Johnson Creek preliminary lab results

[DC2]

Just found this on the Johnson Creek website, hope it hasn't already been posted...
News from Johnson Creek Blog Archive Preliminary Lab Results on Johnson Creek Original Smoke Juice

Preliminary Lab Results on Johnson Creek Original Smoke juice
by Christian Berkey on August 5th, 2009


In the last few weeks there has been a lot of focus on the safety of, and ingredients, in e-cigarettes. Johnson Creek Original Smoke juice has always been focused on making the highest quality product available and, because of that, has not been mentioned in most reports in the media and elsewhere. While our customers have enjoyed the great tastes of Johnson Creek in their favorite e-cigarette, they’ve also been purchasing from a company using pharmaceutical grade ingredients and familiar flavorings.

Many of our peers in the industry have been working in the last few weeks to bring data to the public with additional information beyond the FDA reports of July 22nd. We applaud the public safety efforts of both the FDA and the responsible companies working to provide the additional facts.

A preliminary lab analysis was done prior to the FDA’s report for Johnson Creek Enterprises. This independent lab analysis was commissioned to show the components of the ingredients before they’re turned into the flavors you love. The lab used reports available in the industry at the time to establish criteria for testing and we’ve attached our results below.

While this report shows the basics of the great product everyone has come to expect in our Smoke Juice, it’s only the beginning. We’re currently working with multiple laboratories to commission a more in depth study based on both the published FDA research and expert guidance in chemical and nitrosamine analysis. We had hoped to finish this testing quickly, but reliable validation and testing can easily take weeks.

In the mean time, we invite you to take a look at our first report and be confident that Johnson Creek Enterprises is continuing in it’s tradition of making the highest quality, best tasting e-liquid on the market. It’s why Johnson Creek Original Smoke Juice, is America’s Smoke Juice.

“Characterization of Liquid ‘Smoke Juice’ for Electronic Cigarettes”
- Analytical testing performed by Alliance Technologies

 

[DC2]

I just skimmed through it quickly, but noticed a few things of interest.

I hope I'm not misunderstanding what I'm reading, and would be happy to be corrected...
1) They get their nicotine from Sigma-Aldrich in St Louis
2) It appears the juice tested had 6.97% nicotine in the juice
3) It appears the vapor had only 0.44% nicotine

No time right now to read more right now...

 

[kabomb]

Not sure if I'm right, but wouldn't 6.97% nicotine be 69.7mg?

 

[pbusardo]

I already posted a similar thread. What bothers me is that I contacted Sigma about the nicotine, toying with the idea of making my own juice.

They asked me what I would be using it for. When I told them, they said it wasn't for human consumption. And then proceeded to ask me who was using it in e-liquid. I didn't say a word.

I did approach JC and asked them to comment. This is what they said:

"With regard to your below questions. Although we do not discuss specific vendors, our lab report included generic MSDS information that the outside lab pulled for nicotine. All of our ingredients are US sourced and of the highest pharmaceutical grade approved for human consumption.

Please let us know if you need anything else.

Cheers,

Customer Support Team


I invite you to make your own conclusions.

 

[DaBrat]

Not sure if I'm right, but wouldn't 6.97% nicotine be 69.7mg?

The test sample was a 15 ml bottle so it would be about 1.04 ml of that. So if the correct conversion is 10 mg/ml (could be wrong) thats a little over 10mg. Since this was volume not weight that conversion is iffy at best.. probably testing low/mid range juice. If correct that would be their 11mg.

 

[dawghouse]

Is there another purpose for nicotine other than human consumption? Pesticide perhaps? Yikes! Not for human consumption doesn't sound like pharmacy grade of anything!

 

[joedirt]

Is it possible, they just threw in representative MSDS for the two major chemicals found... and not a statement of supplier sourcing? Is it common for the test lab to mention the MSDS from Sigma-Aldrich because that was the ingredients?

I'm wondering if they don't get it from China which potentially is worse then "not for human consumption".

 

[DC2]

I'm wondering if they don't get it from China which potentially is worse then "not for human consumption".

Well, they seem to be saying no to that assumption...

I did approach JC and asked them to comment. This is what they said:

"All of our ingredients are US sourced and of the highest pharmaceutical grade approved for human consumption."

 

[larcat]

Unless Heidie at JC was straight up lying to me, they do indeed source 100% domestically. Check my original post in this thread for my similar concerns, and then the follow up I posted.

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/new-members-forum/32236-johnson-creek-double-speak.html

 

[TropicalBob]

The really MAJOR problem I have with Johnson Creek is their secrecy. Even before Christian started that company, he was extremely secretive on this board, saying others would copy his methods if they knew them. Fine. But when product came on the market, it needed lab testing and ingredient listings. We got neither.

And the secrecy remains -- totally unnecessary now and working against the best interests of e-smokers. How long do you think the FDA will allow snake oil liquid without ingredient lists, once that agency gets firm hold on our practice?

JC should have done the right thing long ago, should have pioneered safety in all ways. The company has taken many steps in the right direction, and is a leader among e-liquid suppliers, but the secrecy sucks, and we should have had answers long ago.

 

[HighTech]

Well, they seem to be saying no to that assumption...

Nicotine for human consumption is available in the US to qualified companies. The same nicotine that is used in other NRT's. All sales are tracked and reported to a government agency... and in some instances, state agencies as well. It is no longer approved as a pesticide or for pesticide use by the EPA due to exposure risk.

 

[GregH]

The really MAJOR problem I have with Johnson Creek is their secrecy. Even before Christian started that company, he was extremely secretive on this board, saying others would copy his methods if they knew them. Fine. But when product came on the market, it needed lab testing and ingredient listings. We got neither.

And the secrecy remains -- totally unnecessary now and working against the best interests of e-smokers. How long do you think the FDA will allow snake oil liquid without ingredient lists, once that agency gets firm hold on our practice?

JC should have done the right thing long ago, should have pioneered safety in all ways. The company has taken many steps in the right direction, and is a leader among e-liquid suppliers, but the secrecy sucks, and we should have had answers long ago.

I'm really confused here. I admit to being a relative newbie (only a little over 3 months in). But when I started researching e-liquids, JC was the only company I found who listed all of their ingredients, both on their site and on every bottle. Plus their stuff is all made domestically and comes in very responsible packaging with safety seals, child-proof caps, and requisite warnings.

Now I realize that there is probably some history I'm not aware of. Maybe there was a time period when JC did not list their ingredients and operated in a cloud of secrecy. But that cloud seems to have been lifted now. And they appear, at least to me, to be one of the more open and straightforward suppliers out there.

Here's what decided it for me when I decided on who was going to get my business for e-liquid:

Did I want to use a product from:

• A supplier who shipped in plain, clear dropper bottles labeled simply as MLB or CML or CHOC.
• Or a supplier who listed all ingredients on each bottle.

 

[joedirt]

great so they say the source it domestically and it is pharma quality.

- Why did the lab report contain MSDS from Sigma-Aldrich? Doesn't this imply they use Nicotine from Sigma?
- If so, was Sigma lying? Was the poster mistaken? "[Sigma] said it wasn't for human consumption"

I think JC should at least deny sourcing Sigma nic or this needs more investigation.

 

[GreySaber]

- If so, was Sigma lying? Was the poster mistaken? "[Sigma] said it wasn't for human consumption"
.

What is their nicotine for then? Is it for lab tests on rats perhaps?

Does nicotine have an industrial application we are unaware of? Since it's not a pesticide anymore.....

That to me leaves human consumption, animal tests, and what?

 

[DC2]

What is their nicotine for then? Is it for lab tests on rats perhaps?

Does nicotine have an industrial application we are unaware of? Since it's not a pesticide anymore.....

That to me leaves human consumption, animal tests, and what?

Maybe they supply it for approved NRTs like the patch, the gum, the lozenges, and what have you.
Maybe they don't CURRENTLY want to be associated with electronic cigarettes.

In time, this will pass, and the truth will definitely win out.
But for now, we are all pariahs.

Someday we will be looked upon as pioneers and heros.
Time has a way of making things right.

 

[GreySaber]

Maybe they supply it for approved NRTs like the patch, the gum, the lozenges, and what have you.

That would still be human consumption via approved methods. The only thing I can imagine is that sort of thing where you inject it into rats and take observations.

 

[joedirt]

That would still be human consumption

The word 'consume'... A patch is not human consumption. Is applied to skin different then ingested for FDA crap?? your skin is an amazing organ. Nicotine gum, however is a different matter.

Why can't nicotine be used in pesticide?????? in the US???

Nicotine-Based Pesticide May Explain Bee Colony Collapse Disorder

It may be they know more in France than we do in the U.S. There they have banned the use of a class of pesticides known as neonicotinoids. France, Italy, Germany and Slovenia found that the nicotine-based substance impaired the bees’ navigational and foraging abilities.

The insecticide is sold under the name of Poncho, Gaucho and Cruiser, made by Bayer and Syngenta, and put on the seeds prior to planting

 

[joedirt]

Ok looking at Sigma website:

Under
N3876 (−)-Nicotine ≥99% (GC), liquid --- Synonym: (−)-1-Methyl-2-(3-pyridyl)pyrrolidine
* Neurotransmitters > Cholinergics > Agonists
* Nutrition Research > Biochemicals Found in Plants - sorted by compound type > Alkaloid

Uses are Nutritional RESEARCH


However... they also have:


36733 Fluka (−)-Nicotine PESTANAL®, --- Synonym: (−)-1-Methyl-2-(3-pyridyl)pyrrolidine
# Pesticides > Insecticides > Botanicals
# Pesticides & Metabolites > Alpha sort > N-P



So it appears their same Nicotine is really also sold as PESTANAL.

This takes me back to original question.. Why is the JC testlab report including the MSDS for Sigma????

 

[hxj]

\This takes me back to original question.. Why is the JC testlab report including the MSDS for Sigma????

I don't understand... didn't JC already answer this question?

"With regard to your below questions. Although we do not discuss specific vendors, our lab report included generic MSDS information that the outside lab pulled for nicotine."

This seems reasonable to me. And when I read the original report a couple of weeks ago before seeing this thread, I just assumed that the MSDS was there for reference, not implying where the nicotine came from.

 

[pbusardo]

Or it does come from Sigma and they don't want anyone to know because Sigma says it's not for human consumption.

I just sent an email to Alliance Technologies who did the report. Let's see what they say:

"Hello. I’m trying to understand something about the attached report I found posted on a website.

Is the Material Safety Datasheet contained on page 21 for the nicotine element of the report used as example or is it the actual nicotine product used?

Thank you."