And another one
- Thread starter Mazinny
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
That scares me too, but I'm not sure what could be done about it. We could require every US manufacturer to include a 20 page instruction and safety manual with every mod and atomizer sold. B&M's could be responsible for ensuring this manual is included with every purchase, but what about the hundreds of thousands of purchases made online, almost direct from the manufacturer?
Every authentic I have seen, or visited the website for, actually has all of the safety warnings. That doesn't mean that every reseller or cloner also has that information up, or that anyone will read it.
This is the warning on one site selling the Herakles tank:
Warning: Never use a short or flat 510 connection on any hybrid or hybrid style device. If unsure whether this pertains to your particular set-up, DO NOT assemble and use. Always use proper precautions and handling.
However, in this particular instance, I don't even think this was a direct to battery connection. The top cap looks different, but he only mentions the tank and not the mod, so we don't know. Perhaps he was using one of the 0.2ohm heads, and his battery couldn't handle it. Maybe the battery wrapper was torn and it shorted. We'll never know.
The fact is, a lot of what we use is fairly benign, IF it is used properly. If it isn't used properly, like many other consumer goods out there, the results can be disastrous.
I am not sure exactly how any lawsuit would come about. Has anyone won a suit against
a cell phone or laptop maker? I did a quick google search "lawsuit v cell phone makers exploding batteries" The only thing of interest that came up was references to suits being made by a
couple of fellows injured by exploding e-cigs (mods?). I think in order for a suit to be
successful one would have to prove the batteries or device were faulty. Not a impossible task
but, exceedingly difficult seeing the evidence (the battery) has blown up along with
the device it was used in. Ultimately the battery manufacturer would have to be
dragged into court and I am sure they have tons of previous ligation supporting
them going all the way back to the invention of radio and proliferation of the automobile.
Back in the day (circa 1950-60) car battery venting was a not to infrequent occurrence.
The only remedy available at the time was the admonition we all hoped you were
wearing safety glasses and didn't get any in your eye's.
I think the safest bet is to go after the retailer and determine what they did or did
not do in terms of supplying pertinent safety information. As unfortunate as it
sounds if just one B&M got nailed hard by the courts it would do more to straighten
this mess out than 1000 pages of regulations ever could.
Just some random thoughts Regards
Mike
a cell phone or laptop maker? I did a quick google search "lawsuit v cell phone makers exploding batteries" The only thing of interest that came up was references to suits being made by a
couple of fellows injured by exploding e-cigs (mods?). I think in order for a suit to be
successful one would have to prove the batteries or device were faulty. Not a impossible task
but, exceedingly difficult seeing the evidence (the battery) has blown up along with
the device it was used in. Ultimately the battery manufacturer would have to be
dragged into court and I am sure they have tons of previous ligation supporting
them going all the way back to the invention of radio and proliferation of the automobile.
Back in the day (circa 1950-60) car battery venting was a not to infrequent occurrence.
The only remedy available at the time was the admonition we all hoped you were
wearing safety glasses and didn't get any in your eye's.
I think the safest bet is to go after the retailer and determine what they did or did
not do in terms of supplying pertinent safety information. As unfortunate as it
sounds if just one B&M got nailed hard by the courts it would do more to straighten
this mess out than 1000 pages of regulations ever could.
Just some random thoughts Regards
Mike
Good question, Mike. It seems to be it would also require the plaintiff be able to prove it was not user error on his or her part. Even tougher to do with an RBA.
One would have to show the exact cause I think:
User error?
Defective atty or factory coil?
Defective mod?
Defective battery?
I don't think it would get anywhere.
One would have to show the exact cause I think:
User error?
Defective atty or factory coil?
Defective mod?
Defective battery?
I don't think it would get anywhere.
I think as long as there are Products, Lawyers, and Injuries, there will Always be Liability Lawsuits.
Read This before You File a Lawsuit for Product Liability – Facts from a Personal-Injury Attorney | Rudolph & Hammond
NOTE: Not Endorsing that a Lawsuit is Justified in this Accident. Or that I have much love for Personal Injury Lawyers in general.
Part of the blame can be given to journalism. They report these events for the purpose of scaring people instead of warning people. There is an important difference. There are devices used for vaping that have a higher risk of problems and the proper thing to do for the journalists is investigate and explain the hazards or disclose how to learn about them. Instead the stories are just for spreading fear. May be journalism deserves the hard times it's having.
Well, you don't have to PROVE anything, just convince a jury.
I agree though, it would be hard to make a case against a "device" where you choose the components. You select the battery compartment, you select the battery, you select the atomizer, and you choose the resistance of the atomizer. That sounds like a whole lot of user responsibility to me.
ETA: Unless you are sold an entire kit from a single vendor and that set up is proven to be the cause of the incident.
I agree. Your suit still has to meet the requirements or you have to get a lawyer smart
enough to convince a judge first of all and a jury secondly that square pegs really fit in round holes.
mike
Yes, anyone can file a lawsuit. Will a judge feel it has merit and allow it to be presented? Will a judge or jury side with the plaintiff?
Sometimes you just have to wait like 'Charters & Caldicott.' The CDC unscientifically supported attack on simple atomizers and batteries is amazing.
I have said in the past that the government is going after every single component
in a e-cigarette from the battery to the juice and each and everything in between.
I have also said the coils are not a problem. We have been using giant coils in electric
heating systems,space heaters,toasters,roasters,food warmers and,nameless other
applications where heat is needed with out any apparent health concern for how many
years now? Of course you noticed the CDC has come up with a new little twist. The coils
we use are soaked in juice so they invented the PH of the liquid scare to have something
to hang their hats on. Of course if that was a factor the natural oxidation would coat
the coils quickly enough to seal most if not all of the toxic metals even though there
is no way the amount would be enough to hurt anyone anyway. Anyone who thinks
wicks no mater what they are made of could shed enough fiber material that's coated
in a viscous liquid in an amount that could hurt an ameba let alone a human is not
thinking straight. Wait a minute what about white lung caused by smoking filtered
cigarettes? Oh,there's no such thing you say and you would be right.
Regards
Mike
Read Mooch's blog post (thanks Mooch, great work) and still miss the bomb failure mode discussion.
I feel for the guy getting hurt, but I'm still waiting for the 'bag of stupid' to spill out.
No heat, no vent.... just boom.
Really??
Every time I read about these accidents, I'm reminded of the following excerpt from the "leaked" draft provided by TVECA. I've posted it before and I'm very old so please excuse me yet again. Read it carefully and IMHO/guess it spells byby to mechanicals for sure (if and when)
And yes, just to make sure that my stash covers all the bases, I recently ordered a GP Paps V4 from vapourart.com. A friend let me borrow his for a few days and that spelled yet another debit to my CC. /lol
HTH
And yes, just to make sure that my stash covers all the bases, I recently ordered a GP Paps V4 from vapourart.com. A friend let me borrow his for a few days and that spelled yet another debit to my CC. /lol
HTH
Every time I read about these accidents, I'm reminded of the following excerpt from the "leaked" draft provided by TVECA. I've posted it before and I'm very old so please excuse me yet again. Read it carefully and IMHO/guess it spells byby to mechanicals for sure (if and when)
View attachment 525164
And yes, just to make sure that my stash covers all the bases, I recently ordered a GP Paps V4 from vapourart.com. A friend let me borrow his for a few days and that spelled yet another debit to my CC. /lol
HTH
I don't think Anyone who has followed the Deeming Process believes that many of the Current Regulated Mods are going to be PMTA-able. And Mechanical Mods? Not a Hope in Hell.
The Only real Question is How Long will they be Allowed to be sold Once Deeming is Finalized?
This year I have decided to use the RX200 model joytech chip. It makes my coils sing. Just like Lord Tennyson's poem Ulyuss.Every time I read about these accidents, I'm reminded of the following excerpt from the "leaked" draft provided by TVECA. I've posted it before and I'm very old so please excuse me yet again. Read it carefully and IMHO/guess it spells byby to mechanicals for sure (if and when)
View attachment 525164
And yes, just to make sure that my stash covers all the bases, I recently ordered a GP Paps V4 from vapourart.com. A friend let me borrow his for a few days and that spelled yet another debit to my CC. /lol
HTH
Last edited:
I think mechs are a big reason why the 2007 grandfather date will stick.
They want to eliminate them.
If they think there is a problem now with exploding mods, wait till inexperienced builders, start cobbling mechs together, out of flashlights.
They want to eliminate them.
If they think there is a problem now with exploding mods, wait till inexperienced builders, start cobbling mechs together, out of flashlights.
Allowing only proprietary tamper-proof systems fulfills all the desires of everyone involved.
Well, everyone but us.
(see the Vuse for an example of your future)
--A secure and predictable nicotine level
--A measurable and predictable dose
--No chance for user error with incompatible parts
--Only the allowed flavors are available
--Ability to monitor and tax nicotine amounts accurately
Not to mention that is the only way to clear the coming regulatory hurdles.
As long as free-roaming nicotine is available, such efforts are doomed to failure.
If free-roaming nicotine becomes unavailable, all of the above is within reach for the regulators.
Without anything to refill with, mods are gone.
I've been saying this for years.
And nothing I've ever seen has caused me to doubt my conclusions.
Free-roaming nicotine can not be allowed to survive.
It's the gum in the works.
Well, everyone but us.
(see the Vuse for an example of your future)
--A secure and predictable nicotine level
--A measurable and predictable dose
--No chance for user error with incompatible parts
--Only the allowed flavors are available
--Ability to monitor and tax nicotine amounts accurately
Not to mention that is the only way to clear the coming regulatory hurdles.
As long as free-roaming nicotine is available, such efforts are doomed to failure.
If free-roaming nicotine becomes unavailable, all of the above is within reach for the regulators.
Without anything to refill with, mods are gone.
I've been saying this for years.
And nothing I've ever seen has caused me to doubt my conclusions.
Free-roaming nicotine can not be allowed to survive.
It's the gum in the works.
How does the FDA get to be an expert on Electrical Devices? Silly me, I thought we already had orgs that handled electrical items and their safety issues. So what kind of conflict of requirements is this fiasco going to cause?
So now the FDA gets into Hoverboards, flashlights.......?
Really?
So now the FDA gets into Hoverboards, flashlights.......?
Really?
Hasn't the FDA has been regulating electrically powered medical devices for quite some time?
No, because they aren't used to consume a "tobacco product".
Bottom line is: When it comes to vape stuff, if it isn't sold for numerous other uses, make sure you have what you need for as long as you intend to vape. That means nicotine *and* devices.
- Status
Similar threads
