Inhaling Flavouring Chemicals

[TropicalBob]

The sheer number of e-smokers world-wide should serve to alert us if a batch of contaminated e-liquid hit users. Word would spread at .. the speed of the Internet. So I trust e-liquid supplies I've had on hand a week or a month. And I trust what's in the liquid itself is far healthier than any smoke product I would inhale. The trust is based on the information we all have available. It's not "blind".

I can't argue against some regulations that protect e-smokers. But I see no reason not to have faith that these products that we're using are indeed far healthier than smoking tobacco cigarettes. I use e-cigs all day. Everyday. And I have no intention of stopping .. unless the plug is pulled on my practice.

 

[Doostin]

Regarding JC, what's the deal with their FDA registration logo/page? Can someone explain in layman's terms, are they legit and beyond the FDA topics of conversation we've been having?

 

[Sun Vaporer]

That should read (looking at a bottle of 24mg cherry flavour TW in front of me now):

1. tobacco essence oil < 5%
2. tobacco lead oil < 5%

8. 2-methyl butyic acid < 1%

16. glycerol < 20%

not sure if that makes any difference.

Exogenesis--If you have the ingredients to TW and they are listed wrong, could you please repost the list here so that we have correct information. A redo of the entire list would be appreciated--Thanks from all of us--Sun

 

[TropicalBob]

No, on anything special about JC. Each company planning to distribute liquids like ours is supposed to simply register its address and products with the FDA. In NO WAY does that constitute any approval. It's a required distribution step, that JC complied with.

 

[surbitonPete]

The sheer number of e-smokers world-wide should serve to alert us if a batch of contaminated e-liquid hit users. Word would spread at .. the speed of the Internet. So I trust e-liquid supplies I've had on hand a week or a month. And I trust what's in the liquid itself is far healthier than any smoke product I would inhale. The trust is based on the information we all have available. It's not "blind".

I can't argue against some regulations that protect e-smokers. But I see no reason not to have faith that these products that we're using are indeed far healthier than smoking tobacco cigarettes. I use e-cigs all day. Everyday. And I have no intention of stopping .. unless the plug is pulled on my practice.

and I bet if anyone 'was' to become ill or die from vaping..... you would sure hear about that quick enough.......it would be Instant headline news on the TV.

 

[Doostin]

Thanks TB, wasn't sure about it, but I'm definitely glad to hear they are making steps I the right direction. They do seem to be one of the more professional liquid companies in that regard, though afaik they are still the only North American company producers.

What I am most interested in is their method of nicotine extraction from tobacco. I read somewhere of DIYers boiling tobacco, to me that doesn't seem to be a very effective way of excluding other toxins to the same levels found in Nicoderm patches etc.

 

[Kate]

I bet they haven't thought about checking that there's no diacetyl in their eliquid. They don't tell us specific chemicals they use as flavourings so we can't know either.

Bickfords say they use diacetyl and they supply flavourings to eliquid manufacturers.

 

[dEFinitionofEPIC]

I bet they haven't thought about checking that there's no diacetyl in their eliquid. They don't tell us specific chemicals they use as flavourings so we can't know either.

Bickfords say they use diacetyl and they supply flavourings to eliquid manufacturers.

....lovely

 

[exogenesis]

Exogenesis--If you have the ingredients to TW and they are listed wrong, could you please repost the list here so that we have correct information. A redo of the entire list would be appreciated--Thanks from all of us--Sun

Sorry for the delayed reply, went to be really early (bit under the weather).

No difference in content list from what smokingclam posted for TW's 36mg Tobacco,
smokingclam's original post

Just a couple of typos, & a difficulty for the first 3 items perhaps,
also (unimportant) last item difference:

The list on my bottle of 36mg 'Tobacco' and my bottle of 24mg 'Cherry' is the same (surprisingly):

1. Tobacco essencial oil <5%
2. Tobacco [COLOR=red]lead[/COLOR] oil <5%                (this is meant to be [COLOR=red]leaf[/COLOR], I assume)
3. Nicotine (from tobacco leaf) <3%    (this would be in error for 36mg liquid - see below note)
4. 2,3,5-Trimethylpyrazine <1%
5. 2,3,5,6-Tetramethylpyrazine <1%
6. 2,5-Dimethylpyrazine <1%
7. 2-Acetypyrazine <1%
8. 2-Methyl [COLOR=red]butyic[/COLOR] acid <1%            (this is meant to be [COLOR=red]butyric[/COLOR], I assume)
9. Terp ineol <1%
10 Ethyl maltol <1%
11. Guaiacol <1%
12. 2-Acetyl pyridine <2%
13. Octalactone(gamma) <1%
14. Pure water <10%
15. Propylene glycol >65%
16. Glycerol <20%

Currently TW doesn't put this info on the bottles anymore,
i.e. the labelling was changed since switching from gold coloured (dropper) caps to
black child-proof caps & black dropper caps.

Note: I can see why, since it must be difficult to guarantee most of the above is strictly true,
also I think that with the advent of 36mg liquid item 3 (nicotine) it looks like if newer labels
had been printed they would need to have been changed from <3% to <4% or <5%.

Also, maybe, having to put a much larger value than is actually present, to cover yourself,
gives a worse impression than not having it there at all, I don't blame them for removing the list at all.

Especially since each strength should really have a different list (particularly the 1st three items), and
that's not even mentioning flavours.
The small black writing on a red label was very hard to read anyway, or perhaps I should go get my eyes tested.

Presumably TW's publically available GC-MS report (has been posted on this forum) is a better guide
to true representative analytical content anyway?

An example of 'jumping to conclusions' about these chemicals is that one item that stood out for me was
the AcetylPyridine, probably just due to bad association with the base (Pyridine) itself (look it up)
but AcetylPyridine has rat LD50 of 2280 mg/kg & is used in flavourings

btw, if PillBox38 or TotallyWickedAbe read this,
I'm not having a go at you in any way, just posting info

 

[smokum]

What I am most interested in is their method of nicotine extraction from tobacco. I read somewhere of DIYers boiling tobacco, to me that doesn't seem to be a very effective way of excluding other toxins to the same levels found in Nicoderm patches etc.

It is my understanding that the nicotine and PG/VG are obviously purchased, and not "produced" by JC. It is also not final mixed at their location but rather at a controlled lab based on their "own" specific formula/recipe calculations.

VapeOn,
Greg

 

[pointedobject]

Hi all, I looked into the diacetyl and the whole popcorn lung issue and it's pretty scary stuff! The condition is called Bronchiolitis obliterans as in obliteration - no cure!
I wiki'd the disease and there's other chemicals that are suspect as well:
'Bronchiolitis obliterans has many possible causes,' <snip> 'and exposure to toxic fumes, including: diacetyl, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, ammonia, chlorine, thionyl chloride, methyl isocyanate, hydrogen fluoride, hydrogen bromide, hydrogen chloride, hydrogen sulfide, phosgene, polyamide-amine dyes, mustard gas and ozone.'

The list of baddies is getting longer! Any word back from Bickford's Kate?

 

[jennydotz]

Aren't those some of the chemicals in analog smoke?

 

[Kate]

No word from Bickford yet.

Is anyone willing to check with Johnson Creek about their ingredients, they have listed some here but not the flavour chemicals?

I noticed this on your list Pointed - polyamide-amine dyes. I wonder if food colourings are related.

 

[Sun Vaporer]

Sorry for the delayed reply, went to be really early (bit under the weather).

No difference in content list from what smokingclam posted for TW's 36mg Tobacco,
smokingclam's original post

Just a couple of typos, & a difficulty for the first 3 items perhaps,
also (unimportant) last item difference:

The list on my bottle of 36mg 'Tobacco' and my bottle of 24mg 'Cherry' is the same (surprisingly):

1. Tobacco essencial oil <5%
2. Tobacco [COLOR=red]lead[/COLOR] oil <5%                (this is meant to be [COLOR=red]leaf[/COLOR], I assume)
3. Nicotine (from tobacco leaf) <3%    (this would be in error for 36mg liquid - see below note)
4. 2,3,5-Trimethylpyrazine <1%
5. 2,3,5,6-Tetramethylpyrazine <1%
6. 2,5-Dimethylpyrazine <1%
7. 2-Acetypyrazine <1%
8. 2-Methyl [COLOR=red]butyic[/COLOR] acid <1%            (this is meant to be [COLOR=red]butyric[/COLOR], I assume)
9. Terp ineol <1%
10 Ethyl maltol <1%
11. Guaiacol <1%
12. 2-Acetyl pyridine <2%
13. Octalactone(gamma) <1%
14. Pure water <10%
15. Propylene glycol >65%
16. Glycerol <20%

Currently TW doesn't put this info on the bottles anymore,
i.e. the labelling was changed since switching from gold coloured (dropper) caps to
black child-proof caps & black dropper caps.

Note: I can see why, since it must be difficult to guarantee most of the above is strictly true,
also I think that with the advent of 36mg liquid item 3 (nicotine) it looks like if newer labels
had been printed they would need to have been changed from <3% to <4% or <5%.

Also, maybe, having to put a much larger value than is actually present, to cover yourself,
gives a worse impression than not having it there at all, I don't blame them for removing the list at all.

Especially since each strength should really have a different list (particularly the 1st three items), and
that's not even mentioning flavours.
The small black writing on a red label was very hard to read anyway, or perhaps I should go get my eyes tested.

Presumably TW's publically available GC-MS report (has been posted on this forum) is a better guide
to true representative analytical content anyway?

An example of 'jumping to conclusions' about these chemicals is that one item that stood out for me was
the AcetylPyridine, probably just due to bad association with the base (Pyridine) itself (look it up)
but AcetylPyridine has rat LD50 of 2280 mg/kg & is used in flavourings

btw, if PillBox38 or TotallyWickedAbe read this,
I'm not having a go at you in any way, just posting info

Exogenesis--Thanks for clearing up the list for us--it is greatfully appreciated--surprised to here they no longer list it again?-- At least its better then JC with their "Artifical Flavors"--that tells us nothing---Sun

 

[pointedobject]

Some of them definitely are in analogs, so there's that. The report on the workers who came down with the 'popcorn-lung' were said to be all non-smokers?
I was thinking about the dyes as well... ugh
It's funny, I'm not one to usually give trust easily - but with these things somehow I'm trusting faceless companies from the other side of the world (I say as I inhale some really nice tasting Camel from a gnome bottle

I'll send an email to JC asking about their ingredients - I ordered from them a couple of times so maybe they'll respond? I'll let you know what they say.

 

[jennydotz]

Dosn't someone from JC cruise the forum? If I were a retailer that's what I'd do, to see what people were concerned about.

 

[Kate]

Personally I'm more likely to trust someone who provides a full list of chemicals for scrutiny rather than vague 'natural and artificial flavourings'.

Of course only people from China can poison us - it's forum law

 

[scrubadub]

Just in case it gets missed Freddo points out in this post http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/general-e-smoking-discussion/8967-e-hookah-coming-soon.html that Royal Smokers are running a poll to gauge demand for UK manufactured liquid that is tested in the UK as well. Sounds promising.

 

[exogenesis]

Sun Vaporer, happy to help in any way.

Kate, those sneaky Chinese are bent on taking over the West, no matter the means,
mind you if a UK manufacturers does get set up, we be doing it to ourselves.

Scrubadub, read that earlier & wondered: if royalsmokers are a USA site,
with a Shenzhen supplier, why poll about a UK manufacturer & not a USA one? I voted YES.

 

[Doostin]

It is my understanding that the nicotine and PG/VG are obviously purchased, and not "produced" by JC.

I thought it would pretty hard to get a company going by growing its own tobacco and going through the stages...but what about the company they've purchased the nicotine from? Would it be done with he same methods as big-pharma does?

I only ask because for me the one big appeal for e-smoking to me is the fewer toxic chemicals, it would seem that if many of the same toxins are present in the e-liquid we're still absorbing them, and it would defeat the purpose of one of the many reasons why I've chosen this tobacco replacement method.