FEMA report on ecig hazards pdf

[MacTechVpr]

I don't know about a number of the mistakes or faults you are describing which illustrates why I'm avoiding mechs. vaping is being attacked so there can be a reluctance to talk about things it would be useful to know. May be there are minor health issues we aren't hearing about because the effected vapers worry about government interference. Flavor makers hesitate to be as candid as they might be for the same reason. On another level, if you ask about DIY in this forum you are directed to getting started guides that are so complex the beginner is sure it's too much trouble. That delayed me starting DIY by 3 months. Everybody has their agenda and that seems to be especially true when it comes to vaping.

Why not address fake battery issues with a unique identifier that you get by optical scanning or NFC then go to a website to see if that exists in a manufacturer's database. Lots of products are protected that way.

As far as business ethics. Some things just aren't made in America. When I bought off shore the headache was getting the manufacturer to simply live up to his side of the deal. That was an issue I never had with my US suppliers.

As far as exploiting labor, you can abuse people but the price you pay is in product quallity. When I needed to fill a position I would decide what the job needed to pay to get the quality of work required then try to find someone who was capable of earning that money. If that was too much money I'd re engineer the product or the production process. I would send an agent to an offshore factory to take photos of assembly workers at work to see working conditions and worker attitudes. This was not because I'm some do gooder but because if their lives aren't good enough they can't do good work for me.

Emphasized some of your high points above. Only mistakes or faults I refer to are more related to ethics than eng/QC, agreed. Consumers of non-Western production need to be aware of the potentials for differences. Western companies these days are not immune to indifference either as Volkswagen demonstrated. Too much and too far off topic to discuss here. Average consumer says a battery's a battery and that's sufficient for some to conclude it conforms to a standard wherever made. Those days are over. Sources, not just the maker, matter. Applies to vendors as well. Only way I see of mitigating risk is consumer education on battery issues...and basic functional aspects of our vaporizers. Regulatory over-reaction would only compound the problem IMO. Still in context, the prevalence of incident is certainly small despite so much direct rather unfiltered supply. We've been rather fortunate, I think. And that's a testament to the community. My rant as you likely may see is about the promoted urge to excess which only makes a responsible perspective of vaping and vapers by others less tenable.

Good luck.

 

[Kurt]

I read a story recently in a chemistry periodical that demand for cheap Li-ion batteries for ecigs is so high that some Chinese factories are cutting back on quality control to keep up, especially in the clean rooms used for producing them. A speck of dust in the material can be all that is needed to have a very unstable battery.

Over-claiming current limits could also be a problem, just as mAh are often over-claimed. Combine this with ignorant new users wanting to use subohm coils on mechs, and its not a pretty picture.

That said, I have noted a similar number of stories about cell phone fires in the last year, but admittedly cell phones are more prevalent than ecigs.

 

[LaraC]

I'm frustrated because the reporting about accidents is irresponsible, scaring people instead of warning them. Where is the consumer product safety comission? They often study an issue and provide guidelines for safe practices. Safe handling of loose batteries and avoiding mech mods pretty much covers it so far. But all the agency talks about is child proof e liquid caps. That low risk threat is the best they can do?

From the link you put in your original post, sofarsogood... to the October 2014 paper published by the U.S. Fire Administration:

"Electronic Cigarette Fires and Explosions"

on page 2:
"The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission has
advised that e-cigarettes do not fall under its jurisdiction."

I suppose the Consumer Product Safety Commission does have jurisdiction over batteries per se.
Maybe they already have guidelines about batteries. I haven't looked.

Child-proof caps for e-liquid bottles was an easy decision for the Product Safety Commission to recommend, given the way anti-nicotine and tobacco zealots (ANTZ) and the media have unrealistically demonized "nicotine" for decades.

I think the Consumer Product Safety Commission is quite content with the prospect of e-cig devices being put entirely into the FDA's hands ... through the FDA's proposed (and unreasonably harsh) deeming regulations which would define e-cigs as a "tobacco" product.

I doubt if the Consumer Product Safety Commission wants anything regarding the e-cig devices themselves to land in its lap. No pun intended.

 

[sofarsogood]

I read a story recently in a chemistry periodical that demand for cheap Li-ion batteries for ecigs is so high that some Chinese factories are cutting back on quality control to keep up, especially in the clean rooms used for producing them. A speck of dust in the material can be all that is needed to have a very unstable battery.

Over-claiming current limits could also be a problem, just as mAh are often over-claimed. Combine this with ignorant new users wanting to use subohm coils on mechs, and its not a pretty picture.

That said, I have noted a similar number of stories about cell phone fires in the last year, but admittedly cell phones are more prevalent than ecigs.

I haven't noticed battery shortages. I would bet that the companies cutting corners today were doing it long before ecigs. But it's another reason to be fussy about what battery to use and even who to buy it from.

Cell phone batteries misbehave too but less often because they have the usual suite of protective circuits. If nobody was carrying loose batteries with exposed terminals or using mech mods most of the injury accidents wouldn't have happened.

From the link you put in your original post, sofarsogood... to the October 2014 paper published by the U.S. Fire Administration:

"Electronic Cigarette Fires and Explosions"

on page 2:
"The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission has
advised that e-cigarettes do not fall under its jurisdiction."

I suppose the Consumer Product Safety Commission does have jurisdiction over batteries per se.
Maybe they already have guidelines about batteries. I haven't looked.

Child-proof caps for e-liquid bottles was an easy decision for the Product Safety Commission to recommend, given the way anti-nicotine and tobacco zealots (ANTZ) and the media have unrealistically demonized "nicotine" for decades.

I think the Consumer Product Safety Commission is quite content with the prospect of e-cig devices being put entirely into the FDA's hands ... through the FDA's proposed (and unreasonably harsh) deeming regulations which would define e-cigs as a "tobacco" product.

I doubt if the Consumer Product Safety Commission wants anything regarding the e-cig devices themselves to land in its lap. No pun intended.

The part of your post that stands out is about the consumer product safety commission saying they have no jurisdiction. I'd like to know more about that. I'm skeptical. Is there a list of consumer products that are specifically exempted or is there a criteria? How do they know they have jurisdiction over hoverboards but not ecigarettes? What stops them from studying the matter and making recommendations? Perhaps they don't want to get i nvolved because they'd have to say things in the merits and the government does not want to be in that akward spot with ecigs.

 

[skoony]

@LaraC I have mentioned in the past that the government et al have the authority
and duty to protect United States Citizens for dangerous products. This is a classic
case of passing the buck. They very well can go after manufacturers that are making
products that require batteries that are not intended to be used for the required
application they are used in. The batteries themselves are not intended to be used
or sold individually at the consumer level and as such at least the reputable manufacturers
are probably not liable but, manufacturers sellers and buyers of devices using them
are liable. The new regulated mods are a good sign some one is getting it.
If government agencies are willing to shirk their duty and lay it all on the FDA
then not only are tamper proof cartridges in our future but,tamper proof hardware.

Regards
Mike

 

[Kent C]

I have mentioned in the past that the government et al have the authority and duty to protect United States Citizens for dangerous products.

You would have a hard time finding that in the Constitution..... or you'd have to so alter the
interpretation of certain clauses out of their context to make the case. Not that, that hasn't been done, but strict construction of those clauses from original intent, show no such idea of 'protecting' citizens from themselves or their choices in products. In fact, it's just the opposite. Guns are 'dangerous products' and they uphold the right of citizens to have them and use them. They, the gov't has neither the authority or duty to do otherwise, only to uphold the Constitution as stated.

 

[sofarsogood]

@LaraC I have mentioned in the past that the government et al have the authority
and duty to protect United States Citizens for dangerous products. This is a classic
case of passing the buck. They very well can go after manufacturers that are making
products that require batteries that are not intended to be used for the required
application they are used in. The batteries themselves are not intended to be used
or sold individually at the consumer level and as such at least the reputable manufacturers
are probably not liable but, manufacturers sellers and buyers of devices using them
are liable. The new regulated mods are a good sign some one is getting it.
If government agencies are willing to shirk their duty and lay it all on the FDA
then not only are tamper proof cartridges in our future but,tamper proof hardware.

Regards
Mike

I found the answer about the CPSC and ecigs. I would rather call it an excuse. Actually it is an artful dodge. There are some things that the Commission is barred from regulating including alcohol, food, and drugs. ecigs are not food, and not a drug but that doesn't suit the government's agenda. They want it to be a drug related product. If you take away the nic there's no drug. If Nicotine is a drug then caffine is a drug but they regulate coffee makers.

 

[skoony]

You would have a hard time finding that in the Constitution..... or you'd have to so alter the
interpretation of certain clauses out of their context to make the case. Not that, that hasn't been done, but strict construction of those clauses from original intent, show no such idea of 'protecting' citizens from themselves or their choices in products. In fact, it's just the opposite. Guns are 'dangerous products' and they uphold the right of citizens to have them and use them. They, the gov't has neither the authority or duty to do otherwise, only to uphold the Constitution as stated.

Your mostly right. Firearms are specifically mentioned along with free speech and some other
noteworthy concepts. That doesn't explain the CPSC,FDA,FAA,FTC,BATF and all the rest of these
agencies supposedly tasked to protect the the health and safety and to promote the general
welfare standing around with their hands in their pockets. One would think that somewhere
there is a bright motivated desk jockey in the government out to save the world and more
importantly the chillin' from the evil scourge of e-cigarettes. I would think they would be
fighting over the privileged to vanquish vaping.
Then again maybe the other agencies have more sense than the FDA. After watching
the unpasteurized milk and wooden shelves for cheese storage fiasco's go as far as they
did I wonder why they are laying off such low hanging fruit. Of course the reason is
you can't tax it if its banned and tax it even more if it's not regulated as being bad for you.

Regards
Mike

 

[MacTechVpr]

The part of your post that stands out is about the consumer product safety commission saying they have no jurisdiction..

‎Navigating the Regulatory Maze of Lithium Battery Safety | Intertek_Regulatory-Maze-WP.pdf
Batteries | CPSC.gov

Not sure if you're reasoning follows my own but no battery issues, no vaping problem. And I'm with you on enforcement if specific offshore makers (and commercial importer counterparts) are in non-conformance to extant voluntary standards overseen by the Exec/Leg branches. If such presents a hazard to the public, I'd say this is a "trade" issue and not just the purview of any one domestic regulatory agency. Also, what would even more standards/regulation/jurisdiction bring to the table? The authority lies within the power of the preceding branches to sanction, fine or tax as they see fit. It's why we have a Customs Service. We don't need every agency of the government to have guns, be an army and stand ready to put the cuffs on things. Leave the door open wide enough however and some might find enough of a gray area to suggest that the activity itself is a risk requiring specific remedies. And that's what we have right now in my estimation. Gov kicking us in the .... instead of the problem in the head. And ready to build monuments to regulation with us as the excuse.

Your point was well taken on product branding and authentication.

Good luck.

 

[Kent C]

That doesn't explain the CPSC,FDA,FAA,FTC,BATF and all the rest of these agencies supposedly tasked to protect the the health and safety and to promote the general welfare standing around with their hands in their pockets.

Understood. I'm well aware of the reality of the 3 and 4 letter agencies (none of which are in the Constitution either), but your comments about how the gov't has the 'authority and duty' is what I was addressing. They have neither, according to the Constitution. and only have that by the slippery slope of violating the Constitution without anyone stopping those who think they know what's best for us.

And again, there's nothing about "protect the health and safety". While there is the general welfare clause which has been used by the unscrupulous to mean something that was never meant by those who wrote it - Madison said you promote the general welfare by upholding individual rights, since they are the only thing that citizens have in common - ie. from a principled rights argument not a greatest good for society argument. (wrt gov't).

 

[sofarsogood]

‎Navigating the Regulatory Maze of Lithium Battery Safety | Intertek_Regulatory-Maze-WP.pdf
Batteries | CPSC.gov

Not sure if you're reasoning follows my own but no battery issues, no vaping problem. And I'm with you on enforcement if specific offshore makers (and commercial importer counterparts) are in non-conformance to extant voluntary standards overseen by the Exec/Leg branches. If such presents a hazard to the public, I'd say this is a "trade" issue and not just the purview of any one domestic regulatory agency. Also, what would even more standards/regulation/jurisdiction bring to the table? The authority lies within the power of the preceding branches to sanction, fine or tax as they see fit. It's why we have a Customs Service. We don't need every agency of the government to have guns, be an army and stand ready to put the cuffs on things. Leave the door open wide enough however and some might find enough of a gray area to suggest that the activity itself is a risk requiring specific remedies. And that's what we have right now in my estimation. Gov kicking us in the .... instead of the problem in the head. And ready to build monuments to regulation with us as the excuse.

Your point was well taken on product branding and authentication.

Good luck.

As best I can tell regulated mods have a very clean record as far as safety goes so far. That may be because the technology for regulating electricity in low voltage devices was very mature before vaping came along. Mechs have inherent risks and people are making predictable mistakes and hurting themselves. I'm trying to picture how government bans a metal tube with a switch on the bottom. Warnings are the first option and they aren't doing it. Why not?

Understood. I'm well aware of the reality of the 3 and 4 letter agencies (none of which are in the Constitution either), but your comments about how the gov't has the 'authority and duty' is what I was addressing. They have neither, according to the Constitution. and only have that by the slippery slope of violating the Constitution without anyone stopping those who think they know what's best for us.

And again, there's nothing about "protect the health and safety". While there is the general welfare clause which has been used by the unscrupulous to mean something that was never meant by those who wrote it - Madison said you promote the general welfare by upholding individual rights, since they are the only thing that citizens have in common - ie. from a principled rights argument not a greatest good for society argument. (wrt gov't).

To have civilization people have to be able to live in densly populated areas and for that to work there has to be, among other things, sanitation and public health. Other things need government oversite or control, like public safety, police. So how far do we want that to go? The debate is endless and it should be. It's legitimate for government to be interested in important social trends like vaping but it's not okay for them to be lying scoundrals to protect their tobacco drug trade. If we end up with a President Trump it will be for crap like this. If I vote for Trump it will be because, if I have to be miserable, I want company. My favorite thing about Trump is EVERYBODY in government hates him. May be because he's not corrupt enough to fit in.

 

[Kent C]

To have civilization people have to be able to live in densly populated areas and for that to work there has to be, among other things, sanitation and public health. Other things need government oversite or control, like public safety, police.

Police and justice are legitimate Constitutional gov't concerns. The rest should be either state or individual responsibilities, not the Feds. And the gov't shouldn't get into 'important social trends' - whatever that means. Vaping is an individual concern - it harms no one else - hence no rights are violated - and no gov't concern.

Won't get into the comments on Trump, unless he has said something on vaping and so far, I don't think he has.

 

[sofarsogood]

Police and justice are legitimate Constitutional gov't concerns. The rest should be either state or individual responsibilities, not the Feds. And the gov't shouldn't get into 'important social trends' - whatever that means. Vaping is an individual concern - it harms no one else - hence no rights are violated - and no gov't concern.

Won't get into the comments on Trump, unless he has said something on vaping and so far, I don't think he has.

I've never called myself a Republican or Democrat, too independant minded for that. Later what I can up with is 'cowardly libertarian'. These days the only difference I see between Republicans and Democrats is they are corrupt in different ways and the differences aren't as important as the corruption. If government officials are sincere about anything I can'tt tell you what that would be. The government could do things that make vaping more successful at ending the tobacco age, or they could do nothing at all, but those aren't options. They won't discuss the issues on the merits. So tear them down with mean spirited criticism, undermine their credibility, until they leave us alone. President Trump sounds like a movie title.

 

[Kent C]

I've never called myself a Republican or Democrat, too independant minded for that. Later what I can up with is 'cowardly libertarian'. These days the only difference I see between Republicans and Democrats is they are corrupt in different ways and the differences aren't as important as the corruption. If government officials are sincere about anything I can'tt tell you what that would be. The government could do things that make vaping more successful at ending the tobacco age, or they could do nothing at all, but those aren't options. They won't discuss the issues on the merits. So tear them down with mean spirited criticism, undermine their credibility, until they leave us alone. President Trump sounds like a movie title.

My only point was to point out something that was said about gov't - 'that it had the authority and duty to protect people for (from) dangerous products'. I know that many people believe that to be true, but it simply isn't, and I sought to correct that. Only that, nothing else. This isn't about whether they should or shouldn't - just that by the Constitution, they have no such authority.

 

[MacTechVpr]

As best I can tell regulated mods have a very clean record as far as safety goes so far. That may be because the technology for regulating electricity in low voltage devices was very mature before vaping came along. Mechs have inherent risks and people are making predictable mistakes and hurting themselves. I'm trying to picture how government bans a metal tube with a switch on the bottom. Warnings are the first option and they aren't doing it. Why not?

Because the admonitions are superseded by plentiful encouragement to ignore them. People make predictable mistakes because they ignore the need for predictability. Sometimes exacerbated by producers who depart from consensus standards to make predictability impossible. Of the two the latter applies to regulated devices as well as to batteries. Adding complexity doesn't make us safer when we're predisposed to ignorance. In either mode, the user needs to don the vaping condom — some rather rudimentary electrical understanding. Nothing works better without it.

Good luck.

 

[DC2]

In either mode, the user needs to don the vaping condom — some rather rudimentary electrical understanding. Nothing works better without it.

You know, I really do agree with you in concept.
But how are you going to inform John Q. Public that there is a need to learn that?

Because that is exactly where the breakdown in communication exists.

 

[MacTechVpr]

You know, I really do agree with you in concept.
But how are you going to inform John Q. Public that there is a need to learn that?

Because that is exactly where the breakdown in communication exists.

I know it, and you know it. And if more of us did it, encouraged more new users to learn how the stove works, we'd all be better off for it. This simultaneously serves both altruistic and self-serving ends in that by educating our peers we gain communal and individual certainty as well as a defensible security from external intrusion. All of us. The goal of achievement we acknowledge as important then isn't that of the enthusiast or hobbyist but one of personal self-reliance. And the closest analogy I can draw upon is learning to cook as we strike out as young adults...so that we don't starve.

Some will say well Mac's just being too idealistic. Perhaps. Or maybe, just practical and realistic if you appreciate my analogy and its implications. We have created a culture of support yet in parallel one of the susceptible uninformed hangers-on. And I'm afraid we all do it, myself included. In 2000+ posts here I'm sure I've dealt out my fair share of snapshot answers to many who could have readily helped themselves to the info. Can't apologize for my concern that I just don't know for sure. Wouldn't want to deter those who just landed here and see them fail while they try sorting out the forum's structure and SE function. But those walkin' in vapin' 6 weeks with their 6th sub-Ω RTA and 200W box need to know by then what the clapton their wind's gonna do...and can I just run it in watt mode? That's the conundrum we face on this thread. Which is the greater threat? The marginally deficient battery, or the user?

Ultimately, we need large numbers of minimally qualified safe vapers to argue the rational case that vaping is beneficial, or we may not. Our choice as a culture. That's not to malign or criticize all or anything that we do. It's all of it in great measure what makes vaping as marvelous an alternative as it is. But we would prosper with a much wider understanding of the need for such an ethic. I wouldn't presume to tell anyone what to do. Not my nature. But I can certainly encourage and not hesitate to shame those who'd insist I scramble their eggs for them (or insist on asking for the umpteenth time). If we want to see change, those who know are going to have to make it happen. I know, I know. We already do so much. It's hard to say no. Like it or not, that's the hand that's dealt. Who else will help us, if not us?

Your question is a good one. My efforts with some vendors were largely unsuccessful. My approach here modestly better. There are outstanding contributors on ECF, too many to name. Wish we could say that's the ticket. Just more free stuff neatly ordered in one place. But it's really much more a passing on of attitude and the urgency for it. What's easily taken is seldom appreciated for its value. That I guess sums it up. Let's put value on the right things.

Good luck.