Diacetyl Free - Does it Matter?

[Jman8]

nicotine is a whole other story.
nicotine IS needed. it allowes people to get the nic fix they NEED in order to stop smoking. nicotine is required in order for vaping to work as intended, and get people off cigarettss.... D/AP is not.
nobody says "man i need my D/AP fix" or "i wish i could stop smoking, but this eliquid just doesn't have enough diketones for me."

You are making a legitimate point here, but IMO, not making it accurately. I've quit cold turkey prior to vaping (for longer than any vaper has quit smoking thru vaping), so to say it is needed (with all caps) is in my strong opinion, plain wrong. I grant there are many vapers who feel this is true, but to the degree this becomes 'truth' it just plays into the medical model for vaping. We live in the (legal) world where vaping is recreational. For survivability of the industry, we would do far better politically if we demanded no nic juices and then just let people add that in, as may be desired.

Thus not really needed, but is very much desired. I desire it. I'd like vendors to keep adding it, and keep disclosing how much they are adding. If one company came along and produced the best eLiquid I ever tried, but refused to disclose nic content, I'd either avoid their liquid (likely) or possibly test it myself and based on that info, would decide whether I continue to use it.

If great tasting flavors can be made without DA/AP, and that guarantees less harm than very little (and I emphasize guarantee), then I think the industry will move in that direction. I don't think it will happen solely (or even mostly) because of FDA. I do think the anti-DA hoopla will play a big role, but I'll be looking for that guarantee and if harm does occur, I'll be sure to point out how wrong you all were (including Dr. F. and Kurt).

Vaping is clearly popular because of the multitude of flavor offerings. Some vapers have moved to unflavored, and seem to really like it. If entire industry moved to unflavored, and issues of harm are still on pace of what they are now (read as very little to none, while anti types roar loudly), then I think smoking will bury vaping within 5 years or less. There will always be vaping/vapers, but growth will no longer exist. Fortunately, I think there will always be a market for flavors (even if underground), so really is unlikely we / the industry goes to place of unflavored is best way for all involved.

 

[Jman8]

This thread is ....... ridiculous. The notion that, "By acknowledging the potentially damaging nature of diketones, we're the ones spurring on regulations" is so dumb I can't even begin to address the flawed logic in it. If the market doesn't self-regulate, the government will do it for us.

Also, you guys are hypocrites in regards to Dr. F. He's arguably one of the only major names interested in promoting e-cigarettes and the harm reduction associated with them, and he is all for the outright removal of diketones from e-juice. You guys all love his studies where he calls out the nonsensical testing procedures done for -aldehydes in e-liquid, but when he says something you disagree with (ie: diketones) you're quick to dismiss his claims. Which is it, is he a valid authority figure on e-cig safety, or is he a fearmongering ANTZ (such as myself, apparently)?

Like I said, this thread is a farce.

I addressed both these points earlier. And since "this thread is a farce" is not explained, then this post shows up as a farce to me. I've called Dr. F. (and Kurt) into the thread twice. So, not feeling very hypocritical and am feeling like it would be good to have the anti-DA crowd updated with what those two really feel is wisest choice at consumer level moving forward.

 

[Jman8]

These days i don't take chances , sure there is not conclusive proof about diketone harmfulness over the long term at this point , how can there be conclusive proof at this very early stage

If you are vaping (at all), you are taking a chance. I would strongly suggest cold turkey based on everything you wrote. Not sure why this wouldn't be at top of the list for those who think avoidance / not taking chances is the most prudent course.

 

[nyiddle]

A "farce" because this isn't an intelligent discussion, it's just a bunch of circle-jerking from the same 4 or 5 members giving moot/unintelligible points and bull.... reasons as to why diketones should stay in e-liquid.

"You can make the decision yourself!" -- Not if juices aren't truthfully tested, which we've learned in this thread is very cheap. To say that an e-liquid maker, even a small one, can't afford the <$250 test for their entire line is a joke. For that 20$/30mL bottle, the maker is probably making $15+.

"There's diketones in real cigarettes, where are the smokers with popcorn lung?" -- There probably are, but we don't make that correlation because coroners assume smokers are suffering from COPD/Emphysema, which presents in similar ways to bronchiolitis obliterans.

"Don't want risks? Don't vape!" -- Yeah, that's some real useful advice. "Afraid of a car accident? Don't drive!", "Afraid of bee stings? Never go outside!"... Afraid of defending your point? Advocate a frustratingly useless solution!

The FDA will use diketones as another platform for regulation if we don't do something about it.

So yeah, you signed the petitions, you sent the pre-written e-mail to your legislation, good job. But realistically, when the media and the FDA decides to mount their high horse (realistically only a matter of time before they pick up on the D/AP thing) and begin attacking vapers based on D/AP in juice, are you still gonna be arguing the same nonsense?

"They can take our vapes.. But they'll never take our popcorn lung ......nit!" Piss up a rope, the lot of you.

 

[Asbestos4004]

Everyone can make their own decisions and if people want diacetyl in their juice then by all means fill yourself up with it . Back when i was a youngster i just did whatever i wanted to do because i was a youngster after all and everyone knows youngsters throw caution into the wind .

If something was potentially dangerous i didn't care , the more dangerous the better is how i lived , well i now deeply regret the way i thought back then because i am paying for the choices i made.

I thought i knew everything and just did whatever i felt like doing , it took a long time to realize that if i had only used common sense and lived more cautiously i would be in far better health than i am today .

You don't think like that when your younger though, you really don't so i understand when many youngsters say "who cares about diketones " and it's better than smoking mindset.

My philosophy is why vape that stuff when there is no need to do so , it's not like you have a choice between smoking and only e juice with diketone's , people have a choice between diketone free e juice and smoking now .

Basic common sense tells me to vape diketone free juice because after really reading and not just skimming the info found on Wilkspedia about diacetyl i have to admit it scared the crap out of me , it really did.

Imo , there is very little doubt in my mind that continuing to vape diketones over the long haul will result in serious health consequences at some point .

The ailments i suffer from today are directly related to the care free " throw caution into the wind ' attitude i lived by back in the day and i'm furious with myself for not listening and ignoring the obvious .

These days i don't take chances , sure there is not conclusive proof about diketone harmfulness over the long term at this point , how can there be conclusive proof at this very early stage .

There wasn't conclusive proof that cigarettes caused cancer either until people started developing it years later . Common sense people but it's your life do as you wish.

I was a youngster once, as well. I lived the same way you did....however the hell I wanted to. Then I went on to the military and a few different battlefields. Now, I remove Asbestos from buildings so I can then tear them down. I doubt it'll be my ejuice that does me in.

I'm not recommending anybody vape questionable liquids. I'm also not recommending they don't. None of us know one way or the other whether it's good or bad. Is it an avoidable risk? Yes...absolutely it is. But so is Vaping. Vaping is an avoidable risk.....so who are you to draw the line for everybody else? There is no 100% safe way to vape. There is also not a 100% safe way to breathe at a busy intersection. There's still many cars on our roads with asbestos brake pads. Do you ride in elevators? Elevators use asbestos in the brake systems, so I suggest you take the stairs for now on.
I think it's great that you have made decisions based on what you believe.....I think it sucks when people try to shove their way of life in everyone else's face and try to make it law.

 

[Asbestos4004]

A "farce" because this isn't an intelligent discussion, it's just a bunch of circle-jerking from the same 4 or 5 members giving moot/unintelligible points and bull.... reasons as to why diketones should stay in e-liquid.

"You can make the decision yourself!" -- Not if juices aren't truthfully tested, which we've learned in this thread is very cheap. To say that an e-liquid maker, even a small one, can't afford the <$250 test for their entire line is a joke. For that 20$/30mL bottle, the maker is probably making $15+.

"There's diketones in real cigarettes, where are the smokers with popcorn lung?" -- There probably are, but we don't make that correlation because coroners assume smokers are suffering from COPD/Emphysema, which presents in similar ways to bronchiolitis obliterans.

"Don't want risks? Don't vape!" -- Yeah, that's some real useful advice. "Afraid of a car accident? Don't drive!", "Afraid of bee stings? Never go outside!"... Afraid of defending your point? Advocate a frustratingly useless solution!

The FDA will use diketones as another platform for regulation if we don't do something about it.

So yeah, you signed the petitions, you sent the pre-written e-mail to your legislation, good job. But realistically, when the media and the FDA decides to mount their high horse (realistically only a matter of time before they pick up on the D/AP thing) and begin attacking vapers based on D/AP in juice, are you still gonna be arguing the same nonsense?

"They can take our vapes.. But they'll never take our popcorn lung .......it!" Piss up a rope, the lot of you.

pretty hard to take you seriously with that hat on....

 

[Zach M]

It's cheap to DIY cause there is zero overhead. Even technically that's not accurate, but I doubt any DIYer is paying themselves a wage for the time they take to DIY. Nor are they paying to advertise. Nor to rent space. Nor to pay for office supplies specific for DIY. So on and so forth.

Oyeah, I agree it is cheaper to DIY - I don't think any juice line (house blend or not) compares on a pricing level..again tho, I'm not saying people who DIY should pay to have the juice tested HOWEVER if people who DIY wanted to have the suppliers test goods to prove it does or does not contain certain checmicals that is another story. As I mentioned, it might even be better to be looking at the suppliers of the ingredients then juice makers to have things tested

If it is $150 a pop (minus reports), then if you have 8 different levels of PG-VG and 5 different levels of nic content, it is plausible that you'd have to pay $2000 for each flavor. I would acknowledge it is possible you wouldn't have to pay that. But as stated earlier, a scientific type just needs to come out and suggest that DA content could be impacted by more (or less) PG, and suddenly all 8 versions would need testing. The disclosure demanding group would insist upon it. Probably saying things like "really for just $1000 more, you can't take the time to make sure your product is safe? You deserve to be out of the market if that's the case." Same scenario with nic content.

Plus, there's the companies that currently offer hundreds, if not millions, of flavors or flavor combinations. Let's say it is around 400 base flavors that these companies are offering, and so at the $150 price, that would be around $60,000. Then if the PG/VG and nic content stuff comes in, you could add in that figure times say 10, to be accurate. And then to be even more accurate, if these companies offer flavor combos, it is plausible that all combinations would need additional testing. So the one that offers 14 million combos (that I go with) would need to plan on paying around $210 million.

For those that this situation applies to, they can just test the ingredients if they wanted - instead of testing each random juice combination...Again, not saying they need to but it is an idea...Or again, have the suppliers of the juice test each ingredient. I personally know a store that is fairly popular who specializes in juice, although he does not test everyone one of his juices he has the supplier get the "ingredients" tested. Granted suppliers can lie to people, in his case that happened once - someone decided to test one of the juices and it came back showing it contained diacetyl - as a result he had to go back and see what ingredients / flavorings went into that juice and then contact the supplier of that ingredient....In the end things worked out, but in the short run I think the question becomes who do you hold responsible if something is a "lie" or comes back "false"?

 

[Jman8]

A "farce" because this isn't an intelligent discussion, it's just a bunch of circle-jerking from the same 4 or 5 members giving moot/unintelligible points and bull.... reasons as to why diketones should stay in e-liquid.

"You can make the decision yourself!" -- Not if juices aren't truthfully tested, which we've learned in this thread is very cheap. To say that an e-liquid maker, even a small one, can't afford the <$250 test for their entire line is a joke. For that 20$/30mL bottle, the maker is probably making $15+.

I've never spent $20 on 30 ml bottle. Been vaping for 4 years, never done DIY, and never sought out the cheapest vendors. So, this idea that all vendors are making a killing is weird. When do we get to the intelligent points on the other side of the equation?

I say that because overhead was brought up earlier. If testing becomes part of overhead, then entry into the market will be greatly reduced. Your notion of $250 (or less) has been addressed extensively prior to this post. With reasonable points, and none of which you referenced. I find it a farce to think it'll only be $250 for a company per flavor, and this assumes the FDA is not involved. I can cite vendors that have tested, but because more than one third party company tested their liquid, then it wasn't enough for some consumers. To not take that sort of situation into account is IMO, farcical.

"There's diketones in real cigarettes, where are the smokers with popcorn lung?" -- There probably are, but we don't make that correlation because coroners assume smokers are suffering from COPD/Emphysema, which presents in similar ways to bronchiolitis obliterans.

No coroners don't assume. This would be another sign of not thinking through the issue critically. If BO were legitimate condition occurring to smokers, it would be widely known by now because of the fact that anti-smokers exist and that they have stranglehold on science.

Really, if you are thinking critically, and are anti-DA, you say that some smokers do have lung issues, and do we want vapers to experience that? But as that has rebuttal to it, I just assume save that rebuttal when a critical thinking anti-DA person shows up and and asks that on this thread.

"Don't want risks? Don't vape!" -- Yeah, that's some real useful advice. "Afraid of a car accident? Don't drive!", "Afraid of bee stings? Never go outside!"... Afraid of defending your point? Advocate a frustratingly useless solution!

It is useful advice and is likely the advice every non-vaper will readily provide, and for sure what all other anti-types will be aiming at. Me, I'm saying if you are preaching avoidance, then why not put that on top of the list? It doesn't have to be only thing on the list, but if your whole point is 'avoidance' then it is disingenuous to not place it at the top. In all the other situations you bring up, if someone was deadly serious in asking "how can I avoid this," I feel very confident that another reasonable person would tell them to avoid the activity altogether, if they are that worried.

The FDA will use diketones as another platform for regulation if we don't do something about it.

So yeah, you signed the petitions, you sent the pre-written e-mail to your legislation, good job. But realistically, when the media and the FDA decides to mount their high horse (realistically only a matter of time before they pick up on the D/AP thing) and begin attacking vapers based on D/AP in juice, are you still gonna be arguing the same nonsense?

"They can take our vapes.. But they'll never take our popcorn lung .......it!" Piss up a rope, the lot of you.

Lots of vehemence in your rhetoric and yet the points are all easily refuted IMO. Media is already on the DA/AP issue, and are making the same silly points as anti-DA crowd does on vaping forums. FDA has noted DA/AP (and about 10 other compounds) as item they have red flagged.

But this notion that FDA will regulate it out of existence is I think laughable. Though is another thing in this debate that we'll just have to wait and see. So far, me who is convinced DA/AP will be around for a long while am feeling righteous knowing it is still in products available today. When it is no longer in legal products anywhere, come see me and let me know how righteous you feel then.

 

[Zach M]

That seems to be a rather weak point. And your analogy is flawed. A better analogy would be if your guest said "I might be allergic to peanuts" and you decided to try to ban peanuts and have them removed from all foods. Then you could tell everyone how stupid it is to eat real peanut butter when you can make perfectly fine sandwiches without it.

I don't think it is flawed, it's almost like the wire conversation....it is said that Ni200 wire should only be used with TC devices, however you CAN use it on a non-TC device - but should you?

 

[Gauntlgrym]

Why would they be red flagged, flavoring company's use them for food & beverage everyday ?
CDC - BUTYRIC ACID - International Chemical Safety Cards - NIOSH and of course you know the lovely CAS 513-86-0, (i'll let you look for yourself) surely isn't in your juice

your point? flavor companies use D/AP everyday as well. didn't stop them from getting flagged.

the chemicals you point out may be in the eliquid, but no scientists have said they are an inhalation risk. am i just supposed to assume they are a risk? with absolutely 0% evidence. at least there is SOME evidence regarding D/AP, even if you want to act like it's less than it is.....at least SOME evidence is there.

many scientist do however think D/AP are unsafe, and should be removed from eliquid. Dr.F included.

-edit-
***just a quick question for all the "we love diketones people." what makes your opinion more valid than Dr. Farsilinos opinion? are you all experts in the cardiovascular field, that have spent years studying and testing ecigs and the vapor they produce?? what makes you all think that you know better??***

 

[Gauntlgrym]

So only the ones that "need" nicotine should have access to it?

is there a point you are getting towards, or are we playing 50 questions?

 

[AzPlumber]

is there a point you are getting towards, or are we playing 50 questions?

I made my point and you know exactly what it is but you've decided to dance around it.

 

[Jman8]

in the short run I think the question becomes who do you hold responsible if something is a "lie" or comes back "false"?

Truncated. Because I think this is a key question in this debate, and not just something for manufacturers to consider. It is partially why I advocate for doing your own testing as a consumer.

And me personally, if I am lied to by another, I hold myself responsible. I start off with the "shame on me" meme on the whole "fool me once" ideology. I find this works wonders, and reality is I'm not really into shaming myself. People have all sorts of notions on how trust works, and I have my own (though pretty sure I'm not alone in how I understand it). I could give diatribe version of it, but will resort to short version rhetoric. I think if you (or I really) am willing to place "trust" in another, then there is no way that is of benefit to them, and in reality is only something that if I doubt that trust, it hurts me (not them).

*Have to put 'trust' in double quotes above because of my keeping to the short version rhetoric. Give me another 15 paragraphs, and I'll explain in great detail what I mean by this, but going with short version, I stand by what I just wrote.

Responsibility always starts, and ends, with yourself. And your Self is way bigger than you may currently understand, or is at least in my case.

 

[sparkky1]

A "farce" because this isn't an intelligent discussion, it's just a bunch of circle-jerking from the same 4 or 5 members giving moot/unintelligible points and bull.... reasons as to why diketones should stay in e-liquid.

"You can make the decision yourself!" -- Not if juices aren't truthfully tested, which we've learned in this thread is very cheap. To say that an e-liquid maker, even a small one, can't afford the <$250 test for their entire line is a joke. For that 20$/30mL bottle, the maker is probably making $15+.

"There's diketones in real cigarettes, where are the smokers with popcorn lung?" -- There probably are, but we don't make that correlation because coroners assume smokers are suffering from COPD/Emphysema, which presents in similar ways to bronchiolitis obliterans.

"Don't want risks? Don't vape!" -- Yeah, that's some real useful advice. "Afraid of a car accident? Don't drive!", "Afraid of bee stings? Never go outside!"... Afraid of defending your point? Advocate a frustratingly useless solution!

The FDA will use diketones as another platform for regulation if we don't do something about it.

So yeah, you signed the petitions, you sent the pre-written e-mail to your legislation, good job. But realistically, when the media and the FDA decides to mount their high horse (realistically only a matter of time before they pick up on the D/AP thing) and begin attacking vapers based on D/AP in juice, are you still gonna be arguing the same nonsense?

"They can take our vapes.. But they'll never take our popcorn lung .......it!" Piss up a rope, the lot of you.

How will the FDA use diketones as another platform for regulation ?

 

[Gauntlgrym]

You are making a legitimate point here, but IMO, not making it accurately. I've quit cold turkey prior to vaping (for longer than any vaper has quit smoking thru vaping), so to say it is needed (with all caps) is in my strong opinion, plain wrong. I grant there are many vapers who feel this is true, but to the degree this becomes 'truth' it just plays into the medical model for vaping. We live in the (legal) world where vaping is recreational. For survivability of the industry, we would do far better politically if we demanded no nic juices and then just let people add that in, as may be desired.

Thus not really needed, but is very much desired. I desire it. I'd like vendors to keep adding it, and keep disclosing how much they are adding. If one company came along and produced the best eLiquid I ever tried, but refused to disclose nic content, I'd either avoid their liquid (likely) or possibly test it myself and based on that info, would decide whether I continue to use it.

nicotine is needed because it serves no purpose without it. might as well just disappear if you can't put nic in it.
vaping is looked at as a smoking cessation device, and i'm sure it's why the mass majority of people started vaping, to quit smoking. without nic, it serves no purpose.

it's like a car with no engine, what's the point?

 

[Zach M]

I do wish to make clear that we currently have very little to no harm associated with vapers inhaling DA through their eLiquid, just as we also have very little to no harm associated with vapers inhaling the substitutes fro DA in eLiquid. The idea of switching over with that very key fact in place will literally tell us nothing if it stays the case of "little to no harm" and if it does change to "more than a little" (but still low), it would mean that we would've arguably been better off, at the very least, keeping DA-laced eLiquids available.

Bottom line is I think real studies need to be done to see what the effects are of "VAPING" these chemicals are....Yea sure, studies have been done on these things to see if it you can eat them - i.e. food coloring, sucralouse, DA - but what is the effect of vaping them? The chemical composition of things changes when you heat them up - look at off-gassing from metals...I haven't seen anything that truly looks at the effect - if any - on vaping these things

Just to point out again, it's not just diacetyl that has been red flagged in juice - it is other chemicals as well

 

[Zach M]

I've never spent $20 on 30 ml bottle. Been vaping for 4 years, never done DIY, and never sought out the cheapest vendors. So, this idea that all vendors are making a killing is weird. When do we get to the intelligent points on the other side of the equation?

How much do you / did you spend on a bottle of ejuice? How much do you think it costs them to make that bottle?

 

[Gauntlgrym]

No coroners don't assume. This would be another sign of not thinking through the issue critically. If BO were legitimate condition occurring to smokers, it would be widely known by now because of the fact that anti-smokers exist and that they have stranglehold on science.

you do realize that coroners don't do an autopsy on everyone that dies right? unless your family wants it done, or foul play was suspected..... autopsies are not done.
so if your doctor misdiagnoses you with COPD or Emphysema, but you die of popcorn lung..... there is a very good chance nobody will ever know the real cause of death.

 

[Jman8]

***just a quick question for all the "we love diketones people." what makes your opinion more valid than Dr. Farsilinos opinion? are you all experts in the cardiovascular field, that have spent years studying and testing ecigs and the vapor they produce?? what makes you all think that you know better??***

I think when anyone, scientist or otherwise, resorts to "should" assertions to make their points, they a) cease to be scientist in that moment and b) put their credibility in their field on the line. Really doesn't matter what the field is. Could be something light hearted or non-professional, but using "should" is a red flag item for me. For science, if the current data is not backing what the should rhetoric is suggesting, then I think you deserve scrutiny. And the only hope around it is for what you think will happen to actually happen, otherwise your should assertion is, in reality, no different than religious preacher preaching morality.

With that said, Dr. F.'s opinion on vaping diketones, is for me valid (minus the should part). But the recommendations going forward are where we can say some scientists are far better off staying out of politics than immersing themselves into a political debate, which vaping culture is clearly experiencing.

If Dr. F. is recommending something along lines of personal concern, then please, for the love of vaping, let it stay at that. But if Dr. F. is recommending we join our anti brethren and seek to change the industry based on alleged levels of harm, then IMO, he has joined the ranks of anti-vaping. I don't think he has fully gone in that direction, but I would reserve judgment based on how I observe his rhetoric.

For consumers, this does come down to personal decisions. You have option/choice right now to choose diketone free vendors. I believe Dr. F. would strongly suggest you go with those vendors. You also have option to push vendors, be vocal on points that say to industry, "you must change the way you are currently operating / doing business." When you do that, you have joined the crowd that seeks regulations. You might think that your version of "reasonable regulations" are tame, and hey, you might be spot on. But be careful with you who you associate with and/or join forces with, because their version of "reasonable regulations" may not align with yours, and suddenly you are associated with those who seek to decimate the industry or are very okay with weeding out all the "bad apples" according to their version of "bad."

 

[Asbestos4004]

nicotine is needed because it serves no purpose without it. might as well just disappear if you can't put nic in it.
vaping is looked at as a smoking cessation device, and i'm sure it's why the mass majority of people started vaping, to quit smoking. without nic, it serves no purpose.

it's like a car with no engine, what's the point?

for YOU it serves no purpose. For others, it serves many purposes. I started vaping to quit a 35 year tobacco habit. It worked. I know of others who vape for a number of different reasons. You should stop speaking for everybody else.