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

[Lessifer]

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

Interesting watch, I'll have to go back some time and watch the Hobbs portion. It sounds like nicoventure is at least taking a more correct approach, in analyzing the aerosol. I wish they would not have taken the first step of eliminating "carcinogenic and other" known hazards, because that data would be beneficial, even if it isn't necessarily profitable. Seems like, for menthol at least, the aerosol is not toxic whereas smoke is.

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

I'm not a scientist but I have issues with their assumptions used for their computer models. They say longer puff time means deeper lung exposure, but I didn't see any mention of particle size, or any kind of measure of how much is absorbed in the tissue leading down to the lungs. I take two second puffs, but very little actually makes it to my lungs, because I don't lung inhale. I still think we need a better understanding of how the products we use act within our bodies.

 

[Mazinny]

Not sure if this has been posted on this thread :

ECTA Notifies 50 Vendors To Cease Sale Of Five Pawns | The Grumpy Vaper

Which leads me to think why is Vaporshark ( an AEMSA member ) continuing to sell the liquids testing positive in their own tests. Do the AEMSA standards apply only to juice the members manufacture themselves and not to juice they distribute for other vendors ?

 

[nebulis]

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

I don't think the FDA needs anything like this to lock down open tank systems if they decide to do so?

The history of mankind is probably full of analogous examples showing how it never helped to hide something behind your back pretending it does not exist ;-)

 

[zoiDman]

I don't think the FDA needs anything like this to lock down open tank systems if they decide to do so?

The history of mankind is probably full of analogous examples showing how it never helped to hide something behind your back pretending it does not exist ;-)

If they Want Congress to Go Along with it they might.

 

[zoiDman]

Interesting watch, I'll have to go back some time and watch the Hobbs portion. It sounds like nicoventure is at least taking a more correct approach, in analyzing the aerosol. I wish they would not have taken the first step of eliminating "carcinogenic and other" known hazards, because that data would be beneficial, even if it isn't necessarily profitable. Seems like, for menthol at least, the aerosol is not toxic whereas smoke is.


...

It was Interesting. And it was cool that the Entire seminar was on that Video.

Because I have seen the portion with Dr. Hobbs before. But not the Rest of it.

 

[SeniorBoy]

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


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

Thanks. Looks like I had a senior moment. That's a start. I'm working my way through the list for my next....

 

[Mazinny]

I'm not a scientist but I have issues with their assumptions used for their computer models. They say longer puff time means deeper lung exposure, but I didn't see any mention of particle size, or any kind of measure of how much is absorbed in the tissue leading down to the lungs. I take two second puffs, but very little actually makes it to my lungs, because I don't lung inhale. I still think we need a better understanding of how the products we use act within our bodies.

I vape in a similar manner to you as well, but a lot of vapers don't. Clearly more studies are needed, but the question is what to do in the meantime. I have read some studies and analyses suggesting this is potentially a big risk, but the only analyses i've read suggesting it isn't is by some forum members here with no scientific background ... oh and Five Pawns and Mount Baker Vapor too.

 

[Pinggolfer]

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

Really?

 

[Lessifer]

I vape in a similar manner to you as well, but a lot of vapers don't. Clearly more studies are needed, but the question is what to do in the meantime. I have read some studies and analyses suggesting this is potentially a big risk, but the only analyses i've read suggesting it isn't is by some forum members here with no scientific background ... oh and Five Pawns and Mount Baker Vapor too.

I think I might be one of the vapers you're talking about but that's not quite how I feel on the subject.
Here are my personal views:
1. We need more knowledge about what is actually happening in our application, particle size, lung penetration, how much is transferred from liquid to aerosol.
2. If someone is concerned, they have valid reasons to be concerned, and should be able to make informed choices.
3. Vendors should state whether or not they know if their liquids contain diketones, if they know, they should publish their analyses.
4. If a consumer wants to eliminate diketones from their products, they should seek out vendors who have performed tests and publish them.
5. While this is an area of concern and deserves further investigation, it should not be blown out of proportion, and testing should not be mandatory.

Of course those are just my personal views, and who am I?

 

[SaferVaping]

Damn! Leaving something like this out is messed up for sure. I am in touch with a big law firm that is currently investigating this matter. If you use or used the Five Pawn juices at issue and want to speak to an attorney investigating this, send me a message. If this turns out to be true and people's health has been put at risk it's a very bad thing.

 

[Pinggolfer]

I find it interesting how c9 had the results 7 weeks before they pulled fp off their site. Did it become dangerous 7 weeks later? I guess it was safe enough to sell while they had it stock. Sure were not looking out for their customers for 7 weeks. So it's safe to say c9 was deceiving it's customers.

 

[zoiDman]

Really?

OK Ping.

How did Any of this Help Us with regards to the FDA, Congress or the Court of Public Appeal?

 

[Lessifer]

Wow, class action vultures are already circling...

 

[zoiDman]

I think I might be one of the vapers you're talking about but that's not quite how I feel on the subject.
Here are my personal views:
1. We need more knowledge about what is actually happening in our application, particle size, lung penetration, how much is transferred from liquid to aerosol.
2. If someone is concerned, they have valid reasons to be concerned, and should be able to make informed choices.
3. Vendors should state whether or not they know if their liquids contain diketones, if they know, they should publish their analyses.
4. If a consumer wants to eliminate diketones from their products, they should seek out vendors who have performed tests and publish them.
5. While this is an area of concern and deserves further investigation, it should not be blown out of proportion, and testing should not be mandatory.

Of course those are just my personal views, and who am I?

I can Buy into Most of what your listed Lessifer.

But I would make this Addition.

6. If an OEM makes the Claim that an e-Liquid contains No Diacetyl or AP, they should be willing to Post Lab Results supporting their Claim. And the OEM shouldn't threating Retailers if they want to test the OEM's e-Liquids to Substantiate the OEM's Claim.

 

[Pinggolfer]

OK Ping.

How did Any of this Help Us with regards to the FDA, Congress or the Court of Public Appeal?

It didn't, but I wasn't adding fuel to the fire. Let's face the facts besides myself who else buys fp?

 

[Pinggolfer]

Damn! Leaving something like this out is messed up for sure. I am in touch with a big law firm that is currently investigating this matter. If you use or used the Five Pawn juices at issue and want to speak to an attorney investigating this, send me a message. If this turns out to be true and people's health has been put at risk it's a very bad thing.

Seriously?

 

[kates]

I find it interesting how c9 had the results 7 weeks before they pulled fp off their site. Did it become dangerous 7 weeks later? I guess it was safe enough to sell while they had it stock. Sure were not looking out for their customers for 7 weeks. So it's safe to say c9 was deceiving it's customers.

They didn't carry on selling, it was the results of their tests they didn't publish for 7 weeks. Stock was returned to fp

 

[Lessifer]

I can Buy into Most of what your listed Lessifer.

But I would make this Addition.

6. If an OEM makes the Claim that an e-Liquid contains No Diacetyl or AP, they should be willing to Post Lab Results supporting their Claim. And the OEM should threating Retailers if they want to test the OEM's e-Liquids to Substantiate the OEM's Claim.

I thought that was covered, or at least implied in #3, and I assume you mean "shouldn't threaten"?

Yeah, all of that is aside from the fact that this particular manufacturer allegedly/apparently lied about what is in their liquid when asked directly by consumers.

 

[zoiDman]

It didn't, but I wasn't adding fuel to the fire. Let's face the facts besides myself who else buys fp?

So if it Didn't, and you Agree, why do you have you Knickers in a Twist?

Please Don't tell me you Approve of what Five Pawns has Done? Or the Way they have Handled the Situation?

I don't use Five Pawns. I think it is Ridiculously Overpriced. And Didn't see anything that Jumped out at me that I could find in e-Liquids for less than Half the Price.

 

[SeniorBoy]

I find it interesting how c9 had the results 7 weeks before they pulled fp off their site. Did it become dangerous 7 weeks later? I guess it was safe enough to sell while they had it stock. Sure were not looking out for their customers for 7 weeks. So it's safe to say c9 was deceiving it's customers.

I find it FAR MORE interesting how 5P had three lab reports dated:

5/27/14
10/6/14
10/27/14

ONE is over 1 year old!!!!!!! And only recently chose to release them to the public after the C9 post of their own lab reports. Did their position become dangerous one year later? I guess it was safe enough to sell their juices while they had them in stock. Sure, were not looking out for our customers for over the last year. So it's safe to assume that 5P is deceiving it's customers.

Respectfully, I fail to see any merit in your post! EDIT: BUT I may be hyper critical so here is your opportunity. Shoot me a feedback form after you read my Blog post and state your case in great detail. Take me to task. Pull out the driver like our fav golfer and crush me 375. Sink that 20 footer and win. Good or bad, just details. I will answer you in a Blog post which includes your "counter" along with my own thoughts. We may agree or we may not. I don't know that. BUT, maybe together we can shoot 59.

Thank you
Steve