All these threads regarding safety and regulations, and my ranting

[markmcs]

Mark, you say you've done due diligence. Do you think wanting to know whether any of 3 compounds you'd like to avoid are in the e-liquid you buy is like worrying about your battery exploding?

Let's just say for a second you have some comprehension of the issues. Are we disturbing you by discussing them? Does it make sense for you to come tell us how we should think and act? Do you usually talk to everybody per their "pretty face", or just women?

Fernand,
If you had bothered to read the post I was responding to, you would have known I used the battery analogy and the crossing the street blindfolded vs driving example because panini had said there was " no such thing as a minor risk". I was merely pointing out that in fact, some things were much more risky than others (e.g. the risk of your battery exploding is very slight and you can vape without really worrying about it).

As for you being insulting to me, that is uncalled for. I am entitled to my opinion as you are yours.
Should vaping be completely safe? Yes!

Is it, or will it EVER be completely safe? Not likely!

Should a reasonably intelligent person be shocked that a possible health issue has been uncovered? DUH!

I understand the concern...I just can't help laughing at the righteous indignation and outright anger in these threads that a mostly untested and completely unregulated product has been shown to be imperfect. You were aware there were some risks when you bought your first ecig, so don't go postal when you are proven right.

I feel that we should be more concerned about the pending legislation that may ban our vape. Raising the alarm will only help that outcome.

And the truth is...the risks ARE minimal compared to smoking!! Isn't that why most of us started? If you want risk free, then quit entirely as millions have done.

 

[markmcs]

Wow, way to assert your dominance. You must be right then, Im sold.

In reference to the eliquid testing and/or improvment that is coming that you and others have meantioned, although slowely,... I have to say thats not a valid argument unless you can provide some proof. Untill then, lets leave that "trust me" element out of it.
If you are willing to share what information you have or claim to have, please by all means do share!

It's simple economics...If a product is found to be unsafe (except for tobacco, that is) or have some issue that needs to be corrected, the manufacturer will eventually have to change that product to regain consumer trust. If not, he will not stay in business very long.

Changing his formulas is much easier and cheaper than fighting litigation or facing possible bans.

I'm just saying that if vaping survives the no-smoking onslaught and becomes an approved alternative to smoking, improvements will have to be made and safety issues addressed. Unfortunately, we will probably be vaping a little diacetyl for some time to come.

Either you are willing to take the risk or you aren't. No one is twisting anyone's arm here. Some of you act like you have been personally attacked by the EVIL Juice Makers!!! Grow up!

 

[GoodDog]

I have done due diligence...I have read the ALARMIST threads,

Maybe you should just calm down a bit and put down your vape...because there will always be some health risk, no matter how much transparency exists. your L-ion battery could explode and damage that pretty face of yours....but here you are still vaping!!!!

It strikes me as paranoid and hypocritical that people who knowingly, regularly, and intentionally inhaled thousands of poisons by lighting up 30 or 40 times a day for years and years to suddenly cry foul when they find that one of the components of some of the hundreds of e liquid flavorings may be unhealthy to vape!!!

All this ranting and raving about "possible" health issues of vaping small amounts of diacetyl is silly and premature.

Get a grip people!!

I agree that unhealthy chemicals shouldn't be in eliquids, but threads like are a bit much!!! Concern is good....alarmist ranting is counterproductive!!

Threads like this smack of "Conspiracy" and "Paranoia" and once that happens....NO ONE will hear you!!!

If you want to avoid any risk, it might be better just not to do anything at all. I don't think anyone can realistically expect a rash of "VAPING DEATHS" anytime soon! I just feel the alarmists need to temper their concern...not stifle it. right now this is 'much ado about nothing'!!!

This thread is really becoming pretty silly!

Even the most reputable eliquid vendor is right to try to protect their company, in light of the lynch mob that seems to be forming around this issue.

Some here are making way too much of this!!!! Just choose your own poisons and try not create a panic. Life is too short for all this unnecessary drama!

Who has been insulting whom?

 

[markmcs]

Who has been insulting whom?

Touche, Gooddog!!

...roger, base....yes, we are under attack....taking heavy fire...........request immediate air support at one...zero...fiver....niner.....urrounded...theyv....brokn....thru....AAAAGGGGHHHH!

 

[Panini]

Fernand,
If you had bothered to read the post I was responding to, you would have known I used the battery analogy and the crossing the street blindfolded vs driving example because panini had said there was " no such thing as a minor risk".

It's called context. I was speaking in context of the topic -- Diacetyl inhalation leading to bronchiolitis obliterans. If you want to ignore that and try to demean my posts further, go for it. I'll let your posts speak for themselves.

 

[markmcs]

It's called context. I was speaking in context of the topic -- Diacetyl inhalation leading to bronchiolitis obliterans. If you want to ignore that and try to demean my posts further, go for it. I'll let your posts speak for themselves.

I was trying to explain my post to ferdnand, who obviously didn't understand what I had written, or why....and I'm sorry panini, but there IS such a thing as a minor risk, as my examples were meant to show. Yes, dozens of popcorn plant workers are sick with B.O., but we are unsure of the risk to vapers, if any. It needs to be addressed and discussed and investigated, but until some action is taken, our personal choice is our own. I am willing to take some risk to avoid smoking, others are not. The chemical won't be banned anytime soon so for the "risk-free vaping crew" there is really only one option.

 

[Edwv30]

Fernand,
If you had bothered to read the post I was responding to, you would have known I used the battery analogy and the crossing the street blindfolded vs driving example because panini had said there was " no such thing as a minor risk". I was merely pointing out that in fact, some things were much more risky than others (e.g. the risk of your battery exploding is very slight and you can vape without really worrying about it).

He did bother to read your post. Your twisted Panini's post and responded to something that was never said. When it comes to our lungs and health there is no such thing as a "minor risk" especially if that risk can be avoided. If a supplier discloses the chemicals used in their product we can avoid using it. A supplier should be required to disclose this information...period.

As for you being insulting to me, that is uncalled for. I am entitled to my opinion as you are yours.

No one insulted you. You are the one coming on this thread and arguing\insulting people when you don't even comprehend what our concerns are about....disclosure. How many times do we have to say that? Why are you even arguing about it? Do you think knowledge is a bad thing?

Should vaping be completely safe? Yes!

Again...no one said that vaping should be completely safe, (although that would be nice). We are simply asking for disclosure in order to decide what we choose to inhale.

Is it, or will it EVER be completely safe? Not likely!

Agreed, no one said otherwise. Who are you trying to prove that to?

Should a reasonably intelligent person be shocked that a possible health issue has been uncovered? DUH!

This doesn't deserve a response.

I understand the concern...I just can't help laughing at the righteous indignation and outright anger in these threads that a mostly untested and completely unregulated product has been shown to be imperfect. You were aware there were some risks when you bought your first ecig, so don't go postal when you are proven right.

The only anger here is coming from you. We are not angry...just asking for knowledge and demanding truth from suppliers. Again...why does this bother you so bad?

I I feel that we should be more concerned about the pending legislation that may ban our vape. Raising the alarm will only help that outcome.

We are concerned about pending legislation. Go argue with the suppliers who refuse to disclose what is being used in their juices. They are the ones who are going to cause the bans because they refuse to self regulate and disclose the truth.

And the truth is...the risks ARE minimal compared to smoking!! Isn't that why most of us started? If you want risk free, then quit entirely as millions have done.

That's not the truth, no one knows the truth at this point in time. You are not a doctor so please don't play one on ECF. There are theories that Diacetyl may be LESS destructive in cigarettes due to the other chemicals.

 

[markmcs]

He did bother to read your post. Your twisted Panini's post and responded to something that was never said. When it comes to our lungs and health there is no such thing as a "minor risk" especially if that risk can be avoided. If a supplier discloses the chemicals used in their product we can avoid using it. A supplier should be required to disclose this information...period.



No one insulted you. You are the one coming on this thread and arguing\insulting people when you don't even comprehend what our concerns are about....disclosure. How many times do we have to say that? Why are you even arguing about it? Do you think knowledge is a bad thing?



Again...no one said that vaping should be completely safe, (although that would be nice). We are simply asking for disclosure in order to decide what we choose to inhale.



Agreed, no one said otherwise. Who are you trying to prove that to?



This doesn't deserve a response.



The only anger here is coming from you. We are not angry...just asking for knowledge and demanding truth from suppliers. Again...why does this bother you so bad?




We are concerned about pending legislation. Go argue with the suppliers who refuse to disclose what is being used in their juices. They are the ones who are going to cause the bans because they refuse to self regulate and disclose the truth.



That's not the truth, no one knows the truth at this point in time. You are not a doctor so please don't play one on ECF. There are theories that Diacetyl may be LESS destructive in cigarettes due to the other chemicals.

Ed, I responded to the statement, "Also, there really is no such thing as a minor risk. Either it poses a risk or it doesn't" That was said. My thinking was that if one out of 700,000 become ill, that is a minor risk. If one out of 20 become ill, that is a major risk. I'm a little tired of playing semantics.

I am not an MD, nor do I pretend to be.....but while we are on the subject...are you the official ECF attorney? Does anything I say to anyone here have to be vetted by you?

 

[warbdan]

I'm starting to have visions of another closed thread

 

[Edwv30]

It's somewhat sad that out of all the information on this thread you have chosen to focus in on "minor risk." I really wish you were able to comprehend what is being said here instead of insulting people and trying to incite flame wars.

 

[Edwv30]

I'm starting to have visions of another closed thread

Yes, I think that's the intent of certain members posting on this thread.

 

[SimpleSins]

Yes, it's almost uncanny how that happens, isn't it? Can't handle a debate based on merit, so instead get rude and confrontational and manage to get it shut down once again. And again with the uncanny coincidence, too.

 

[Bovinia]

It doesn't matter how many times we try to discuss our concerns and ask for disclosure. Every time there will be someone or several people come along just to argue the opposing point. It's sad, because it continues to divide the community and protect the vendors from having to make our juices as safe as reasonably possible

 

[markmcs]

It's somewhat sad that out of all the information on this thread you have chosen to focus in on "minor risk." I really wish you were able to comprehend what is being said here instead of insulting people and trying to incite flame wars.

Although I took exception to that statement, I do "comprehend" what has been said here, and I have learned some addl info about the problem with Diacetyl. My initial point, if anyone can remember, was that in my humble opinion, some here were excessively worried and were being a little more emotional about this than I felt was necessary.
This is how I feel...you are entitled to feel differently....but if we can't call each other on our views, what is the point?

 

[Panini]

Mark, I asked you if you had read through the previous threads for a reason. Not because I was trying to construct some type of insult about your knowledge on the issue. There is a lot of background here, broken trust and in most cases, failure to receive any acknowledgement or answer about the inhalation of something that could ultimately destroy their lungs. And aside from caring about the actual people behind the device, do you think risking cases of decreased respiratory function is wise in the current political climate?

There have been closed threads, snide remarks and “subtle” insults hurled in both directions. But a few of us still feel it’s important. I personally don’t understand why consumers wouldn’t be somewhat passionate about this. We’re trusting our vendors to take a lot of precautions with this stuff. We take for granted that they measure properly and work in sanitary conditions. So when we ask a question about a substance that could ultimately destroy our lung tissue (albeit, slowly) and receive false answers, or no answers, what do you suggest?

 

[markmcs]

Is this some separate, Sacred thread, where opposing views are discouraged? That's how it seems. From my first post here, I was attacked by the very people who are now preaching decorum and open discussion. Some of whom I've had very reasonable, amicable conversations with in the past.

It's as though I have committed some taboo by questioning the diacetyl problem.

 

[GoodDog]

Although I took exception to that statement, I do "comprehend" what has been said here, and I have learned some addl info about the problem with Diacetyl. My initial point, if anyone can remember, was that in my humble opinion, some here were excessively worried and were being a little more emotional about this than I felt was necessary.
This is how I feel...you are entitled to feel differently....but if we can't call each other on our views, what is the point?

Wow Mark, all those posts accusing members of being an "alarmist", "paranoid", "conspirator", "silly", "ranting and raving", "lynch mobs", creating "drama" and so on is just your way of saying, "humble opinion, some here were excessively worried and were being a little more emotional about this than I felt was necessary."?? You do have a way with words.

 

[Fernand]

Mark when I first ran into this I was put off by the tone of some posters, but I hadn't looked at the issue in depth. I still think there is sometimes too much of a finger-pointing tone, with some counterproductive generalizations expressed, but i can understand why people are frustrated. My big question was whether we are vaping enough of these compounds to be worried. So I did a lot of digging. The short answer is that if you vape lightly flavored juice, with incidental diacetyl or AP content, you are likely inhaling 0.036 ppm, and if very strongly flavored liquids say of a vanillaey custardy type, you are likely inhaling over 4.2 ppm. The OSHA proposed permissible level is 0.03. The human data is hard to analyze and summarize, but at 100 ppm many animals show severe damage in a few hours, and at 350 they all do, beyond repair. This is a bit close for comfort. It's similar for diacetyl and acetyl propionyl. The acetoin inhalation data is due out soon. Now, assuming that I'm giving you accurate and considered information, don't you think 1) you might want to know which flavorings use how much, 2) in the meantime, since they are interchangeably very widely mixed in (I was surprised to read that some strawberry uses them) you just might want to cut down on use of all flavorings and 3) you may want to get better informed, check what I've told you and beyond, and keep abreast 4) after you do you may want to help figure out practical solutions, since this is an avoidable thing.

 

[markmcs]

Wow Mark, all those posts accusing members of being an "alarmist", "paranoid", "conspirator", "silly", "ranting and raving", "lynch mobs", creating "drama" and so on is just your way of saying, "humble opinion, some here were excessively worried and were being a little more emotional about this than I felt was necessary."?? You do have a way with words.

Well, GoodDog, "all those posts" didn't come out of the blue...some were in response to posts that were, less than civil to me also. I take my share of the blame for what this thread became, and I am trying to make peace. I think the emotions ran a little high in both directions, don't you?

 

[markmcs]

Mark, I asked you if you had read through the previous threads for a reason. Not because I was trying to construct some type of insult about your knowledge on the issue. There is a lot of background here, broken trust and in most cases, failure to receive any acknowledgement or answer about the inhalation of something that could ultimately destroy their lungs. And aside from caring about the actual people behind the device, do you think risking cases of decreased respiratory function is wise in the current political climate?

There have been closed threads, snide remarks and “subtle” insults hurled in both directions. But a few of us still feel it’s important. I personally don’t understand why consumers wouldn’t be somewhat passionate about this. We’re trusting our vendors to take a lot of precautions with this stuff. We take for granted that they measure properly and work in sanitary conditions. So when we ask a question about a substance that could ultimately destroy our lung tissue (albeit, slowly) and receive false answers, or no answers, what do you suggest?

Mark when I first ran into this I was put off by the tone of some posters, but I hadn't looked at the issue in depth. I still think there is sometimes too much of a finger-pointing tone, with some counterproductive generalizations expressed, but i can understand why people are frustrated. My big question was whether we are vaping enough of these compounds to be worried. So I did a lot of digging. The short answer is that if you vape lightly flavored juice, with incidental diacetyl or AP content, you are likely inhaling 0.032 ppm, and if very strongly flavored liquids say of a vanillaey custardy type, you are likely inhaling over 4.2 ppm. The OSHA proposed permissible level is 0.03. The human data is hard to analyze and summarize, but at 100 ppm many animals show severe damage in a few hours, and at 350 they all do, beyond repair. This is a bit close for comfort. It's similar for diacetyl and acetyl propionyl. The acetoin inhalation data is due out soon. Now, assuming that I'm giving you accurate and considered information, don't you think 1) you might want to know which flavorings use how much, 2) in the meantime, since they are interchangeably very widely mixed in (I was surprised to read that some strawberry uses them) you just might want to cut down on use of all flavorings and 3) you may want to get better informed, check what I've told you and beyond, and keep abreast 4) after you do you may want to help figure out practical solutions, since this is an avoidable thing.

I didn't want, or expect, this thread to heat up the way it did, and I appreciate you reaching out to me with these posts. Obviously, there is more "passion" about this than I realized, but it hasn't fallen on deaf ears. As Ferdnand said, the "tone" here put me off a bit, but the concern is valid.

I won't pretend to share the same sense of urgency that I get from this thread, but I do agree vendors need to be more forthcoming about their ingredients, work to produce flavors without diacetyl or acetoin, unless a safe level can be established, and to replace other unsafe chemicals.

If I find a way to speed up that process, I will use it and pass it along. In any case, I appreciate the info, as painful as its been, and I'll do my share of research on the subject.