Cloud9vaping pulls Five Pawns and other liquids from the shelf after testing.

[sd3614]

Of course. That is why vapers who wish to vape DAP-free are looking to purchase from companies with published test results. Something we have been waiting for for a long time, and which is finally coming to fruition.

Consumers who wish to vape DAP eliquids can continue to vape them, either by looking for DAP in the test results, or by purchasing from vendors who do not provide tests.

There is something for everyone.

I don't disagree, like I said everyone has a right to know if they want to. I just question independent testing in regards to all of it. It all leads down a path that leads to government regulation and perhaps getting regulated right out of having any choice. I have a feeling big tobacco and the pockets it reaches will take simple "we deserve the right to know" and turn it into crushing supply.

Then many of us will probably take another look at a pack of smokes when it becomes less of a hassle to do so. That is all I am saying.

For "now" at least most of us can DIY... for "now". That obviously would need addressed also by government at some point.

 

[SeniorBoy]

BTW,



When I was conducting research for my own Blog post on the C9 vs 5P issue, my first stop was the AEMSA Standards document. Unfortunately, all I found was:

"*Note: Diacetyl and Acetyl Propionyl (2,3 – Pentanedione) standards are undergoing active re-‐evaluations. All standards amendments are posted immediately after ratifications."

I also read the entire Standards document, hoping to find some "industry" guidance on the D/AP issue. I understand their is some deliberation and research germain to this issue BUT "silence" is disappointing. My fingers are crossed for sooner rather than later. PLEASE!

 

[rurwin]

The one thing we need to prove to the FDA, if that is ever possible, is that the industry can regulate itself.

Sure, we mustn't descend to name calling and ugliness, but we must make sure that abusive vendors cannot do business. Publishing test results is not an action that should be taken lightly but, if 5P refused to speak on the record or take action for two months, it seems justified to me. It is likely that C9 were getting a significant number of complaints from their customers -- Five Pawns is a very popular brand and not easy to source in the UK. Publishing the test results is the most neutral way of justifying their actions. Anything less would look like libel.

There's another tell that hasn't been mentioned much, why doesn't 5P have a report from May 2015 to publish? Wouldn't the first thing they should have done have been to send everything off for a new assay? The Cloud9 results might be in error, but they shouldn't be ignored.

 

[schismz]

There will not be a lawsuit because neither side can afford one, whatever the situation or outcome.

Cloud9 can't afford the lawyers; it isn't their business that they are fighting for.

Five Pawns can't afford to shine a spotlight on their procedures. There's enough evidence of serious inconsistency even without the Cloud9 reports and they really don't want a hostile expert witness telling everyone how dangerous AP is. If they win they look like a bully and if they lose their business is dead.

Yeah except as has been pointed out in a few other threads, there's a 3rd set of lawyers that has nothing to do with Five Pawns or Cloud 9. That would be the lawyers who wind up handling the class-action lawsuit on behalf of 5 pawns customers.

Five Pawns... they obviously decided that they'd make more money by lying to their customers and hoping not to get caught prior to bringing out their new line of reformulated products which don't contain DA or AP. They got caught lying and then dug the hole deeper by their truly bizarre blog post where they admit culpability and reprint their own internal data proving that they knew they're lying to customers. I don't really pretend to understand why they did this instead of just shutting up. Hey, we know it's awful, but it's not as awful as Cloud 9 said it was!!! I'm assuming if an attorney wrote this, he or she has been fired by now.

Whatever, I've already expressed my opinions in another thread covering this topic: Dimitri Goes Off on Rant About Dishonest Liquid Vendors | Page 28 | E-Cigarette Forum

 

[Thundernoggin]

I don't disagree, like I said everyone has a right to know if they want to. I just question independent testing in regards to all of it. It all leads down a path that leads to government regulation and perhaps getting regulated right out of having any choice. I have a feeling big tobacco and the pockets it reaches will take simple "we deserve the right to know" and turn it into crushing supply.

Then many of us will probably take another look at a pack of smokes when it becomes less of a hassle to do so. That is all I am saying.

For "now" at least most of us can DIY... for "now". That obviously would need addressed also by government at some point.

The trouble is we are already on the path to government regulation. I agree with what Dimitri said in his podcast. Just imagine what would happen if the FDA decides to duplicate Dr. F's study with a much bigger budget.

 

[rurwin]

BTW,



When I was conducting research for my own Blog post on the C9 vs 5P issue, my first stop was the AEMSA Standards document. Unfortunately, all I found was:

"*Note: Diacetyl and Acetyl Propionyl (2,3 – Pentanedione) standards are undergoing active re-‐evaluations. All standards amendments are posted immediately after ratifications."

I also read the entire Standards document, hoping to find some "industry" guidance on the D/AP issue. I understand their is some deliberation and research germain to this issue BUT "silence" is disappointing. My fingers are crossed for sooner rather than later. PLEASE!

It is there, but I don't blame you for missing it:

Custard Notes
Flavor compounds that impart a buttery, creamy, or custard taste or sensation.
Most commonly used are acetoin, acetyl propionate and diacetyl
...
Flavorings containing Custard Notes will identify advertising and product descriptions

I assume they mean "will be identified in". Seems like odd English, but that's its clear meaning.

 

[Pinggolfer]

Just imagine what would happen if the FDA decides to duplicate Dr. F's study with a much bigger budget.

That would be great news. We need standards so let the FDA make them. Great post.

 

[Siam Diesel]

Canada's ECTA already has e-liquid testing standards (Electronic Cigarette Trade Association (ECTA) of Canada). Surely, using these for the time being would be preferable to waiting for the FDA to act...


Sent from my P3 Ti...

 

[Lessifer]

The trouble is we are already on the path to government regulation. I agree with what Dimitri said in his podcast. Just imagine what would happen if the FDA decides to duplicate Dr. F's study with a much bigger budget.

Honestly, if that were to happen, we'd have a lot more information, but not really any more knowledge.

What would be wonderful is if someone did an independent study of D/AP in vapor/aerosol, the relative amounts between the liquid and the aerosol, the relative particle size of the aerosol, how far it penetrates into the lungs, etc.

It should not be the FDA doing it though, they need to keep their hands out of this pie.

BTW if you haven't checked out my petition against the deeming regs, there's a link in my signature.

 

[zoiDman]

...

What would be wonderful is if someone did an independent study of D/AP in vapor/aerosol, the relative amounts between the liquid and the aerosol, the relative particle size of the aerosol, how far it penetrates into the lungs, etc.

It should not be the FDA doing it though, they need to keep their hands out of this pie.

BTW if you haven't checked out my petition against the deeming regs, there's a link in my signature.

There was a Video Posted in this Thread where the Speaker (Dr. Hobbs?) spoke about Diacetyl and AP.

Did you happen to watch the Next Speaker?

 

[Thundernoggin]

.............It should not be the FDA doing it though, they need to keep their hands out of this pie. BTW if you haven't checked out my petition against the deeming regs, there's a link in my signature.

That was my whole point. Nothing good can come from waiting for the FDA to clean up this mess.

 

[Jode]

Very interesting thread. I really wish we could get on top of these types of issue. I am not suggesting that these things are not important, but we may have bigger fish to fry right now. We are not going to have to worry about any of those results or companies like Suicide Bunny, 5Pawns, or whoever is next to test high in diacetyl/AP if we cannot get on top of congress rejecting deeming regs. I don't want to derail or take away from importance of thread but if you have not already done so please read, sign, and share petition in my signature or go read change-dot-org petition tread.

 

[Lessifer]

There was a Video Posted in this Thread where the Speaker (Dr. Hobbs?) spoke about Diacetyl and AP.

Did you happen to watch the Next Speaker?

I haven't yet, it's been hard enough just keeping up with the thread itself. Was there someone who has actually done testing on the levels in the liquid vs the aerosol, and/or the difference in lung penetration between smoke/whatever form the D/AP is in inustrial settings/and vapor-aersol?

 

[Racehorse]

Publishing test results is not an action that should be taken lightly but............. Publishing the test results is the most neutral way of justifying their actions. Anything less would look like libel.

rurwin,

I wanted to bring into the conversation, not directed to you specifically, but wanted to ask everybody: what is WRONG with publishing test results? Vapers who want to vape DAP-FREE need to see test results in order to make informed purchasing decisions in the free market.

I link back to Dr. Farsalino's study. In a medical research study, names are not important, nor would it be ethical to publish them, as that is not the purpose of a study. So he did not, as he stated anyway that "There is no reason to mention the names. Our goal is for the industry to respond and solve the problem as a whole..."

However, from a purely business and commercial standpoint, (and I have bolded the part that is most essential) here is what Dr. F. said:

"Dr. Farsalinos:
..."We identified an unecessary hazard in e-cigarettes, which represents an avoidable risk. We are providing a realistic and easily implemented solution, which is proper testing at relevant limits of detection. We emphasize the fact that none should trust any verbal or personal reassurance that diacetyl is not present in the flavorings. Only proper testing and publication of the result can provide true and trustful information. Testing is not cost-prohibitive, and will make the e-cigarette liquids even safer than they currently are. I think the industry has a perfect opportunity to show responsibility and a good face. The vapers need it, and the regulators must see it. I am sure they will respond in an appropriate and responsible way..."
Donate to Dr Farsalinos' new study | Page 8 | E-Cigarette Forum

I take the word *publication*, in this instance, to mean that vapers who are purchasing eliquid in a free market commercial enterprise are certainly entitled to test results.

And I see no way, other than "publication" to do that.......unless we want the eliquid manufacturers to send out 1,000s of "private emails" per day when asked for test results on either their own ejuices, or other people's brands that they carry?

So why was Cloud9 supposed to take them down when consumers in a free market have a right to see them?

(not to mention a vendor, wanting to implement responsible selling practices to the benefit of their consumers?) Some vendors, thankfully, feel that consumers should have the right to know what they are intaking.

 

[zoiDman]

I haven't yet, it's been hard enough just keeping up with the thread itself. Was there someone who has actually done testing on the levels in the liquid vs the aerosol, and/or the difference in lung penetration between smoke/whatever form the D/AP is in inustrial settings/and vapor-aersol?

I hear you... I'll look for it.

 

[zoiDman]

I haven't yet, it's been hard enough just keeping up with the thread itself. Was there someone who has actually done testing on the levels in the liquid vs the aerosol, and/or the difference in lung penetration between smoke/whatever form the D/AP is in inustrial settings/and vapor-aersol?

Here you go...

Dr. Hobbs presentation is Very Good. And she Makes a Very Good point about Diacityl being GRAS on the her Last Slide

"Safe Enough to Eat does Not Mean you can Breath it"

But more to your Question. Watch the Next speaker after Dr. Hobbs at the 1:57.37 mark

 

[Mazinny]

Honestly, if that were to happen, we'd have a lot more information, but not really any more knowledge.

What would be wonderful is if someone did an independent study of D/AP in vapor/aerosol, the relative amounts between the liquid and the aerosol, the relative particle size of the aerosol, how far it penetrates into the lungs, etc.

Not exactly a study but an analysis of current literature prepared by a toxicology consultant :

DA_PD_monograph.pdf - Google Drive

edit : not sure who the analysis was prepared for but this is the guys Linkedin page :

Patrick Rainey, Ph.D. DABT | LinkedIn

 

[LouisLeBeau]

Maybe this might make some sense as it was posted in a mod forum.

An Open Letter to The Ecig Industry Regarding Accusations

Though I am Co-President of Southern California SFATA I would like to make very clear that I am writing this letter as an attorney, consultant and investment banker.

... snip....

I honestly thought I had said all I cared to say on these matters. But this opening line kept coming back to me as I was doing my chores. Attorneys are not ones to waste words, typically. Unless maybe they're getting paid for them, but this isn't the case here. Or is it?

"Though I am Co-President of Southern California SFATA I would like to make very clear that I am writing this letter as an attorney, consultant and investment banker."

How clear would Mr. Burton like to make it? Why not make the statement solely as Co-President of SFATA? It would be appropriate. Unless Mr. Burton has a dog in this fight outside of SFATA? perhaps, "as an attorney, consultant and investment banker."? I don't want to infer anything, but I think that the statement begs the question. Does Mr. Burton have a professional or financial relationship with 5 Pawns or perhaps some other ejuice manufacturer that might color his wishes that we conduct these affairs silently? I mean, if he does, he DID make it clear that he is NOT writing as Co_Pres of SFATA, but as an attorney, consultant and investment banker. Is this some kind of disclosure? I'm not implying anything, I'm just thinking out loud.

 

[WillyZee]

This C9/5P story may just be what the FDA is looking for to lock down open tank systems for good.

The last 5 years of vape progress could become like an urban legend.


Sent via iPhone

 

[zoiDman]

This C9/5P story may just be what the FDA is looking for to lock down open tank systems for good.

The last 5 years of vape progress could become like an urban legend.


Sent via iPhone

Yeah... I sure Don't See How Any of This can be Helping Us.