- Status
Trace amounts of death in everything we're exposed to. Bring the yummy diacetyl and gluten
Wow, if you can back that up with some factual information from Enthalpy, that means there's really no excuse for even a small start-up e-juice company to not test their juice. $200 is nothing comparable to the overhead of acquiring the proper equipment and materials to become an e-liquid vendor (assuming you're not just mixing your liquid in your bathtub, swimming pool, local pond, etc..)
Last edited:
The group that doesn't vape.
Your fooling yourself if you think avoiding a couple of diketones will keep you safe from unknown long term effects of vaping.
Good that you Understand this. Because there is a Lot of People, including e-Liquid Makers/Retailers, who Don't.
I understand the thread to be saying a bunch of things, but pretty sure you are alluding to idea that it should be disclosed. My primary rebuttal to that is to choose vendors that disclose. If none are, then do your own testing if you like a vendor's juice and for whatever reason they are not disclosing. Fortunately (for those concerned), some vendors are, so the option does exist. To say "all should" and if some do not, then it is asking for someone to play middle man as regulator. Regardless of who that is, it'll have so many drawbacks that it will make all who are pro-vaping long for the free market where under disclosure was part of the game.
All justifications for FDA involvement.
Depends on the lab. The $200 could be accurate, but is likely seen as unreliable and/or only partially addressing the perceived problem. Like if I said I'd test juice for DA for $1, and my test method is (as you can imagine) very poor, then it would be seen as unreliable. But the headline could be written as "it only costs $1 to test!"
The $200 testing method might work. In some ways I don't see how it wouldn't work, and also don't see why it wouldn't be (far) less than $200. But say company has all products test at $200 a pop, and then gets scrutinized for not going with the fancy schmancy more precise testing method that costs $600. What do they do then? The politically correct response is eat the $200 tests and pay for the more expensive one.
But why if testing your liquid just test for DA/AP? FDA has noted 12 or so items that they are concerned about. Wouldn't it be prudent to test for all those as well, if looking to comply with that sort of standard? FDA estimates testing to be thousands of dollars (if not tens of thousands).
Then there's the idea that a liquid may need to be tested if there's any variation. So 50/50 PG-VG and 70-30 PG-VG batch might need 2 sets of tests (at say $200 a pop), thus more like $400 for testing virtually the same liquid. Some vapers may say just test the recipe and that's all we want, but all it would take is semi-credible scientific type to say, "wait just a minute, the PG-VG variations could impact how DA levels are presented in the pulmonary functions" (or some nonsense like that) and suddenly there are both vapers and media reports saying, why of course you have to test all variations. Who thought you wouldn't have to?
Then just realize that a vendor like one I like advertises that they have 14 million flavor combinations. As in that is theoretically possible with what they are able to make up. Might never sell some of those combos, but if they sell even one of those, then it would need the disclosure you ask for, and again scientific type could say "when you combine virtually DA free caramel with entirely DA free apple, there's an opportunity for the DA contamination to be present at a level that we are uncertain of unless we do additional testing." So, let's take your $200 figure and multiply it by 14 million and then let's say this business really ought to have no problem running the tests given all the money they are raking in from vapers. Oh, and never mind the PG-VG variations. Hopefully the scientific types won't actually make those type of assertions, for then it is more like 14 million x 8 x $200.
This is what I meant by way off.
The group that defends diketones doesn't vape diketones themselves. They go to great lengths to defend these harmful chemicals, but they choose not to inhale them. That's funny.
So are you anti-vaping, or.. What are you even saying here?
My argument is for harm reduction. Is your argument that we should go back to smoking, because at least the long-term effects are known?
I sent them an email, see what they say - but $200 is what the store told me they pay...
TOBACCO & SMOKE ANALYSIS
I am very mindful of what I put in my body I won't drink a soda, eat a burger, or vape diketones. What's that you say? I'm not talking about the thirty years I was smoking I'm a health nut now. 
I don't know who is right or wrong but the whambulance whining in the thousands of threads on the subject are repetitive and pointless.
I don't know who is right or wrong but the whambulance whining in the thousands of threads on the subject are repetitive and pointless.
Really, is that other group avoiding nicotine for its potential negative consequences? If not, then I call hypocrisy on that group. Or inconsistency.
One group asks for the scientifically sound evidence that vaping DA correlates to harm. Not even causes. Just correlates. Show us the data. This same group can easily speculate that 30 years from now we'll have more sound data. But if same group says you can say that about anything with vaping, then suddenly detractors want to change the game. Like we don't have 30 year old data on vaping unflavored, therefore it is wise to presume it is dangerous right now, and ought to be treated as such. Don't like that idea? Why not? It is entirely consistent with what you are saying about DA and long term studies. So what if I have zero evidence to back up the danger of vaping unflavored, I do have the facts straight that we do not have long term data on it, and therefore to avoid the potential risk, everyone needs to agree that vaping unflavored could be dangerous.
To me, the group that has concern about DA and cares to enter into debate ALWAYS needs to paint the other side as "you are saying it is totally safe" or "you are saying it is harmless." When that is either never said or is so rarely even implied. If it is implied by one that I identify as 'on same page as me and the DA issue' then I'm calling them out on it. Vaping is not inherently harmless. Because nothing on this planet is.
So, this group that has great concern over DA is VERY OKAY to have that concern, but when making statements about what other vapers ought to do or what industry must do, then the debate just went into a direction that I really hope you are able to reason through. Otherwise, you might show up with some egg on your face due to some unfounded claims that not even science can support you on. IOW, stick to personal concern and stick to finding vendors that match what it is you say you want. Feel free to find other vapers that support that. But join together and make demands on industry based on non-scientific assertions and suddenly you show up to me a lot like our ANTZ counterparts. Sorry if that rubs you the wrong way, but I see it as entirely accurate.
Not sure what you mean by "fancy shmancy", here is a link to the credentials for the $200 lab test per bottle...what more do you want / do they need?
http://www.enthalpy.com/pdf/Ecig_Brochure.pdf
- 20 years experience
Instrumentation:
- 2 Trip Quad GC/MS/MS
- 4 gas-phas FTIR spectrometers
- 5 GCs cnofigured with MS detectors
- 16 GCs configured with FID, FPD, TCD, PID detectors
- 11 HPLCs and ICs configured with UV and EC detectors
Staff:
- 3 Ph.D. scientists
- 15 analysts and technicians
- 4 project managers
- 4 QA specialist
Accreditations:
- NELAC
- ISO17025 standards by A2LA
$200.00 is nothing? 200 x ???. Costs add up. Costs must be justified.
Why test for anything that hasn't been proven harmful?
With out any evidence that diketones are causing harm to
vapers it would be foolish to test as it would be a priori
evidence that one thought it to be harmful thus you are
intentionally causing harm if its found in your juice.
Regards
Mike
Yeah. The best way to avoid regulation is to ignore anything that might be potentially harmful.
That's sarcasm, if you can't tell. If someone gets sick because of diketones, the FDA will have a perfectly viable reason to step in. Seems like you're sticking your head in the sand as if it's to some benefit, when really it's to the detriment of all vapers.
I'll bet ANTZ are glad people don't care about diketones. The sooner there's concrete linkage between diketones and lung damage, the sooner people have no choice but to go back to Big Tobacco.
In regards to if it is safe or not....I think that they still need to do more testing, thats really the end of that discussion, until then - you decide if you want to put XYZ in your body or not....even still, if it is proven to be bad, still up to you if you want to vape it or not
I have no idea (still) what are the answers to some important questions about diacetyl;
for example:
1: Is diacetyl something added in, like an option ?
I get the impression that it is no some additive, but instead either a part of some flavorings; or maybe it is not really part of some flavorings but something used in the process of the flavour extraction process; or maybe it's something to do with artificial flavorings
2: is diacetyl something produced in mixing ?? Sometimes it sounds like the juice makers don't actually put diacetyl in their juice, but it ends up being there
The only thing that seems to be fairly certain is the diacetyl issue has something to do with flavorings, so for starters, anybody who wants to avoid it can just use unflavored
for example:
1: Is diacetyl something added in, like an option ?
I get the impression that it is no some additive, but instead either a part of some flavorings; or maybe it is not really part of some flavorings but something used in the process of the flavour extraction process; or maybe it's something to do with artificial flavorings
2: is diacetyl something produced in mixing ?? Sometimes it sounds like the juice makers don't actually put diacetyl in their juice, but it ends up being there
The only thing that seems to be fairly certain is the diacetyl issue has something to do with flavorings, so for starters, anybody who wants to avoid it can just use unflavored
FDA approval and verification that they've tested for all other items that someone somewhere might be concerned about. If they can test for all things the FDA has noted in leaked document for $200 and FDA accepts this, I'll be promoting that lab more than just about anyone.
Diacetyl - bad or not? Sure - anything is bad for you in copious amounts. But like Zach M stated - it's up to you to vape it or not. Will I be putting anything extra in my body that might kill me? I do enough of it already - so I'll try to avoid putting anything too crazy in there.
Yes $200 is nothing for those that are using a ISO certified lab....again, I personally don't really buy from "local" place b/c of the mentioned cases I talked about....Yes, if you have 200 "house blends" then testing them will be expensive....if you have 2 to 5 flavors, testing them shouldn't be that big of a deal
People have already gotten sick off of nicotine. So, please stay consistent with your rhetoric.
I do agree that if data comes in that is not ANTZ driven fear mongering, and it shows viable harm correlated to vaping DA, then it will greatly impact the overall market for vaping. Many will still vape, but most will not.
I highly doubt that data will come in. I've asked Dr. F. for it directly. Birds chirped in the background.
- Status
Similar threads
