Am I the only person who has a problem with ppl making juice in their homes?

[sub4me]

They say their products contain All USA made ingredients so I thought it was fair to assume that also included the nic, which is why I asked.
I didn't expect a wise guy response of get an education. I think its ridiculous how some pretend to know everything but I suppose that's the extremists view on everything they discuss.

 

[stevegmu]

They say their products contain All USA made ingredients so I thought it was fair to assume that also included the nic, which is why I asked.
I didn't expect a wise guy response of get an education. I think its ridiculous how some pretend to know everything but I suppose that's the extremists view on everything they discuss.

It does...

Welcome to the new line of ProVape E-juice. We brought in a master chemist to create the finest juice available. All of the premium e-juice selections are made here at ProVape by our master mixologist.

Everything is sourced in the USA and we think you will find this is the best juice you have ever tried. All of our juice is designed to have the perfect consistency so it will wick well into your atomizer or cartomizer.

All selections in the Premium catalog will be shipped out with your hardware order since we stock them all in house.

International customers welcome to order juice from our Premium catalog (please take note of the list of countries where shipping of ProVape e-juice is prohibited)
Ingredients:

Nicotine extracted in the USA from tobacco grown in the USA
USP Grade Propylene Glycol
USP Grade Glycerine
All flavorings are FDA approved
No additional water or colors added
Bottles do not contain Bisphenol A (BPA Free)

 

[sub4me]

Steve, thanks for the information.

 

[AndriaD]

Edited - Removed USA listing. After reading a bit, I smell an RJR style Scaremongering Rat.

I've been noticing that for DAYS...

There is a simple solution - Abstinence

Bingo!

Andria

 

[FlamingoTutu]

Interesting Steve. Never thought to look at ProVape's juice. Do you know how long they have said the nic was extracted in the US?

 

[stevegmu]

Interesting Steve. Never thought to look at ProVape's juice. Do you know how long they have said the nic was extracted in the US?

As long as I can remember. ProVape hasn't always made their own juice, though...

 

[FlamingoTutu]

As long as I can remember.

Tempting to ask how good you memory is. Ok, kidding. That's interesting, I never knew that.

 

[sub4me]

Get an Education before judgment:

USP Nicotine Solutions
USP Nicotine Solutions
Pure USP grade organic nicotine extract, USP grade Kosher certified Propylene Glycol and/or USP grade Kosher certified vegetable Glycerin carrier base fluid. Wizard Labs nicotine solutions contain no other preservatives or chemical additives.
Wizard Labs is an FDA registered facility located in South Florida, USA

http://www.nicselect.com/nicselect-advantages/

Edited - Removed USA listing. After reading a bit, I smell an RJR style Scaremongering Rat.

There is a simple solution - Abstinence

I smell a bully.

 

[sub4me]

Maybe some of you could try being polite to others that are having a discussion cause there's been some good information given here.

 

[Jman8]

I beg to differ. I think vendor must get analysis of the e-liquid they sell. As you say it only cost $250 per flavor.

You provide no reasoning for your disagreement. Who wants this analysis and for what purpose? I submit that as this discussion has been going, consumers want it. I think certain vendors may wish to provide it, but do not think they need to be required to do so, as that will lead to a whole bunch of unintended consequences from the (die hard) consumer perspective. ANTZ will be involved in analysis just as much as eCigs will be regulated. IMO, that needs to be front and center in this type of debate, otherwise I see it being highly naive to go down this road.

You say it 'only costs $250' as if that's no big deal for the vendor. But I'm thinking you'd treat this as really big deal if it were entirely up to the consumer. So reads as, "as long as it isn't my money paying for it, then let's just say it is only $250," as if that is small peanuts.

Substances higher that the daily safety limit should clearly be indicated on their label. As Dr. F. indicated if those chemicals are avoidable they should not be there to start with.

They are naturally occurring substances. The currently known 'safe stuff' is synthetics. I find that laughable when considering the ANTZ aspect in this. I strongly believe it will be a short few years til ANTZ exploits that and produces new harms on par with 'what is wrong with smoking.'

With all due respect, I'm afraid that what you are proposing is a recipe for disaster. IMO, there are no valid or logical reasons for keeping avoidable high risk chemicals in our e-liquid.

I would say taste / quality is a highly valid reason. Perhaps if I did taste test and 9 times out of 10 couldn't tell the difference, then you'd have legitimate points here. But if I (or anyone) could tell difference, then I would say you are the one that is mistaken here. You also fail to neglect what ANTZ (and their scientists, who heavily influence mainstream perspective) will have on all this. Thus, the 'recipe for disaster' is equally, if not more, on your plate and for what you are advocating for. I am saying, 'yes, have analysis, as may be desired. And yes, have utmost concern for safety, as may be desired.' But if requiring those items of someone (namely a vendor) outside of you, then I see that as a) irresponsible and b) passing the buck. Or 250 bucks in this case. I don't see this as requirement for the consumer, nor for the vendors. But you and stevegmu want to argue that it must absolutely be requirement for vendors. I'm always up for that debate as I see the "should be required" position as undeniably misguided.

 

[stevegmu]

Yes, there should be and will be regulations. As the Suicide Bunny fiasco has shown, some vendors can't be trusted. If they can't put up the money for testing, or can't make e-liquid without higher than accepted levels of dangerous ingredients, they shouldn't be in business...

 

[Jman8]

A few vapers who do mind vaping those rotten lungs chemicals because they taste good and in their view not as bad as ..... I don't really care and they can go on. But the rest of us want labels on e-liquid bottles that clearly indicate the presence of the harmful chemicals.

So please stop being against the minimal protection we are seaking as you have nothing to gain and we have everything to loose.

And who do you want to be in charge of making sure labels are on eLiquid bottles that indicate presence of harmful chemicals? As I see it, that will be coming and from a group that most ECF'ers deem ANTZ like or heavily influenced by ANTZ.

As I said in earlier post, we may think we've come up with great list of 'reasonable regulations' but then another group comes along and explains how unreasonable our list is and why it needs to be expanded to include their additions, if safety/health is truly the concern. Some will say the original list is satisfactory, but many (if not majority) will defect and go along with updated list. And I see that list constantly being updated with regards to eCigs; because a) we all agree that long term effects are unknown and b) ANTZ will continue poking at eCigs forever and a day. Some of that will be pure propaganda stuff and some of it will be on par with 'the harms of smoking' science. Both of which I find debatable, but the 2nd of which is considered by vast majority as 'actual science.' Thus, 'actual science' will be constantly updating the list of reasonable regulations regarding eCigs. And even that strikes me as silly way to put it because when Dr. F or any 'actual scientist' gets into political advocacy, they stop playing role of 'actual scientist.'

Also, just to reiterate, that my position is not, even a little bit, against minimal protection and find that insulting if that implication is about me. I am debating the requirement aspect of this, and strongly suggesting the person truly desiring minimal protection be willing to bear all the costs. If not willing to do so, I'm up for debating that point precisely, for I'm suddenly not buying that those who say they desire this, are proceeding with a responsible outlook on the topic.

 

[Jman8]

Yes, there should be and will be regulations. As the Suicide Bunny fiasco has shown, some vendors can't be trusted. If they can't put up the money for testing, or can't make e-liquid without higher than accepted levels of dangerous ingredients, they shouldn't be in business...

And if you, as a consumer, can't put up the funding for the protection you seek, and feel must be there, then perhaps you shouldn't be vaping?

 

[stevegmu]

And if you, as a consumer, can't put up the funding for the protection you seek, and feel must be there, then perhaps you shouldn't be vaping?

I do; I pay taxes, for which I expect some regulation for ingestables like food, drinks and e-liquid...

 

[Jman8]

I do; I pay taxes, for which I expect some regulation for ingestables like food, drinks and e-liquid...

Well, if you pay taxes, then why not expect all your eLiquid for free?

IOW, you did nothing to explain why you are not fronting 100% of the cost for the protection you personally seek.

 

[stevegmu]

Well, if you pay taxes, then why not expect all your eLiquid for free?

IOW, you did nothing to explain why you are not fronting 100% of the cost for the protection you personally seek.

I am not quite sure you understand how taxes work, or business for that matter.
It is up to a vendor to disclose if their product is using ingredients known to be dangerous at certain levels, not the consumer. Regulations, which my taxes help fund, ensure vendors like Suicide Bunny do these tests...

Expecting me to pay for a vendor to test for known dangerous substances is as silly as expecting me to test the water coming into my house...

 

[beckdg]

I am not quite sure you understand how taxes work, or business for that matter.
It is up to a vendor to disclose if their product is using ingredients known to be dangerous at certain levels, not the consumer. Regulations, which my taxes help fund, ensure vendors like Suicide Bunny do these tests...

Expecting me to pay for a vendor to test for known dangerous substances is as silly as expecting me to test the water coming into my house...

And who pays (via consumer pricing on the end product) the company for the lost profits when producing a simple product becomes more expensive due to this testing?

This quote clearly outlines a gross misunderstanding of the most basic principles of business. Costs increase, prices increase, period. It's how profits are made and businesses stay afloat.

ADDIT: We won't even touch on that comment about the water. Just glad I won't be drinking coffee at your house.

 

[skoony]

So your saying companies like Halo or JC that say they use USP grade nic are buying it from China or India or where ever??

yes,its USP grade though.
the confusion is US companies are selling it.
it is their product.people don't realize a lot of their plants are overseas.
regards
mike

 

[skoony]

under the heading be careful what you wish for.

its nice that nic production is ramping up here in the USA.

on the other hand that will make it really easy for the FDA to ban
all imports of nic base. then we would have the proverbial choke
point.
regards
mike

 

[K_Tech]

And who pays (via consumer pricing on the end product) the company for the lost profits when producing a simple product becomes more expensive due to this testing?

Not to drift further off topic (but I will), that's one thing I've tried to impress on some of my co-workers, and it often gets lost in translation. Businesses don't pay salaries, taxes, or fines. Consumers do.

Back on topic, I'd rather see AEMSA be the "regulating" body for e-liquid manufacturers, with the .gov keeping its grubby paws off what little of my life I have to myself. Industry regulation is the way to go, because they tend to be more aware of the needs of business.

Individual retailers should have a choice when it comes to getting certified, and the consumer will vote with his (or her) wallet.