I think we need the FDA, I really do.
- Thread starter Sekasi
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Now that I think about it... the USDA should get involved just to handle all the manure floating around the FDA.
I wish the fda and such bodies would address the thing properly but so far they seem to be doing the opposite.
It's kind of like with alcohol; first they tried to prohibit it before they eventually came up with more resonable regulations designed to protect the consumer.
Same with vape gear; instead of consumer protection, the approach so far has been to try to 'legally' 'deem' ecig products to be defined as 'tobacco products' so that they wouldn't have to do any work and just pretend its tobbacco products.
It's kind of like with alcohol; first they tried to prohibit it before they eventually came up with more resonable regulations designed to protect the consumer.
Same with vape gear; instead of consumer protection, the approach so far has been to try to 'legally' 'deem' ecig products to be defined as 'tobacco products' so that they wouldn't have to do any work and just pretend its tobbacco products.
This.
It's neither a tobacco product or a medicine product.
E juice just got labeled as medical care stuff in sweden, because nicotine "can be used for therapeutical purposes" Such load of bs...
First of all, thanks to everyone that took the thread seriously. I knew some people would take the 'you're a FDA paid spy' approach, and that's all cool.. seems most people are able to discuss the topic rationally at least.
I'm probably naive thinking that FDA regulation would only create good versus bad. I admit that wholeheartedly. I think the underlying issue is probably less about the FDA and more about transparency.
Because recipes are secret (mostly), the only way for us to figure out what we're inhaling is extremely costly chemical tests. Not very viable. Because environments in which liquids are produced are secret (mostly), we have no way of knowing if they are put together in a reasonably clean manner.
It all boils down to transparency honestly. The FDA could be one way to enforce transparency, but there might be other better ways of doing it.
To the likes of <insert e-juice vendor here>, how are we ever supposed to know what they are suggesting we inhale? Diacetyl is just one compound we've understood is bad. What others don't we currently know about and who uses it? Even Diacetyl isn't transparent. It's very hard to find vendors who explicitly state they use/don't use it. And for a reason I would have thought..
Again, food for thought. I'll lean how to make my own juice eventually, unfortunately it doesn't seem like a talent that comes naturally to me
I'm probably naive thinking that FDA regulation would only create good versus bad. I admit that wholeheartedly. I think the underlying issue is probably less about the FDA and more about transparency.
Because recipes are secret (mostly), the only way for us to figure out what we're inhaling is extremely costly chemical tests. Not very viable. Because environments in which liquids are produced are secret (mostly), we have no way of knowing if they are put together in a reasonably clean manner.
It all boils down to transparency honestly. The FDA could be one way to enforce transparency, but there might be other better ways of doing it.
To the likes of <insert e-juice vendor here>, how are we ever supposed to know what they are suggesting we inhale? Diacetyl is just one compound we've understood is bad. What others don't we currently know about and who uses it? Even Diacetyl isn't transparent. It's very hard to find vendors who explicitly state they use/don't use it. And for a reason I would have thought..
Again, food for thought. I'll lean how to make my own juice eventually, unfortunately it doesn't seem like a talent that comes naturally to me
I too would be comfortable with some oversight but not by the government. There's not a chance they could administer it correctly. I would rather see an independent organization doing the testing and offering a certification to the vendors for a fee. Certified vendors would have to charge a premium but many of us would be willing to pay a little more for their product. Of course there would be issues....there always are, but I think this might work better and more efficiently than the FDA who has already exhibited a bias against vaping and are willing to support that bias with tons of misinformation.
The AMESA has been attempting to do something similar. I don't think they are making as much progress as i hoped they would.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The AMESA has been attempting to do something similar. I don't think they are making as much progress as i hoped they would.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Well, for example. Coca cola is a super secret recipe yet it's approved. So i doubt that juice makers would be telling their recipes to FDA for "transparency"
But i do see your point.
Edit: If this is a big concern to you, you should realy try to get into DIY juice stuff. You'll know exactly what's in it (except for the flavorings i guess, up to the company if they tell that or not.) and how it's been made, by you.
But i do see your point.
As i mentioned back on page 2. All e juice makers would have to do these tests and it cost ....loads. In the end it would only be the BT who would be able to pull it off.
Edit: If this is a big concern to you, you should realy try to get into DIY juice stuff. You'll know exactly what's in it (except for the flavorings i guess, up to the company if they tell that or not.) and how it's been made, by you.
Last edited:
Not disagreeing or agreeing with you. I just want to throw this out there: Some schools will NOT let people bake things and bring them in for parties. Only because they have no way of knowing what is in those things that parents bake
My stepdaughter is a teacher, hubby's sister just retired was a teacher, sis-in-law was a teacher, several nieces are teachers. I have heard this from a couple of them. SMHChemicals started getting added to keep the taste of the cigarette tobacco consistent. Each crop varies from year to year depending on the growing conditions of that year. Added bonus? They found that different things added created an effect that kept people hooked.
Ding, ding, ding! We have a winner!! Bolded by me.
If more people purchased from those vendors that have joined AEMSA, other vendors would follow. If vendors see that AEMSA members are getting tons more $$ and a lot more customers, yeah, they would want to get a piece of the action. Basically it is up to us as consumers to vote with our $$.
My 2 cents for whatever it is worth.
If more people purchased from those vendors that have joined AEMSA, other vendors would follow. If vendors see that AEMSA members are getting tons more $$ and a lot more customers, yeah, they would want to get a piece of the action. Basically it is up to us as consumers to vote with our $$.
My 2 cents for whatever it is worth.
I will not recommend AEMSA, or look for AEMSA membership in a vendor, until they remove WTA from their list of prohibited ingredients.
And that was one of the issues that, in the thread I mentioned, went around and around about. That and food coloring.
You don't have to agree with their policies or use vendors that do.
Someone said that there should be a trade organization and I just pointed out that there was. Also, the fact that more people are not using AEMSA vendors, kind of tells me that this stuff is not as important to them.
Like I also stated, my vendor of choice is not a member of AEMSA. I do know that their place of business is very well set up. Several people have visited their store and have reported back.
Again, it all comes down to who you trust. Remember also, most of the e-liquid vendors got their start mixing liquids from their homes. Word of mouth was the best advertising they had and still have.
The world's oldest and most successful regulatory schemes are the trade self-regulation systems, the goldsmiths of London for example. Everybody in the world probably knows of them, through hallmarks.
Well, for example. Coca cola is a super secret recipe yet it's approved. So i doubt that juice makers would be telling their recipes to FDA for "transparency"
But i do see your point.
As i mentioned back on page 2. All e juice makers would have to do these tests and it cost ....loads. In the end it would only be the BT who would be able to pull it off.
Edit: If this is a big concern to you, you should realy try to get into DIY juice stuff. You'll know exactly what's in it (except for the flavorings i guess, up to the company if they tell that or not.) and how it's been made, by you.
The problem with many arguments in this thread is expecting truth even from the suppliers of ingredients.
Dr Konstantinos Farsalinos conducted a study on safety of eliquids. He found that in many flavorings that were advertised by the makers as diacetyl free, were not, in fact diacetyl free. Ejuice manufactures will have to have batches of flavorings tested by an independent lab as a result.
Home DIY makers will have to do this as well, or insure that the flavors they make are not the types that use diacetyl. I have chosen the second option (I hope).
Please note that by FDA standards, flavoring manufactures are supposed to list this particular ingredient.
Yes i do know this. Biggest issue there is that it is the food flavoring companies that have lied to the e juice crafters.
So it's basicly up to the the company that makes the flavorings. Most e juice crafters buy their flavorings, they do not make their own flavorings. (Most of them, not all.)
So they trusted the flavor company and told that they were diacityl free, when it wasn't.
So if anything it's the flavor companies that needs to be checked up on. If i'm not wrong there's some companies that sell flavorings do list their ingredients. I don't remember which company though, it was a link i saw here on there DIY forum i think.
Do you think that there is Also the Possibility that some of the "juice crafters" are Lying to their Customers?
As brought up on the Dr. F. thread, some flavor companies just go with "this product is not intended for inhalation," and then they are more or less covered, which then comes down to vendor.
Yet, I believe if consumer is maintaining integrity on this issue, it is really responsibility of consumer. It is nice, and likely socially beneficial for vendors to take on that responsibility. Yet, if consumer really wants to be in the know, and understands that flavor companies (anywhere) may have a policy of "not safe for inhalation" then no second party can be held ultimately responsible. Perhaps legally so, but I would say if going with either science or ethics, it is consumer choice/responsibility.
Of course it is always a possibility. However if you want to run a successful business, it is wise not to lie to your customers. Since the words spread quickly. A serious company wants the best reputation that's possible. So they've nothing to gain/win on intentionally lying.
Personally i don't care so much that i would want FDA/Gov to check up on everything and control. Because it will not work. For the same reason i posted earlier. Which sadly is happening in sweden now. It has been classified as a medical product unless they've been controlled and approved. Which no company will be able to afford. It's up in court again though, i realy hope they loose (don't know the english word for it, medicalcare company?) If "we" loose it's going to get regulated, as medical care. Atm we're allowed to import though but we don't know what will happen if we loose it though.
Oh well i'm kinda drifting away from topic.
Edit: Their only reason for this regulation is the nicotine. Only because "it can be used for therapeutical reasons" They don't care about nicotine free juices. Quite odd.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
