Not sure if you were responding to my point, but am still wondering how anyone can recommend say unflavored when we have no long term data on that liquid?
D/AP concerns. Vocal minority?
- Thread starter JavaJunkie
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Not sure if you were responding to my point, but am still wondering how anyone can recommend say unflavored when we have no long term data on that liquid?
I think unflavored is a much better bet than flavored if someone is hell bent on avoiding the most risks , no long term data is available on anything at this point and won't be for a while so it's just a matter of individual intuition.
Honest, and welcomed, assertion. Pretty much quells the debate around DA/P. To the degree it does not, then I'm still waiting on long term data that shows us unflavored eLiquid is safe / safer than smoking. Kinda challenging to make the case for harm reduction without that.
Finally...........short and understandable.
Sorry, the constant 1/2 page back and forth gives me a headache every time I start reading through.
I often wonder how many just give up finding the answers due to being overwhelmed?
* Not your post in particular, but many reach the length of Abstracts, yet are more confusing to sort through.
I am not waiting on that because my "basic common sense" tells me that vaping any type of e liquid is better than combustion and smoking , my health improvement also makes me think that way .
I am not worried at all about vaping flavor free e liquid if it just contains PG/VG and Nic , i am slightly more concerned about vaping flavored e juice that is free of diacetyl, acetyl propionyl and acetoin .
I am most concerned about vaping e juices with the above three included in the e juices . And no you can't say with certainty what damage may occur years down the line but my "BCS" meter tells me that unflavored is the best bet of all.
Why people keep saying i need proof now is beyond me , we all know that it's way too early for that to happen so each person needs to make their own choices based on their intuition and what their basic " common sense " meter tells them.
Yes, it has been refuted by the authors of the original study ( and others including Dr. F ). I thought i stated it clearly in the post you quoted. Specifically the original authors stated that the Pierce study lied about all cohorts having considerable smoking histories. I don't have an issue if you or anyone else goes by the Pierce study. But it is an outlier. The vast majority of studies ( NIOSH studies and animal studies ) reach a different conclusion.
You are free to interpret the results any way you chose.
I have seen other gov. material that says all but 2 were smokers.
the ones that got OB that is. I'll check m archives.
regards
mike
My meter tells me cold turkey or not vaping is better than vaping. Pretty sure this is actual common sense.
Can't say with certainty that damage will occur years down the line with vaping diacetyl.
If this was only personal concern, then this thread and the others like it wouldn't exist. That they do exist is testament to notion that more people ought to be concerned with the alleged risk, industry should be avoiding that alleged risk (for all) and if those two are not happening, then less need for personal concern/solutions and more need for mandates / regulations.
Look whether it's this, that or the other. Vaping is not 100% safe, but it is most certainly healthier than cigarettes if you are vaping diketones or not. But I digress, since people want to feel safe avoiding this, I do believe in disclosure with juice makers. But these fights over it where the 'good people' are trying to safe us all flies in the face of what means no choice for the person whose only way to quit smoking was these 'harmful' diketones. And your body will tell you when it's harmful. What makes me personally feel worse is sucrolose in juices, but that is me. so if you want to get down to basics why are you diketone free folks vaping artificial sweetener which is a known carcinogen. Let's ban that next. Sheesh. To each its own.
Disclosure? Yes. But a witch hunt? No.
Disclosure? Yes. But a witch hunt? No.
Just think as people who used to smoke, why did we not have such outrage of all the additives in cigaretters? All those chemicals? Poisons added to make you more addicted? I just wish there was this kind of outrage to big tobacco.
unlike tobacco cigarettes where these chemicals are produced during the combustion process ?
2,3-Pentanedione
Vanillin
really good stuff here : 2,3,5-Trimethylpyrazine
2-Methylbutyric Acid
2-Ethyl-3,5(or 6)-Dimethylpyrazine
Butyric Acid
Acetoin are all chemically engineered compounds in flavorings
Maybe we should have these percentages tested by Enthalpy ?
Cigarette Ingredients | R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company thank god the community is only worried about the two "known toxic" compounds
This is my favorite part
Most of these ingredients are commonly used in foods and beverages, or permitted for use in foods by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), or have been given the status “Generally Recognized as Safe in Foods” (GRAS) by FDA, the Flavor and Extract Manufacturers Association (FEMA) or other expert committees.
One question, do you really think the CDC will mandate the removal of diketones from cigarettes ? why haven't they done it already ?
Most of these ingredients are commonly used in foods and beverages, or permitted for use in foods by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), or have been given the status “Generally Recognized as Safe in Foods” (GRAS) by FDA, the Flavor and Extract Manufacturers Association (FEMA) or other expert committees.
One question, do you really think the CDC will mandate the removal of diketones from cigarettes ? why haven't they done it already ?
I have asked this question before in a round about way. My opinion is if there was anything
at all harmful about anything in the e-juice the government (not necessarily the FDA)
could smash our little pop stand quicker than a Nebraska tornado.
Regards
Mike
You can say yes to disclosure, without that needing to be yes to mandatory disclosure. When it becomes a mandate, or something that they should be doing and they continue to not go in that direction, but the push for what they should be doing persists, then it becomes a witch hunt. When thinking it will be addressed (removed) by regulators or happy that lawsuits are occurring to those that haven't followed the "should" guidance, then witch hunters have just shown their true colors by asking/hoping the law of the land to be involved in that hunt. How that is able to be reconciled with pro-vaping movement as it stands right now, today, is so convoluted it is worthy of either the dismissal that overwhelming majority of vapers give this issue or aggressive rebuttal that the politically aware vapers give it.
Moreover, Dr. F. was fairly clear in his "should" assertion that it occur by industry. Thus if there is debate and calling out to be had, it would be among industry operators, not consumers. If Dr. F. meant for consumers to divide themselves publicly over this, I would really like for him to be abundantly clear on how that would work out for us and not feed the frenzy for zealous regulations.
We could very much play the same game, as consumers, over all aspects of vaping. It then becomes easy for anti-vaping people (truly anti-vaping) to exploit that divide among consumers and make it so we consumers appear to "have no idea" and "need long term data" as are best guides going forward. Thing is, us politically aware vapers have played the game before with other ingredients/aspects and from what I've witnessed we always stood together, defending vaping/vape industry, even while we never had the long term data for what was thrown at us. On this issue, we have allowed the divide to occur, allowed ourselves to be exploited by opposition, and now going forward the next ingredient/aspect that comes along could lead some of us to think (or worse speak aloud) that 'maybe I no longer side with pro-vaping stance.' Have a few of those types become liberated from vaping, and the never using anti-vapers will suddenly seem the least zealous people in the room.
Moreover, Dr. F. was fairly clear in his "should" assertion that it occur by industry. Thus if there is debate and calling out to be had, it would be among industry operators, not consumers. If Dr. F. meant for consumers to divide themselves publicly over this, I would really like for him to be abundantly clear on how that would work out for us and not feed the frenzy for zealous regulations.
We could very much play the same game, as consumers, over all aspects of vaping. It then becomes easy for anti-vaping people (truly anti-vaping) to exploit that divide among consumers and make it so we consumers appear to "have no idea" and "need long term data" as are best guides going forward. Thing is, us politically aware vapers have played the game before with other ingredients/aspects and from what I've witnessed we always stood together, defending vaping/vape industry, even while we never had the long term data for what was thrown at us. On this issue, we have allowed the divide to occur, allowed ourselves to be exploited by opposition, and now going forward the next ingredient/aspect that comes along could lead some of us to think (or worse speak aloud) that 'maybe I no longer side with pro-vaping stance.' Have a few of those types become liberated from vaping, and the never using anti-vapers will suddenly seem the least zealous people in the room.
Every single one of these artificial flavor compounds carry a lung irritant warning on there msds, so for years people in the flavoring factory industry (OSHA mandatory or not) wear respirators .So would it be possible to scientifically / toxicologist analysis, state that thorough test show diketone free flavoring to NOT cause bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome or abnormal lung function or any lung infection in general from heating and inhaling the vapor for humans or even a percentage of how much "safer" or it being harmless ?
Last edited:
You don't find it just a little strange that in 2000 - 2002 factory workers were being diagnosed with BOS, most being smokers , so fast forward 13 years later and smokers are being "mis diagnosed" with COPD ?
Last edited:
There is a simple way to avoid putting any of this into ones lungs but it would be difficult for some to do it. Just don't pull it into ones lungs. I, personally, get all the flavor and nicotine I need by holding it in my mouth and letting the vapor out through nose and mouth. I never pull it down into my lungs.
sorry, i have no idea what you are trying to say. In any case it doesn't really address anything in my post which you quoted. Perhaps you meant to quote another post.
Can you tell me where you found the study as to "unlike tobacco cigarettes where these chemicals are produced during the combustion process"
I found what this guy had to say very interesting!
https: //www .youtube .com/watch?v=JxoOzpRjVrQ
I broke the link because there's a little language but it is worth watching.
https: //www .youtube .com/watch?v=JxoOzpRjVrQ
I broke the link because there's a little language but it is worth watching.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
