Actually you have it backwards , the overwhelming majority of e liquid manufactures juices DO contain diketones , there's no question about that .
There is a thread on here titled "diketone free vendors" so if anyone's interested in that i would put it in the search bar .
Unfortunately you cannot take a manufacturers word that their flavors or juices are diketone free because a ton of them say that on their website because many people find that appealing but when probing further they say " well it's what i was told" .
I had quite a few back and forth's with vendors saying are you absolutely certain their are no diketones in your juice and they say we cannot guarantee that if you are willing to probe a little further.
The below info explains a lot , as to why smokers are never diagnosed with "Popcorn Lung" it's really very simple , with smoking, respiratory issues and diseases are NEVER called Popcorn Lung , they are referred to as COPD among others.
The below explains all that
D-Juice 14 points 2 months ago*
Big Food has muddied the waters very effectively.
Summary of the problem by Farsalinos. The background to this is discussed in more detail below.
NIOSH investigated most of the microwave popcorn production capacity in the US along with various other outlets using diacetyl-containing flavourings and a Dutch factory producing diacetyl. Their 2010 report is here:http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docket/archive/pdfs/NIOSH-245/0245-081211-draftdocument.pdf
The pattern of disease was very similar across all sites with evidence of an exposure-response relationship (end of chapter 3 summarises evidence of causality). There was also some evidence of a group at higher risk of respiratory damage but the risk was broadly proportional to total exposure. That is, ten years' exposure to one unit was roughly equivalent to one year's exposure to ten units (although obviously, a short period of high exposure leads to harm sooner than the same total exposure over a longer time period). This is a reasonable rule of thumb when calculating your personal risk tolerance based on the ballparks outlined below.
Bronchiolitis obliterans ("popcorn lung") is a rare endstage disease, reduced lung function was much more common. The cell damage seen in factory workers is very similar to that seen in smokers with COPD. NIOSH used spirometry (FEV1 and FVC) to assess lung function, the same method as used to measure lung function in smokers and to diagnose COPD. Compared to smokers in the general population, smoking factory workers had 2-3 times the risk of reduced lung function. Compared to non-smokers in the general population, non-smoking factory workers had 10-15 times the risk of reduced lung function.
NIOSH recommended an occupational exposure limit of 5ppb in air, which they estimated would limit the risk to 1 in 1000 workers developing seriously reduced lung function due to workplace exposure over a 45 year working lifetime. The limit for acetyl propionyl could not be set lower than 9.3ppb, the limit of quantification in air.
Farsalinos et al translated these limits in breathed air to ug (millionths of a gram) in vaped juice by considering how much air is breathed in by the average adult over 8 hours. They made two errors: one was to use 9.3ppb for AP when NIOSH wanted to set it at 5ppb based on evidence of similar risk to diacetyl from animal studies, the other was not adjusting for 7 days a week instead of 5. So their numbers of 65ug/day and 137ug/day should probably both be around 50ug/day for equivalent exposure but the details aren't as important as the ballparks; it isn't very precise and it never will be because we don't experiment on humans with the intention of trying to harm them.
Pack-a-day smokers are exposed to around 7000ug/day, roughly 100 times the (5 day a week) NIOSH limit. Adjusting for 7 days a week and multiplying up the 0.1% risk threshold from the NIOSH work gives a back of an envelope prediction for the incidence of serious respiratory disease in pack-a-day smokers of 14% over 45 years. The actual observed incidence of COPD in smokers over a lifetime is 15-30%.
So there's not a whole lot of room for vaping to be magically different. It is up to you to decide how much risk you want to take and this will depend on your personal risk vs reward trade off. People with reduced lung function or a diagnosis of COPD due to smoking are at much higher risk. If you choose to use high volumes of diketones it would be a good idea to ask your doctor to monitor your respiratory health. This is measured relative to population norms for your age and sex so it should give you a decent early warning of any harms you are accumulating due to exposure.
Note that the numbers above are per day. Diketone content is usually reported as ppm (parts per million) or ug/ml or ug/g. All of these are roughly equivalent and the amount needs to be multiplied by the number of mls you expect to vape in a day to estimate your daily exposure from that juice.
ADDENDUM
There have been claims made that the factory workers were exposed to powdered diacetyl and that this is the actual problem. This is inconsistent with the evidence across sites using diacetyl in liquid, paste or powder flavourings, including a site that manufactures diacetyl (a liquid at room temperature). Furthermore, this specific question has been studied and the results suggest that, if anything, powder may present a lower risk compared to wet formulations. The following quote is from this handy bulletin that also summarises the flavours which are likely to contain diacetyl (in Table 1 at the end):
A study comparing the concentration of diacetyl emissions from heated butter flavoring powders, pastes, and liquids found that the heated liquids and pastes produced higher airborne concentrations of diacetyl (26). However, substitution of a flavoring based only on its form as a powder should be done with caution. During a NIOSH investigation of a California flavoring manufacturing plant, the highest airborne exposure to diacetyl and acetoin occurred in the powder flavoring production area (7). Inhalation of respirable particles containing powdered flavoring substances may deliver flavoring substances deep into the lung. Further study is needed to determine the effects of these particles, including their potential to contribute to adverse respiratory effects (26). Employers should minimize each worker's exposure to all forms (powder, liquid or pastes) of diacetyl, butter flavorings, or other flavourings containing diacetyl.
- permalink
- give gold
- Auxx 2 points 2 months ago
Great response!- permalink
- parent
- give gold
- SolanaceaeEnthusiast 2 points 2 months ago
Ahh yes , as tou touched on. Lots of people say "well more exists in tobacco smoke and no smokers get popcorn lung"
Its because the doctors look at a pack a day smoker for 20 years with all the symptoms of copd and doagnose copd , since both copd and bronchiolitis obliterans are incurable why would they keep digging for a different diagnosis that presents the same and has the same prognosis?- permalink
- parent
- give gold
- D-Juice 3 points 2 months ago*
Exactly. "Popcorn lung" only exists as a diagnosis because someone was puzzled about a non-smoker getting such severe lung disease. Most of the clusters were only found for the same reason: if it's a smoker you don't ask why, non-smokers are a puzzle for conscientious doctors and competent occupational health authorities.- permalink
- parent
- give gold
- D-Juice 1 point 1 month ago*
Just reading through this article and found an apt quote:
In the Texas coffee cases, a pulmonologist happened to question why a man in his 30s who didn't smoke suddenly had the lung capacity of a 70-year-old. He asked where the man was employed and what chemicals he worked with. The doctor ultimately identified four more workers with the same devastating lung disease. All five had been exposed to diacetyl.
Coffee roasters’ health at risk from toxic compound
I'm a little wary of this article as a whole (although it is a reasonable romp through the history), it doesn't really add much new, although it is useful here as the 2013 Texas coffee cluster isn't in the main (2011) NIOSH report. I think it may be exaggerating some of the dangers of very low exposures. There does seem to be a subgroup of people who are very sensitive to diketones but we don't yet know much about why.
The authors of this article suggest it is to do with high peak exposures but there is no real evidence of that AFAIK. NIOSH simply identify them as a subgroup who are hard to study because they don't tend to stay in the job long, for obvious reasons. They did set a short-term exposure limit of 31ppb for 15 minutes (the 5ppb is an 8 hour time-weighted average) but the STEL is based on caution and no evidence.
They seem to lean more towards a 'human variation' explanation in the NIOSH report and there is a recent study (of smokers) which suggests that this may be right: http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600(15)00283-0/abstract- permalink
- parent
- give gold
- SolanaceaeEnthusiast 1 point 1 month ago
)
