This has been proven to be BS with Cloud9 tests. I'd suggest you do not blindly believe any vendor's words.
Dose unflavored E-Liquid contain diacetyl?
- Thread starter Grimz
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
I think it is about time you get out of your false beliefs. vaping community sponsored research already showed that Diacetyl in 3ml per day of some brands is 80 times more than a pack of cigarettes! And I know some people that down 15ml a day!
We are not here arguing about if smoking is better or vaping. We already STOPPED smoking! Now, we would like to minimize even more damage if we have the option to do so. If I can eliminate Diacetyl, why would I not want to do it? This choice should be left up to me.
Link the peer reviewed studies to back up your claims. Otherwise, enough with the rhetoric and claims of "studies" that aren't proven.
There's a huge difference in today's world that you're overlooking.
People are getting tested over and over, massive, detailed tests, the medical science is thousands of times more advanced, and being paranoid, a thousands things are being tested.
And then the media, so far only the witch hunt lies have come out... imagine if a single "truth" about something actually bad was discovered, the media would be like jackals over it.
10 years' worth of what today's medicine is like can't even be compared to the early medicine of the 1950's, it's like comparing today's weaponry to the middle ages, a jet liner to a horse and carriage. Horse carried letters to the internet.
And even then, cigarettes, they found all the bad stuff fairly easily even with this 1950's technology, but again, too much money involved to kill them even then, so you really think that they want to kill them now and lose all that money?
You're acting like someone if forcing something down your throat.
Look at the OP's question.. does unflavoured contain any.. the answer is simply NO.
And your claims here.. funny thing, I read just about everything I can find, and not once have I seen this "80 times more than a pack of cigarette" claim.
Seriously... look at the numbers on the infographics (that I've read over and over from one research to another), the only way for liquid to have over 80 times more would be if it was close to pure diacetyl and vaping a gallon of it.
You're sounding more like a government or tobacco shill here here to spread lies.
"Absolute Pin, in particular, came in with 40 μg/ml of DA and an incredible 2,500 μg/ml of AP. In other words, according to the results, if you had 2 ml of the stuff you’d be over the recommended intake for DA and more than 36 times over the recommended daily limit for AP."
"In Dr. Farsalinos’ study, the highest amount found outside of a concentrated flavor was an astonishing 10,620 μg/ml, but since this wasn’t about naming and shaming (admirably, unlike what we’re doing here), we don’t know which juice it was."
Many of those with subtanks do 10ml/day average. Vaping Five Pawns would put you 180 TIMES over the recommended daily limit. Do not forget that vendors replaced DA with AP 2 years ago when Dr. F's study came out. Despite that we have over the top diketone levels.
Let's just hope that you are not vaping that juice with 10,620 ug/ml in Dr. Farsalinos's study. That would put you 700 times over the daily limit... meaning that you consumed 2 years worth of diketones in a day!
And that is what is tested! We have no idea what the untested holds!
It is Dr. Farsalinos’ own study and it has been quoted ad infinitum here. What do you want me to link? Go read it. Numbers are there for everyone to see. Jesus.
Like this one, where he states that those studies are flawed?
A new study finds diacetyl in e-cigarettes but exaggerates risks and fails to discuss about smoking
Or this one where it is stated that there is still no proof that even high high levels of diacetyl causes "popcorn lung" or any other ailments?
A new study verifies the lower risk-potential of e-cigarettes but identifies an avoidable risk
Funny stuff there bob....
This is Dr. Farsalinos' site: A new study verifies the lower risk-potential of e-cigarettes but identifies an avoidable risk
Summary from his September 2014 report, redlined by me:
I was sold on that "still has 100 times less than smoking" bull when I researched back then. Reality turned out to be different now.
Of note is the volume of 1ml which was the norm back then with the tanks. Now it is subtanks. So you are probably doing 10ml a day minimum and if you just happen to vape whatever it was the worst liquid that had 495 times higher than safety limits, you are reaching 5000 times more than daily safety limits! As we have seen with the ridiculous amounts of FiveScams, ScammingBunny, TitaniumWood, it is very likely that many liquids are reaching these levels now on the market 2 years since then. It is not a joke any more, is it?
Also noteworthy is the "40% of the samples had higher than safety levels".
Vendors are not here to love us or care about us. They are here to make money off of us. Nobody came until now with test results by themselves. They only came out only when they were called.
I am not okay leaving my health to every idiot that opens a shop because it is so easy to mix 4 items in a bucket and sell it with a margin as good as or higher than the Diacetyl safety violation percentage they ranked up!
Summary from his September 2014 report, redlined by me:
I was sold on that "still has 100 times less than smoking" bull when I researched back then. Reality turned out to be different now.
Of note is the volume of 1ml which was the norm back then with the tanks. Now it is subtanks. So you are probably doing 10ml a day minimum and if you just happen to vape whatever it was the worst liquid that had 495 times higher than safety limits, you are reaching 5000 times more than daily safety limits! As we have seen with the ridiculous amounts of FiveScams, ScammingBunny, TitaniumWood, it is very likely that many liquids are reaching these levels now on the market 2 years since then. It is not a joke any more, is it?
Also noteworthy is the "40% of the samples had higher than safety levels".
Vendors are not here to love us or care about us. They are here to make money off of us. Nobody came until now with test results by themselves. They only came out only when they were called.
I am not okay leaving my health to every idiot that opens a shop because it is so easy to mix 4 items in a bucket and sell it with a margin as good as or higher than the Diacetyl safety violation percentage they ranked up!
Seriously?
A 2 year old report that the doctor himself has change his mind over how it was done??? That the good doctor has done other studies that turned things around??
2 years ago when liquids were being badly done and we didn't have the info we now have??? That just about everyone and their dogs made a huge deal to change their recipes over...
THAT'S what you're going with?
When every study done since is still unable to prove that diacetyl is bad in any way and the popcorn lung thing is an over-hyped media circus with still not a single iota to prove that it did cause it, that the best anyone has been able to say is that it "might be part of something" that lead to it.
And yet.. 10 years of vaping, not ONE case of any lung ailments because of it...not even a single sign of even a start of something for anyone, not a hint, nothing.
OMFG.... At this point, you calling vendors names is ironic
Just walk away already... just quit vaping or vape pure VG only and be done with it already. No one is forcing you to put anything in your body here... your crusade here is just pointless. and wow.. anyways.. ignore mode activated.
Last edited:
Show me what is changed on doctor's view ref diketones?
FivePawns story is 6 months old... Not 2 years. Even after the report, instead of cleaning things up, vendors screwed us over. But average liquid consumption per day increased 10-fold. Moreover, they had their reports from 2 years ago that showed high amounts of diketones... yet they still sold you their crap.
Are you still on this 10-years story? I have given "cigarette" example in 1950s and laid this to rest. No point in repeating this like a broken record. You can come back after 30 years and defend this. Until then, you are no different than the people who were saying the same thing about smoking for decades -- that it has no harm.
Duh! This is what you referred above:
Doctor's article is dated DECEMBER 2015, and his FIRST paragraph is:
As you all know, I have a strong opinion against the use of diacetyl and acetyl propionyl in e-liquids. In the study we published last year, we made this clear and we analyzed the potential risk from the use of these compounds at high levels (basically, when used as ingredients, or are present as contaminants but at high levels). We emphasized the fact that none should deliberately add these compounds in e-liquids and tests should be conducted to detect potential sources of contamination. All these are, in my opinion, responsible measures to avoid this unnecessary exposure.
There is no change in his opinion that diketones should be eliminated, but you keep on an on about how smoking has diketones as well. We are NOT smoking any more. And as demonstrated wit hthe numbers above, some liquids are 5000 times over daily limits than smoking. So you are vaping down 2 months worth of diketone harm from smoking in ONE DAY.
I have nothing more to say to you. Abraham Lincoln surely did say something though.
Alot of ignorance on both ends. Unknown is the answer to everything. No studies are facts, if they were we would have to quit eating and drinking just about everything because studies show they cause cancer. How we read "maybe" as a fact on both ends is silly
That's my point.. we simply can't jump to conclusion (which many just want it to be negative), we have to go with what's being proven at this time, until evidence to the contrary.
Right now, so many are wetting themselves over trying to prove something bad that they are throwing the kitchen sink at it, and yet, they simply can't find anything.
Maybe in 30 years from now, we'll have figured out the extent to anything that would be a side effect of vaping, but right now, after vaping has been around for 10 years, tested to hell and back over and over, the only time when anything negative comes around, it's been user error, things done wrong, not one item from a reliable source, maker, etc.
But at this point, some proof is there, healthier people, no sign of side effects unless it's a personal sensitivity to PG or other, but nothing global.
Every negative results from all studies continue to all be debunked one after the next as being purposefully manipulated to get the negative results.
Just like coffee and so many things like eggs, meat, fats, etc. one day it's terrible for you, the next day it becomes the greatest thing, and round and round we go.
Yup, studies are done in peatree or however you spell it dishes and lab rats. Can't test on live human cell and they can only test for known substances. Because it's never been done before whats produced from vaping could contain unknown substances/chemicals. Thinking it's worse, as bad or better is just an opinion and we all have them. I don't trust any of them, No studies have been done on new generation gear so unless your all vaping 1.8ohm CE4's at 3.3v you can't quote 95% safer as a fact. Needing to produce "dry hits" is a rumor made up by vapers as well, nicotine inhalers produced about the same results as these "dry hits" ... How they produced a dry hit with a nicotine inhaler is something I'd like to know. On both ends studies are being paid for by BT who holds the majority share in vaping, the lawsuit that allowed us the privilege to vape and not get banned outright was paid for by BT as well. Blaming BT for everything is just ignorance as well. Believing anything suggests we trust BT as well. Two sided coin if I ever seen one.
Actually, part of that 95% IS fact.
The base, aka VG and PG, has been tested on both animals and humans for over 50 years now and proven to be completely safe.
Most of the liquid is base with the flavouring being actually very small percentage of the total amount, and nicotine (which also has been tested to death)
That 5% is nothing but a "buffer" where it could be the full 5%, or could be less than 0.01 % that might be "bad".
And no.. dry hits are not invented rumors. Burning material will most definitely create toxins, and when these "studies" were examined in details, it was proven that they did burn things on purpose to "prove" the hazards.
Anyways.. I'm getting the impression that you and a few other "members" are the same person that seems to have an agenda/crusade.
Seriously, if you are convinced to the extent that you are showing in these threads that vaping is that bad.. why are you here? why are you vaping?
VG and PG are proven safe for consumption, I thought you vaped it though sorry. Dry hits are real but the wide spread belief that the studies produced dry hits to show bad results is only true when you look at the results from high voltage results. Low voltage results still showed 5% and as vapers say "no one would ever vape a CE4 at 5v" I believe no one would vape it at 3.3v either so both results are off. We just know not to trust science thats all lol. As someone mentioned before if you believe studies quit eating beef, eggs, corn, tomatoes, drinking coffee, tea and about 1000 other things because they all cause cancer based on scientific studies. At least you didn't say flavouring is 1 chemical +1 for that lol.
None of us use a CE4 anyways so why we would go by that as fact for new untested gear is beyond me. I vape because it tastes better, smells better, I can taste and smell things again and cough less. I believe it could potentially be better then cigs but I don't know anything to be a fact yet just "based on studies Prof.X believes". On the other hand I do know what cigs do.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
