminating those chemicals YEARS ago.

Y'all said yourself that the suppliers were ultimately responsible, and those new start ups all over the place (there picture is in an ejuice thread, they have b&m and sell online, they fill the vendor forum, there are hundreds), can't afford the testing, and the FDA thread explains why vendors aren't putting up links to the deeming regs.

Despite the fact that you don't want regs, they are necessary for what you want, another poster mentioned the wild west, that was the lead statement in the congressional hearing (no politics heh, and you liked his post), by the lead democrat calling these flavors you want protected (such as cherry and apple) marketing to children, and discount codes for referrals (the demise of white cloud, see their Facebook page), brought up this very issue as reason (along with the CDC) to support the deeming regs for the FDA, the FDA says it needs the deeming regs before it can stop the flavors. For god, (man/woman), watch the senate hearing, and read the FDA forum to find out exactly how this is happening,

The deeming regs are seeking congressional approval prior to actually going into affect, to stave off lawsuits (or at least, make them a lot harder, in comes the diacetyl from 2007-2009, oops, look, we still have it floating around in 2014).

You didn't comment on the part food recalls, thousands (maybe a million, extrapolation to over 550,000, not counting poor people and pet mills burying dead pets without testing), pets died, causing great costs to pet owners. Here we go with a simple chemical, melamine. In small quantities, they were using this to build the protein equivalencies needed for glutens, which were substituted for meat to increase protein in both wet and dry foods. ALL the major manufacturers (purina, Iams, hilltop, many more) and grocery store brands (Kroger, Safeway, Walmart - Roy's, Costco -Kirkland, many more). Supplier tests did not test for melamine, and it took a long time to find the suppliers, since they all ordered from china. The vendors relied on the protein tests for glutes (corn, wheat, soy, etc). Someone in china decided to up the melamine level to boost profits, not knowing the full extent if damage. No one knew. The other Chinese suppliers got into the game, a few didn't.

More here (other chemicals involved)

Protein adulteration in China - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

2007 pet food recalls - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The only way to protect the pet food supply AND Allow the continuation of corn gluten, rpc, and other protein concentrates, was to bring the FDA into a self regulated industry. Note the necessary studies done because dead pets were fed to hogs, and the hogs were fed to people (watch out Easter dinner).

That is what happens when you need to know, and people rely on self regulation.

You need to know if the stuff is being tested. Why don't you contact some suppliers? I've noticed vangrl and Jonathan contacting, I am contacting. How bout some emails from wer2cool, since emailing over day late postage seems to be a priority?

You also want disclosure other than a statement. They aren't going to release documents, they will place statements (the good ones, like mbv, maligned in this thread, but I initially believed y'all.)

You don't want regs, but you want to tell vendors what to do. That is what the FDA does. Or conversely, DIY flavors can go by the way side.

If you want self regulation, and no FDA control, then you need to show this amount of determination in the FDA forum. If you don't want politics, then you can only blame yourself for not trying when you don't get what you want.

And you often stated a "statement" via online or email is not good enough anymore. HHHMMM, well heeled vendors want to grow, and they aren't paying for other vendors to be safe, and they aren't disclosing their suppliers, because they want to keep your business (btw, since new to vaping, how did you find out they were originally using flavor west? TIA)

PS, there was an American supplier to menu foods, but I don't have my log in to the itchmo pet food forums (they were top of the google searches during 2008). Due to settlements with the government, they were allowed to declare bankruptcy, and seemed to have fallen off the face of the earth (think far west here), and the lawsuits remained with menu foods.

PPS! You can't always have it exactly your way, sometimes you have to compromise. Or for the really dedicated, create your own safe vapor flavoring company (just need a few flavors to start). Bet you would catch in real quick with standing in community.

 

[ImperfectFuture]

"You made a false assumption"

I'm not sure if this was directed at me? and if it's in regards to MBV?

I did post in this thread (way back when the F.W lab test was posted), that MBV, contrary to popular belief, does not use F.W Butterscotch

Yes, I was not referring to you, I saw earlier you thought I was. My point being, why no Canadian suppliers of flavors? Is this not a money maker?

 

[vangrl27]

Yes, I was not referring to you, I saw earlier you thought I was. My point being, why no Canadian suppliers of flavors? Is this not a money maker?

Do you mean flavour manufacturers or resellers? there are lots of Canadian DIY flavour resellers but no manufacturers that I know of.

I'm pretty positive you are "blackjack" from the Canadian site? and if so you know that I've known that MBV hasn't used F.W for awhile. This thread never felt like MBV was targeted directly, or any other E-juice maker for that matter. They were mentioned by myself briefly in the beginning and then brought up by you again a few days ago.

I may be wrong but I feel like you're upset about MBV being wrongly accused in this thread. They did use Flavor West for a very long time, so it's not unusual that people would associate them with that test. They aren't using F.W anymore and you said that they are now going to test their juices, and that's great. If MBV is still upset that people are concerned that they use f.W why don't they speak up on the threads to clarify matters rather than p.m you? or have they? and if so can you please link?

"And many vapors don't agree with the fear from diacetyl, since it is in current cigarettes "

Also, I do think that Diacetyl is a concern to most vapers, it's why 99% of vendors write "diacetyl free" somewhere on their webpage. A lot of new vapers just assume that was dealt with years ago, and that it goes without saying, unfortunately we know that's not true.
I bet if e-juice makers wrote "contains Diacetyl" that the vast majority would avoid buying that juice.
IMHO

 

[ImperfectFuture]

Do you mean flavour manufacturers or resellers? there are lots of Canadian DIY flavour resellers but no manufacturers that I know of.

I'm pretty positive you are "blackjack" from the Canadian site? and if so you know that I've known that MBV hasn't used F.W for awhile. This thread never felt like MBV was targeted directly, or any other E-juice maker for that matter. They were mentioned by myself briefly in the beginning and then brought up by you again a few days ago.

I may be wrong but I feel like you're upset about MBV being wrongly accused in this thread. They did use Flavor West for a very long time, so it's not unusual that people would associate them with that test. They aren't using F.W anymore and you said that they are now going to test their juices, and that's great. If MBV is still upset that people are concerned that they use f.W why don't they speak up on the threads to clarify matters rather than p.m you? or have they? and if so can you please link?

"And many vapors don't agree with the fear from diacetyl, since it is in current cigarettes "

Also, I do think that Diacetyl is a concern to most vapers, it's why 99% of vendors write "diacetyl free" somewhere on their webpage. A lot of new vapers just assume that was dealt with years ago, and that it goes without saying, unfortunately we know that's not true.
I bet if e-juice makers wrote "contains Diacetyl" that the vast majority would avoid buying that juice.
IMHO

LOL, futureinsights came from those writings in the 80's that were going to get published, but I never submitted. Wrote using dial up web pages mid nineties, they said it would never happen (dang but that credit bubble did). Later, changed to futureimperfect, but some dagnabbit needed to write a scifi book around 2011 with that name, changed to imperfectfuture 2011 starting with YouTube then other sites. Someone stole my URL (they do that, so you have to buy later, well, I showed him - uk company - by using a hyphen.) This user id is only of three ecig sites using the name, and all use the same acronym.

I'm not upset overall, I'm upset that this will affect the regs, I know your Canadian, and they have their own issues going, along with the Brits and eu, but this REALLY is how our government works ATM, and this thread, if not done scientifically, and without proof, does more harm than good. That is again in the casaa warnings for consumers, the Sfasta (US) warnings to vendors, etc, these organizations are listening to lawyers, I don't know how the friends are up north, but stocks go up and down depending on who sues who first (we are a litigious society, where they still believe that money and death penalty actually corrects societies ills).