IF this is true......then why is nobody else doing it?

[djsvapour]

so.....if this is true, then why is nobody talking about vapor-fi?

1. Everybody IS talking about VaporFi - for all the wrong reasons.

2. The UK already has companies which only sell products (e-liquids) which have been tested for their properties under normal vaporizing/inhaling conditions.

I would say there is a difficult and treacherously dangerous fine line between a formulation that has been adjusted or formulated to exclude certain known health risk chemicals and one that has been built 'from the ground up' using entirely safe ingredients.

Since some "brands" of e-cig are already well-known in the business for making excessive claims and applying excessive pricing structures, I wouldn't trust it - No.
And, there is an ever-growing group of vaping companies using a new and deeply pernicious system to direct sales to certain websites, a system which is essentially bribing the previously independent review websites and giving birth to over 100 FAKE review sites, all of which feature "certain brands" then... well...

I doubt they would get away with this type of comment in the UK. In fact, if it were true, then 742 million people in Europe would not be facing the implementation of draconian regulation.
The regulation insists that all products must be fully tested and marketed under government license. There are no products that meet this criteria as yet.
I doubt one of the most controversial vaping companies in the world would be hiding under a bush if they genuinely had the first product in the world that was safe to vape. But, that's not what they are saying. They are presumably saying the formulation(s) are such that the ingredients were chosen or selected for vaping rather than eating.

We already have that in the UK. In fact, there are already many e-liquid companies applying this logic.

 

[khalidmna]

Maybe they meant it's "ideal" for inhaling

 

[Vatic]

Of of their shops recently opened close to me and I've tried a few of VaporFi e liquids. A good friend of mine works there and well,... to put it bluntly.......I wasn't impressed at all. It kinda tasted watered down and was quite expensive. I'll stick with TFA but kudos to those that like and enjoy their juice. Its all about your own personal preference, what ever keeps you off the stinkies.

 

[Alien Traveler]

It looks like they sell clones of Subtank and Nautilus under their brand name.

VaporFi VOX II MOD Starter Kit - E-Cigarettes and Vaporizers

It is exactly the type of company I do not want to see on market. Unfortunately they already have quite a few retail sites.

 

[Wolfenstark]

I tried three liquids from Vapor-fi and they were the worst liquids I have vaped.

 

[Gauntlgrym]

anyone with some scientific knowledge read the lab report they provide next to the claim of "made to be inhaled"??

I can't really make heads or tales of what I am reading, but if they provide a lab report to support their claims.....then is it legit?
I don't even know what I am looking for in the report.

*I wanted to add*

I have tried the liquid and it was...."different" than others I have tried. not really bad, but not really good either. they were a little unlike any other liquid I have tried.
I'm wondering if this is because of the "special" flavorings they use. by the taste, I must admit....something is different.

personally, I would be willing to sacrifice a little in the flavor department, if they are healthier, and made or safe for inhalation. the question is though....if they really are, or if this statement is false.

once again, is the lab report they provide different than other flavoring reports?
scientists please help to answer this.

we need Dr. F to take a look at the report

 

[Gauntlgrym]

Interesting, Fapor Fi states it has “FDA Registered Lab - We've got a state of the art manufacturing facility. Our lab is registered with the FDA as a tobacco manufacturer”. So what? What is in common in tobacco manufacturing and flavorings for juices?

The good thing is “VaporFi E-Liquids are all diacetyl-free”.

I think they are preparing for the coming regulations. at least that's what they told me at the b&m. if ecigs are deemed a tobacco product, then they will still be able to keep doing what they are doing. other companies will not be able to keep making eliquid...they will.

 

[edyle]

anyone with some scientific knowledge read the lab report they provide next to the claim of "made to be inhaled"??

I can't really make heads or tales of what I am reading, but if they provide a lab report to support their claims.....then is it legit?
I don't even know what I am looking for in the report.

*I wanted to add*

I have tried the liquid and it was...."different" than others I have tried. not really bad, but not really good either. they were a little unlike any other liquid I have tried.
I'm wondering if this is because of the "special" flavorings they use. by the taste, I must admit....something is different.

personally, I would be willing to sacrifice a little in the flavor department, if they are healthier, and made or safe for inhalation. the question is though....if they really are, or if this statement is false.

once again, is the lab report they provide different than other flavoring reports?
scientists please help to answer this.

There are quite a few pdf reports on that page.

It's certainly a good precedent that they seem to be providing lots of information about their product.

 

[Hannypoo]

"made to be inhaled" implies nothing about safety, just as 'made to be drank' implies nothing about safety.

To me, "made to be drank" does, indeed, imply that it's safe to drink.

 

[Alien Traveler]

To me, "made to be drank" does, indeed, imply that it's safe to drink.

Like 1.75 of Everclear in one sitting?
And yes, it is made for drinking.

 

[zoiDman]

If I mix some unflavoured, I'd certainly consider that "made to be inhaled".
And if I had flavorings that completely vaporized - meaning no residue: that would qualify, physically, for the description "made to be inhaled".
The 'safety' presumption is just that - erroneous supposition. "made to be inhaled" implies nothing about safety, just as 'made to be drank' implies nothing about safety.

You are Correct.

And I believe that this is why FlavorFI choose the particular wording for their Flavoring that they used.

And see it as Borderline Deception.

 

[edyle]

pure water is safe for drinking; you can give that to your kid to drink.
whiskey is made for drinking; but you don't want to give that to your kid to drink.

 

[Alien Traveler]

anyone with some scientific knowledge read the lab report they provide next to the claim of "made to be inhaled"??

I can't really make heads or tales of what I am reading, but if they provide a lab report to support their claims.....then is it legit?
I don't even know what I am looking for in the report.

There are no routine tests for "vapability". Period.
Their tests are for impurities. For example nic test is a chromatographic test, pure data, no comparison with any limits (as to determine whether it is USP grade or not). Actually, most nicotine vendors supply test results also. And I did not find any tests for flavorings. So, they are at least no better than many others.

 

[Gauntlgrym]

Like 1.75 of Everclear in one sitting?
And yes, it is made for drinking.

oh please...you are just being argumentative.
too much of anything is bad. you can die from drinking too much water in one sitting. doesn't mean it's not safe.

most people (myself included) hear "made for inhalation" and that implies it's overall safe to inhale. it was made to be inhaled by people.

 

[xtwosm0kesx]

I don't believe for one second they use flavors that are "made for inhalation", if they existed they would be WIDELY used and well known. The no diacetyl claim is pretty easy in world where you just replace them with other dikentones.

Also as far as i can tell they paid a company (fdaimports.com) $29 to register them with the FDA, and being registered means absolutely NOTHING, even less than "FDA Approved" which we all know is essentially meaningless.

But hey, spin your registration as being the "FDA knows exactly what we're doing" etc.

 

[edyle]

As Alien pointed out: this statement:

Diacetyl-Free - VaporFi E-Liquids are all diacetyl-free; no fake-butter flavor here! Click to see the Lab report.

is meaningful.

It is specific.
If you buy their liquid and it is not diacetyl free, then you can prove a case in court.

As for 'made for inhalation', it is actually a meaningless statement.
Well I guess it could mean that their liquid is 'no worse' than everybody else's liquid; yes that would work; if they made a liquid that was clearly worse than anybody else's liquid for inhalation purposes, then it could be shown in court that the claim is false.

Now if they said all their liquids contain "No metals", then that would be a meaningfull statement. It would mean most of the stuff can be vaporized; you'd get less gunking of your coils; whether the vape is safe, depends on the gases being produced.

What they actually do say is:

Better than Food-Grade - Our E-Liquid flavorings are specifically made to be inhaled, they are a step beyond “food grade,” and they have been GRAS approved. Click to see the Lab report.

It's a very encouraging statement, but it doesn't actually say much that you can challenge in court (unless the product is demonstrably worse than other stuff).

 

[zoiDman]

...

As for 'made for inhalation', it is actually a meaningless statement.

...

No it is Not.

FlavorFI is making a Claim. A claim about something that is to be put into someone's Body.

And I would like to know what FlavorFI has to Support their Claim.

 

[Mapultz]

To me, "Made for inhalation" implies it's safe. Why would someone make something for a specific purpose that is not safe? That's like cooking food that's "made to eat" that is not safe to be eaten.

I'm not thrilled about this statement.

 

[djsvapour]

It's all good publicity for VaporFi, so fair play.

Whether they can sit with 100% security on such statements is kind of worrying, but then again, so is just about everything else they do; worrying.

They sell some nice $40 e-cigs for $119.99. They also claim to be worth the extra cost to the consumer on the grounds of customer service and then boast about 400% profit margins to their re-sellers.

Interesting to see where they go next with their self-promoting brand of fiction.

I guess the only way is up.

 

[Signmaker]

It looks like they sell clones of Subtank and Nautilus under their brand name.

VaporFi VOX II MOD Starter Kit - E-Cigarettes and Vaporizers

It is exactly the type of company I do not want to see on market. Unfortunately they already have quite a few retail sites.

Not only clones of the device, but they literally stole the cgi render of the Subtank of Kanger's website, recolored the o-rings, and did a bad overlay of their logo in place of Kangertech's. That is hilariously bad.