Oh and, simply to help lessen any angst, I wanted to re-post Scottbee's clarification of the context in which he used the phrase "going all FDA," since you said this again subsequent to his clarification:
skydragon said:
No one is "going all FDA" That should have never even been mentioned. Just because we would like to be able to use cartos but feel safe about it, doesn't mean we want the stupid FDA involved and it is a horrible analogy.
He had previously replied...
Scottbee said:
[...] That wasn't my intent. The FDA came down on e-cigs with a horribly biased analysis, lacking specific testing details and analytics, yet still basically proclaiming them to be "unsafe" and perhaps even dangerous. [...]
I don't know him and obviously can't speak for him, but I'm pretty dern sure he meant it in the sense of the things that were wrong with how the FDA drew and disseminated its conclusions;
not in the sense of someone asking or 'defacto asking' for FDA involvement/scrutiny(!). (Not indicating you should or will like that usage either, and not expressing any opinion, just helping clarify.)
Whew! Ok, glad you guys talked that one out again.
Oh and one more potentially crossed wire I noticed, a semantics thing. When Scottbee comes back to saying "No we
don't KNOW that it's unsafe" (or whether it presents a problem besides not knowing), I think he's speaking in terms of
only a professional, technical, scientific standard of what is required in order for it to be accurate to state/conclude/'know' something is or isn't safe. Pretty much a yes or no matter: Do we know what kind of poly fiber it is, and has it been tested under the unique conditions applicable to vaping, or not? If not, then as far as statements or claims that can be made, it can only be
technically, factually accurate to state that we don't know. Hmmm, maybe it's just too early, or maybe it could be looked at as a distant cousin of the ol' "Have you stopped beating your wife yet" question. (...was gonna put a smiley or wink there but somehow didn't seem right following a sentence containing "beating your wife...")
Possibly-mediocre analogy: Many of us probably feel that the existing data we can cobble together already
does "prove" (and there's no such thing as "pretty much proving") that ecigs have to be (well nope, can't say "have to be" either, not part of a factual sentence, implies guessing) safer than real cigs. But we can't say that, would be a false claim as it results only from a 'common sensical,' fallible, scientifically unproven leap.
We can't even say that we
know inhaling PG via vaping is safe (or at least long-term), despite the positive relevant studies we
do have, including on use in things like medical inhalers; because it has not been studied in the way vapers are actually
using it -- in this comparatively great amount and frequency. Maybe hundreds of 'hits' per day, vs. a few occasional inhalations over a day or week or month with something like an asthma inhaler. (Actually, I've heard at least one long-timer big cheese here say there's a variant of Nicotrol inhaler that contains PG, so may be a less pointy point if so.)
I hope that was cohesive and made sense (didn't sleep last night, insomnia strikes again! :-/ ), but regardless, to the scientist or engineering reader I'd imagine the way I've assembled my attempt at refocusing is at best "quaint" lol.
Again, this isn't meant to express any opinions whatsoever, nor to minimize anything. Just trying to help spread global peace and harmony, like I always do.
