"It only takes ONE bad chemical"

[Moonbogg]

Don't you mean "IF vendors added.... etc." ? Or do you know this to be the case? And it is pretty hard/impossible to determine 'intent' as in "in order to boost sales" unless you have emails regarding that.

Also, "I disclosed it" isn't necessarily to admit that 'one knew there were specific known risks.' It could be the case that the vendor was unfamiliar with anything about diketones and once they became aware and checked their products, that they then reported that and changed it.

And what about the consumer? Wouldn't they be 'negligent' along the same lines? You suppose that vendors would automatically know the alleged dangers. Couldn't the same be said about the consumers? Perhaps you could assume 'intent' in their case as well - say, a slow suicide attempt - which in some localities is actionable or at least a moral crime.

But let's - say as with some smokers - they knew about diacetyl and decided to use eliquids with it anyway because of taste. A personal decision that harms no one but perhaps themselves. Can they then later sue a vendor or manufacturer if they knew ahead of time, like many smokers who sued big tobacco? Or do you just want to indict only one side of this consensual exchange?

And since one is responsible for their own health, isn't it incumbent that the person themselves find out all there is to know about any substance they ingest or inhale and see to it that they only buy from vendors who they can either be assured no such substance are present? (which is still only 'faith' in what someone would say or faith in 'lab reports' that they may provide.)

But you might say, 'that's what gov't regulation is for!' Here's a story regarding steve's peanut guy:

"MINNEAPOLIS, Minnesota (CNN) -- The deadly outbreak of salmonella traced to a Georgia peanut plant was fueled by poor oversight by food safety regulators and a slow response by federal agencies, state health officials and outside experts say."

Should the FDA be responsible for the deaths? The FDA head indicted and sent to jail?

The point isn't that, but that the FDA didn't really 'provide the protection' that some think is absolute when done by gov't, and absent when it is done by business, who actually have the most to lose (other than the customers), if their products are tainted. Again, consumers when they have these type of considerations should take it on themselves, since it is their bodies for which they are responsible.

You sound like a lawyer for big tobacco.

What it comes down to is the following. A known risk has been established that can have serious consequences. When the damage is done, what side of history will you be on? I am on the right side because I speak out against the risk and those who insanely defend it.

 

[Lessifer]

You sound like a lawyer for big tobacco.

What it comes down to is the following. A known risk has been established that can have serious consequences. When the damage is done, what side of history will you be on? I am on the right side because I speak out against the risk and those who insanely defend it.

No, it hasn't. A potential risk has been suggested. That's the point that you seem unable to understand. There is a very large difference between potential and known.

 

[Moonbogg]

No, it hasn't. A potential risk has been suggested. That's the point that you seem unable to understand. There is a very large difference between potential and known.

A risk is just that, its a risk and not a certainty. This is a known and recognized risk regarding diketone inhalation. You give me pushback because, well, I'm me and you don't like my attitude and the way I post. I don't take it personal, but regarding the risk, you are straight wrong. This risk is known.
Diketones should not be inhaled and juice containing them should, at minimum, be declared to contain diketones AND the risk of lung damage should be disclosed on the bottle of juice. If the FDA fails to implement such standards as this, then they fail even harder than the irresponsible juice companies who sell diketones to vulnerable customers.

Here's the thing. This is not an argument, because to call it an argument suggests that its possible for diketone defenders to win this argument. They cannot win. There is no excuse and if and when people get damaged lungs, we will ALL be without excuse for allowing it to happen.

 

[Lessifer]

A risk is just that, its a risk and not a certainty. This is a known and recognized risk regarding diketone inhalation. You give me pushback because, well, I'm me and you don't like my attitude and the way I post. I don't take it personal, but regarding the risk, you are straight wrong. This risk is known.
Diketones should not be inhaled and juice containing them should, at minimum, be declared to contain diketones AND the risk of lung damage should be disclosed on the bottle of juice. If the FDA fails to implement such standards as this, then they fail even harder than the irresponsible juice companies who sell diketones to vulnerable customers.

Diketones are BELIEVED to be responsible for B.O. in an industrial factory setting. It is suspected that they can cause damage outside of industrial settings. It is not known how they behave in the form and concentration used in vaping. Again, there is a difference between known and potential. If you have a dollar, you have the potential to buy a lotto ticket and win. If you actually buy one, you have a known chance, however slim it is. Right now, we still have the dollar.

 

[Moonbogg]

Diketones are BELIEVED to be responsible for B.O. in an industrial factory setting. It is suspected that they can cause damage outside of industrial settings. It is not known how they behave in the form and concentration used in vaping. Again, there is a difference between known and potential. If you have a dollar, you have the potential to buy a lotto ticket and win. If you actually buy one, you have a known chance, however slim it is. Right now, we still have the dollar.

Call it whatever you want. That's not important at all. There should be a warning on every bottle that contains diketones, because way too many people have no idea that there's a potential risk factor here. They don't know that the stuff that's in their juice is the same stuff with strong links to severe lung damage. I think they would want to know that, at the very least. But they don't know. Right now their best chance of finding out is from people like me going nuts on an internet forum and trying to spread the word. It needs to be on the bottles at the very least.

If nothing is done, its a clear profit grab without conscience, just like big tobacco. You see, people think big tobacco is evil just because they are big tobacco. They are people who are no different from you and me. The only difference is they are twisted by defending HUGE profits. So profits will twist e-juice companies just the same.

 

[zoiDman]

Just wondering... Has B.O. ever been Observed where Diketones are not present?

 

[Kent C]

You sound like a lawyer for big tobacco.

What it comes down to is the following. A known risk has been established that can have serious consequences. When the damage is done, what side of history will you be on? I am on the right side because I speak out against the risk and those who insanely defend it.

You sound like a socialist.

I'm on the side of people being responsible for themselves and doing what is necessary to maintain their own health and not pawning it off on someone else - either businesses or the government. I'm also on the side of businesses being responsible for the products they sell and when known effects substantiated by science (not safety-nazi paranoia-type "concerns" on every substance in existence) are shown to present harmful effects, that they act immediately in removing/recalling those products from their line.

If a vendor is accused of selling harmful products - justice should handle it as in any case of a violation of rights and if it is shown (without junk science) that they have knowingly sold harmful products then the full force of the law should be applied. And I don't automatically assume that all vendors act in this manner. In fact, I assume that they all want to stay in business and provide products that their customers want. And that they are rewarded well when they do so.

And if a consumer brings suit against a vendor/business and it is shown that they had no actual basis for it - iow, no harm was done, or that they used a product in a way not designed, or left open bottles of harmful substances within the reach of a small child, or altered the product in a manner for which it wasn't designed, that they should also have the full force of law applied against them as well as paying for all lawyer fees of the business.

I know what side of history I'm on .... and which side you're on as well - a side that results in misery and death for millions of people because they hand over - or it is taken by force - their individual responsibility and put it into the hands of the state. And history, has shown this to be the case beyond any reasonable doubt.

 

[caramel]

You sound like a socialist.

Translation: You don't agree with him.

 

[caramel]

Diketones are BELIEVED to be responsible for B.O. in an industrial factory setting. It is suspected that they can cause damage outside of industrial settings. It is not known how they behave in the form and concentration used in vaping. Again, there is a difference between known and potential. If you have a dollar, you have the potential to buy a lotto ticket and win. If you actually buy one, you have a known chance, however slim it is. Right now, we still have the dollar.

Same for tobacco cigarettes. They have the potential to help you with a lung cancer. Yet it doesn't always happen - like in your lotto example.

 

[Kent C]

Just wondering... Has B.O. ever been Observed where Diketones are not present?

Yes.... a lot:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bronchiolitis_obliterans#Cause

 

[NorthOfAtlanta]

Just wondering... Has B.O. ever been Observed where Diketones are not present?

Here you go, many chemical causes and a similar problem in babies caused by viral infection.

http://www.healthline.com/health/bronchiolitis#Overview1

 

[Moonbogg]

You sound like a socialist...safety-nazi

Interesting name calling you have there. Your huge wall of text only serves to defend this potentially devastating risk. When I say we will be without excuse when and if people get injured, I include myself because I will have failed to do enough. When you speak, you single me out and include terrible language to describe me. I compared you to a lawyer for BT because you defend the inexcusable, but I didn't call you names or include toxic language like you do, language so terrible that its toxicity is only rivaled by that of the diketones you choose to defend despite the potentially horrible consequences.

 

[Kent C]

Translation: You don't agree with him.

True, but the designation is definitional and has nothing to do with whether I agree or disagree.

Try staying on topic just once.

 

[AndriaD]

Yes; they created a very similar thread not too long ago, got taken to school, back peddled and said maybe they went too far with their assumptions and now here we are a short time later with a very similar post featuring an "article" that proves nothing but implies everything.

Bottom line is if you don't want to vape diketones then don't. There are plenty of companys that will be happy to have your business and can back up their claims with test results and assume any company that does not have documents proving the juice to be free of these compounds contains them and avoid them.

That is how the free market works in this situation. You don't want diketones then only shop with vendors who can prove their juice doesn't contain them. Over time if more and more customers want certified diketone free juices then businesses will move to fill that niche and the companies that don't adapt will be left by the way side.

We are all adults and can make our own decisions. We do not need anyone to protect us nor do we need regulations on things that aren't even proven to be an issue when vaping. Its simple enough to avoid them and leave everyone else alone.

No one is forcing anyone to vape diketones. I don't really understand what the issue is. Some people don't eat nitrates because its an avoidable risk but no one is advocating a blanket ban on them. Personally I love cured meats.

Completely agree with everything you said.

Andria

 

[Kent C]

Interesting name calling you have there.

Did you not notice that the line was a variation of your first sentence. Did you not make that connection??? Didn't you consider your line name calling?

"I compared you to a lawyer for BT because you defend the inexcusable, but I didn't call you names or include toxic language like you do,"

In your circle, "a BT lawyer" IS toxic and more 'nasty' than, say, Bernie Sanders.

Playing the 'victim card' while not having a clue. Lol

 

[zoiDman]

Yes.... a lot:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bronchiolitis_obliterans#Cause

Yeah... Where is was kinda Going with this is that as I understand it, B.O. is Almost Always associated with some type of "Trigger" Chemical.

 

[Kent C]

Yeah... Where is was kinda Going with this is that as I understand it, B.O. is Almost Always associated with some type of "Trigger" Chemical.

Almost always? Did you read the link? Viruses, etc. I think 'almost always' overstates it while acknowledging that chemicals are include as 'suspects'.

"In rare instances, bronchiolitis obliterans may be caused by inhalation of airborne diacetyl" -hence "suspect".

 

[Moonbogg]

Saying that we should avoid diketones if we want, but ignore the threat it poses to others, is highly immoral and does not mirror the attitude and behavior of individuals in a healthy society where people care about each other. That sounds like typical cold heartedness to me and is mistaken for freedom, individuality etc.
If someone ends up with lung damage and they wonder why they had no clue about the dangers, what should we tell them? What would you tell them? Would you say, "hey man, I'm all about freedom so this is your fault for being ignorant". Yeah, that's real patriotic. What could we possibly say to such a person? Tell them we didn't care? Tell them it wasn't illegal so...tough luck? What do you say to such a person?
I would apologize for not doing enough. I would accept responsibility, because I participated in vape culture and I spread the word that vaping was minimal risk and basically pretty safe, so I contributed to their misconception that vaping was safe, but here they are with lung damage. All I could do is to accept responsibility for the part I played in that, the part we all play when we say, "go ahead, vape diketones".

 

[AndriaD]

Well, my point is that people don't rapidly expire from bronchiolitis obliterans in the manner that they do from asthma. By the way, have you ever tried a swig of tonic as a remedy?
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/10/101024144132.htm

Just a quick reply so we can get back to the topic -- wasn't sure that *drinking* tonic would have any effect on the airways, and the docs mentioned in this study seem to agree:

"Dr. Liggett cautions that eating bitter tasting foods or compounds would not help in the treatment of asthma. "Based on our research, we think that the best drugs would be chemical modifications of bitter compounds, which would be aerosolized and then inhaled into the lungs with an inhaler," he says."

Andria

 

[zoiDman]

...

"In rare instances, bronchiolitis obliterans may be caused by inhalation of airborne diacetyl" -hence "suspect".

How many People work in an Environment, such as a Microwave Popcorn Factory, where they are Exposed to High Level of Diketones during an 8 Hour Work Shift.

The Same Question can be Asked about How Many Vapers are Inhaling High Levels of Diketone via the e-Liquids they Chose to Use?

"Rare" seems to have varied Meanings. Rare can mean One Thing when compared to the Entire General Population. Whereas Rare may have a very Different Meaning when the Population Sub-Set is those who are Habitually Exposing themselves to High Levels of Diketones.