That's my answer to those who say they are truly concerned about DA / AP.
Confused about Diacetyl? You should be - read now
- Thread starter Oliver
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
That's my answer to those who say they are truly concerned about DA / AP.
I agree with most of this.
Let's be real..... 90% of the juice on the market probably has the same amount of the "bad stuff" in it as 5P and if anything 5P has at least given everyone else a heads up to scramble and get their stuff more in line. A few of my favorite vendors have foums here and their bottle and website have no testing info and the "bad stuff" is not even discussed on their site. They do say things like proceed with risk.
I see the next trend through fall and winter will be everyone complaining that their favorite juice taste funny because it is a "V2" and an increase on $20 120ML vendors to get what they can while they can and always be able to say.... $20, what did you expect?
Bottom line is if you are worried seek out the vendors that claim all is good and tested and expect half of them to get busted within another year of false information. In the end & when the dust settles the safe stuff will most likely be in the plastic case at the gas station @ $20 per ML taxed.
One option is to ignore all of this, assume most liquids contain "bad stuff" and do nothing at all.
Not an option I'd take, but it is an option.
Not an option I'd take, but it is an option.
^^^ I've run into a few people who've stopped vaping because they heard it was worse for them than smoking.
I think about 80$% of juices sold are untested. It's hard to convince others to test when there's the possibility of a witch hunt. Looking for solutions is more effective.
Is nicotine a diketone precursor? Is glycerine? Is PG?
I'm trying to figure out where your concern about unflavored nic is coming from.
Nicoticket published lab results, and there's been no witch hunt (so far as I'm aware) after them, I've mostly seen praise, because they published voluntarily and didn't try to lie about the results.
And VapeRite, likely the first company to have ever admitted to having flavors with diketones, did just fine. They posted that on each flavor with diketones a few years ago. No one is coming after anyone for being upfront. Trying to be clever and evasive is not being upfront. Making objective claims that have not been verified is not the same thing as being upfront. A hunt implies there is a chase or something that is hiding. There is no chase or anything to hide when you stand out and say the truth!
Last edited:
Is there a witch hunt for flavoring manufacturers like TFA (that KNOW) people are vaping with their flavors or even BCV, WZ or ECX , etc., that openly sell flavors specifically for vapers with boldly labelled products as to having diketones? Where is the witch hunt for these companies that sell these products? There isn't one. Let's just be honest here about what we know from what we have seen and not imagine when we don't have to.
Last edited:
Yes diketones and precussers can be present in unflavored nic. That's one of the variables.
This is from a form for eliquid manufacturers (I'm not involved in pro-juice making, just curious) ; "Google: acetolactate tobacco for a ton of research on tobacco content of acetolactate, a precursor of diacetyl. Acetolactate typically ferments into valine, but residual acetolactate can become diacetyl."
It appears there are a lot of things that are precussers that can kick off the chain reaction producing diacetyl and amounts may vary between freshly mixed an eliquid that's steeped. Diacetyl growth may be "aging" that inhances the flavors.
5P's eliquid is pre-steeped. Thier self tests may have come from when liquid was freshly mixed and the same for others test results. I don't know. I don't think it's unreasonable to investigate why test results are so vastly different and/or develop some standardization so that results are comparable.
There is also testing itself;
"The laboratory must know what they are looking for, and they must set the correct “limits of detection” in their equipment. Standard GC/MS wasn’t picking up DA because the limit of detection was set at around 1%, which is way above the NIOSH DA limits.
Testing right now is a bit complex and people are all over the place on how to do it. You should use a lab that has developed a protocol eliquid. Any lab can check for D / AP. Some will use general processes that can't really see these chemicals very well, others will also use very high minimum detection levels. There are 2 labs (currently) who have well developed protocols specifically for eliquid testing. In the US - Enthalpy Analytical in North Carolina. In the UK - WestYorkshire Joint Services.
Your point about setting limits of detection is incredibly important and people need to realise that if they look closely at the testing data for juice suppliers who, in good faith i think, supply these data, the LoD are often ridiculously inadequate and by several orders of magnitude."
I guess one of my points is that diacetyl is not going to be the only question raised about the safety for vaping - so why not set up some sort of infrastructor now to deal with it? Questions about nickle wire are appearing and bulyric acid seems to raise new questions. There will be more.
Yes vendors need to be more direct and transparent dealing with these questions and their inability to gets them in more trouble than the actual test results. Distraction is a tactic used successfully in other industries, but in vaping, it's a collossal fail. It's sad to witness that 5P's doesn't understand their market better.
But no, I'm not ready to throw them under the bus for what may turn out to be an ill-advised reaction. I would like hard data. I don't feel Suicide Bunny's episode ever got beyond heresay into hard data either - I want the question answered why the variance in test results and what can be done to eliminate that in the future. I also don't want to depend on the FDA to do it either.
I wouldn't put a heck of a lot of faith in any test results right now.
This is from a form for eliquid manufacturers (I'm not involved in pro-juice making, just curious) ; "Google: acetolactate tobacco for a ton of research on tobacco content of acetolactate, a precursor of diacetyl. Acetolactate typically ferments into valine, but residual acetolactate can become diacetyl."
It appears there are a lot of things that are precussers that can kick off the chain reaction producing diacetyl and amounts may vary between freshly mixed an eliquid that's steeped. Diacetyl growth may be "aging" that inhances the flavors.
5P's eliquid is pre-steeped. Thier self tests may have come from when liquid was freshly mixed and the same for others test results. I don't know. I don't think it's unreasonable to investigate why test results are so vastly different and/or develop some standardization so that results are comparable.
There is also testing itself;
"The laboratory must know what they are looking for, and they must set the correct “limits of detection” in their equipment. Standard GC/MS wasn’t picking up DA because the limit of detection was set at around 1%, which is way above the NIOSH DA limits.
Testing right now is a bit complex and people are all over the place on how to do it. You should use a lab that has developed a protocol eliquid. Any lab can check for D / AP. Some will use general processes that can't really see these chemicals very well, others will also use very high minimum detection levels. There are 2 labs (currently) who have well developed protocols specifically for eliquid testing. In the US - Enthalpy Analytical in North Carolina. In the UK - WestYorkshire Joint Services.
Your point about setting limits of detection is incredibly important and people need to realise that if they look closely at the testing data for juice suppliers who, in good faith i think, supply these data, the LoD are often ridiculously inadequate and by several orders of magnitude."
I guess one of my points is that diacetyl is not going to be the only question raised about the safety for vaping - so why not set up some sort of infrastructor now to deal with it? Questions about nickle wire are appearing and bulyric acid seems to raise new questions. There will be more.
Yes vendors need to be more direct and transparent dealing with these questions and their inability to gets them in more trouble than the actual test results. Distraction is a tactic used successfully in other industries, but in vaping, it's a collossal fail. It's sad to witness that 5P's doesn't understand their market better.
But no, I'm not ready to throw them under the bus for what may turn out to be an ill-advised reaction. I would like hard data. I don't feel Suicide Bunny's episode ever got beyond heresay into hard data either - I want the question answered why the variance in test results and what can be done to eliminate that in the future. I also don't want to depend on the FDA to do it either.
I wouldn't put a heck of a lot of faith in any test results right now.
Last edited:
I would guess that development of significant level of diketones in steeped, unflavored nic, would be fairly easily tasted, since it wouldn't be masked by added flavorings. Just a guess, like I said.
Except precussers aren't developed into diketones until the flavoring is added and vice versa. I guess some juices are tested before nic is added.
If theres a market someone can make it happen.
They have announced a handheld gas chromatography lab testing {LINK REMOVED} device that will detect diketones it is now crowdsourcing.
It will use an app with a remote specimen collection device..
I cannot find it but its out there looking for sponsors.. I read about it on FB a while back and cannot find the post. It will use a remote sample collection device and an app in your cell phone and supposedly will measure ppm/b..
They already have one made for detecting bad produce, meats, the strain and strength of {OTHER STUFF} for medical users.
This will be a win-win for two communities beer making and vapers..
There's so much confusion about the measurement of diketones --yes diketones can be measured in ppb but the start up cost of that equipment is 50k. It actually measures in real-time. Real-time measurement of diacetyl in beer
Hopefully this app comes to fruition..
They have announced a handheld gas chromatography lab testing {LINK REMOVED} device that will detect diketones it is now crowdsourcing.
It will use an app with a remote specimen collection device..
I cannot find it but its out there looking for sponsors.. I read about it on FB a while back and cannot find the post. It will use a remote sample collection device and an app in your cell phone and supposedly will measure ppm/b..
They already have one made for detecting bad produce, meats, the strain and strength of {OTHER STUFF} for medical users.
This will be a win-win for two communities beer making and vapers..
There's so much confusion about the measurement of diketones --yes diketones can be measured in ppb but the start up cost of that equipment is 50k. It actually measures in real-time. Real-time measurement of diacetyl in beer
Hopefully this app comes to fruition..
Last edited by a moderator:
If theres a market someone can make it happen.
They have announced a handheld gas chromatography lab testing {LINK REMOVED} device that will detect diketones it is now crowdsourcing.
It will use an app with a remote specimen collection device..
I cannot find it but its out there looking for sponsors.. I read about it on FB a while back and cannot find the post. It will use a remote sample collection device and an app in your cell phone and supposedly will measure ppm/b..
They already have one made for detecting bad produce, meats, the strain and strength of {OTHER STUFF} for medical users.
This will be a win-win for two communities beer making and vapers..
There's so much confusion about the measurement of diketones --yes diketones can be measured in ppb but the start up cost of that equipment is 50k. It actually measures in real-time. Real-time measurement of diacetyl in beer
Hopefully this app comes to fruition..
Wow. Interesting. I'm not sure why so many established labs are challenged by diacetyl detection in eliquid - other than developing a protocol or how that protocol would be different - but if equipment for detection existed that could be used on a smaller scale, that would be awesome. It still won't screen for precussers that develop into diacetyl when combined (if that's what's happening) but it could catch them before they become significant. I'm going to have to take a closer look at this later and probably post for some opinions elsewhere. I'm piecing this stuff together as an average, no special skills user too.
Cpffee roasters are interested in diacetyl detection as well. I wouldn't be surprised if there's more industries that would like to control it. I think the medical community has a lot to learn about OB detection and contribution as well.
I still would feel better if the vaping industry had a better developed, established channel for investigating issues surrounding health and safety of vaping than what exists right now. There's a variety of forms something like that could take, I just would prefer it to stay within the vaping community / network / whatever vs. depending on regulatory oversight. I think it would go a long way to improving the public image too.
Way too often I've heard other vapers coment that they want FDA's involvement thinking that is what the FDA will do. That's desperation from the feeling no one has their backs. I think others realize that's not what will happen with FDA regulation (IMO) but it doesn't erase the fear that no one, as an industry, is investigating this stuff.
My opinion is that I'm impressed with the community overall, but I can see that with continued double digit growth, 'crowd-sourcing' solutions among users and manufacturers online will be less effective and limited if for no other reason than lack of outside professional respect. Like it or not, vaping is going to be forced into the traditional hierarchy thanks to deeming. I'd like to remove as much decision making as possible from the FDA.
TPA DX line is also butyric acid. First non diacetyl Bavarian Cream, and Banana Cream. Waited over a year to mix these.
"Third, if diacetyl reductase is a detoxification pathway, by inhibiting this enzyme, butyric acid would enhance the toxicity of diacetyl in those tissues in which both vapors deposit."
This is a very preliminary study but butyric acid raises new questions. IMO I wouldn't take it literally right now. I raised it as an example of potential questions to come in the future.
source: Highlighted Article: Inhalation Dosimetry of Diacetyl and Butyric Acid, Two Components of Butter Flavoring Vapors
This is a very preliminary study but butyric acid raises new questions. IMO I wouldn't take it literally right now. I raised it as an example of potential questions to come in the future.
source: Highlighted Article: Inhalation Dosimetry of Diacetyl and Butyric Acid, Two Components of Butter Flavoring Vapors
Dr. F offered a solution. 1) DA and AP don't belong in ejuice, and 2) should be tested to see if ejuice contains it.
Interpreting sound advice as a witch hunt seems kinda silly to me, FWIW.
No need in a witch hunt Racehorse..All the industry needs to do is police itself..And it looks like some are willing to do just that. MOV post test results as do many others..I don't see why all can't.
Actually, Dr F said DA is "an avoidable risk" and suggested the industry police itself.
But he didn't actually do any studies involving vaping DA and AP. He based his view on studies of popcorn lung in industrial settings, which are VERY inconclusive. From the CDC's own report CDC - Flavorings-Related Lung Disease - NIOSH Workplace Safety and Health Topic :
and
In other words, they believe diacetyl played a role in popcorn lung, but they also believe that it may need to be mixed with other flavorings to play that role.
I'm not trying to prevent juice manufacturers from voluntarily disclosing what's in their juice - I applaud such initiatives. But I think we should be aware that there is NOTHING DEFINITIVE in this argument. There's a lot of speculation, and no definitive proof of anything.
As time goes on, we're going to be made aware of lots of other ingredients in ejuice that cause concern for some. (What do you know about cinnamaldehyde? Acetoin? These are also commonly used in ejuices, and little is known about the long term effects, and won't be known until vapers have been using them a long time. Furthermore - acetoin is typically what is used in juices that claim to be free of da and ap.)
Last, there may be a big difference between inhaling vapor with diacetyl (industrial) vs inhaling aerosol with diacetyl (vaping). Nobody really knows, but the two methods of delivery of flavorings to the lungs IS very different, so the risks could also be very different.[/quote]
So, do your own testing. Dr. F. would love you for this, as I'm sure he would rather you be safe than sorry. Why you wouldn't strains credibility.
Interpreting this as something someone else should do, but not you, is irresponsible. FTW.
Seems to me there is a lot of testing going on at this point due to concerns of the consumer. I do actually appreciate the awareness on the part of many of the e-liquid suppliers, even though it does not effect me personally.
I would be much happier with studies of the actual chemicals in question rather than their actual usage at this time.
We still have no direct knowledge as to actual risk, if any, at the consumer level.
Everything is being based on assertions and assumptions by the CDC after concerns of exposure to high levels of raw chemicals in processing.
Even the One Major court case was based on Attorney argument with minimal medical documentation as to cause of the disorder(Popcorn Lung). No specific scientific testing was done to confirm the actual cause or caused. The whole Case was focused on one specific habit over a 10 year period leaving out the rest of the victims daily lifestyle.
So, my concern is still Scientific documentation of Chemical interaction on the human body through inhalation.
If it is present in cigarettes then I am already highly exposed as I smoked for over 45 years.
I would be much happier with studies of the actual chemicals in question rather than their actual usage at this time.
We still have no direct knowledge as to actual risk, if any, at the consumer level.
Everything is being based on assertions and assumptions by the CDC after concerns of exposure to high levels of raw chemicals in processing.
Even the One Major court case was based on Attorney argument with minimal medical documentation as to cause of the disorder(Popcorn Lung). No specific scientific testing was done to confirm the actual cause or caused. The whole Case was focused on one specific habit over a 10 year period leaving out the rest of the victims daily lifestyle.
So, my concern is still Scientific documentation of Chemical interaction on the human body through inhalation.
If it is present in cigarettes then I am already highly exposed as I smoked for over 45 years.
- Status
