BOOM:
Actually, on second thought, that picture may have been photoshopped. I don't know. But you don't want to mess with them.
Sleazy propaganda re diacetyl in e-cigs
- Thread starter CarolT
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
BOOM:
Actually, on second thought, that picture may have been photoshopped. I don't know. But you don't want to mess with them.
They still vape the stuff from that eliquid company who put TITANIUM DIOXIDE in the juice to make it white.
People vaped that stuff.I'll have to go look and see what the person(s) who spilled that fact got given a hard time. The ingredient was removed, thankfully. If everybody just shut up we'd still be vaping it.
Mike...it does?
So you're saying some journalist that writes for an ecig blog that gives eliquid reviews and discount coupons is able to give information that is better than what Dr. F. gave us?
Dr. F. said it is an avoidable risk. This "blog" says "To me, this topic seems heavily overblown by the media and I don’t think vapers should be overly concerned about diacetyl..."
"since smokers have been inhaling this chemical for years and bronchiolitis obliterans has never been the result, it’s likely that the amount of diacetyl required to cause popcorn lung it well beyond the levels found in cigarettes or e-cig vapor. Smoking has been proven to cause plenty of serious health conditions, but popcorn lung isn’t one of them"
He selectively skipped over the part of the interview where Dr. F. said that is perhaps because diketones do do damage which is often misdiagnosed as COPD, etc.
That smokers have been inhaling that stuff for years is of no concern to me. That is precisely why I quit smoking....because I realized it's probably the worst thing you can do to your body.
Well he's entitled to his opinion. He did get SOME things right. I did have to laugh a little when he was saying how hard it is to get information, and another commenter asks how to get it, "it's different every place I go to....."
virgin vapors uses naturual flavorings and claims they are diacetyl free....that suprised me. I am almost tempted to have that tested myself, since natural organic flavorings have naturally occuring diacetyls....they can only be taken out in a lab. So either they are sending the flavorings to a lab first to have it removed, or have switched over to synthetic flavorings.
for all this talk about "advocacy", it seems that when a fellow vaper "advocates" for the safety of themselves and fellow vapers they receive quite a lot of flak.
Further the article says "...It’s unfortunate that e-juice makers are feeling pressured to PROVE their products don’t contain diacetyl, since it’s the ingredient manufacturers who should be responsible for backing up their claims about diacetyl-free products..."
This is all like a massive Whos On Base comedy skit. Point downstream, upstream, but that poor commenter still doesn't know where to even get the basic information about who has diacetyls and who doesn't.
I think it's *unfortunate* that consumers who are buying products can't get valid information, and yes, they should have to prove it. If they can't prove it WITH A TEST then it isn't valid.
Last edited:
BOOM:
Actually, on second thought, that picture may have been photoshopped. I don't know. But you don't want to mess with them.
That looks like FDA's website logo. And the second man wears a "Police" tag. Sounds legit, eh?
The actual badge looks like this:
That looks like FDA's website logo. And the second man wears a "Police" tag. Sounds legit, eh?
The actual badge looks like this:
Police Raid Rawesome Foods, Dump Raw Milk - Forbes
Thank you Hazy. I hope the irony of having "Police" instead of "FDA" right in the title is not lost on you?
Last edited:
smoking never caused popcorn lung.
popcorn lung was only found in a very small percentage
of industry workers in the microwave popcorn industry and
most recently in a facility that roasts coffee. only one non-
industry worker has ever been diagnosed with popcorn lung,
apparently a long time(20 year)heavy consumer of microwave
popcorn. other than some one who already has health issues
with their lungs i can not foresee any one vaping having an
issue with these substances. i put this in the category of fluoride
in tooth paste,chlorinated drinking water and,glutton.
there perhaps,maybe a fraction of a percent of the population
that perhaps, maybe adversely affected by these substances
but, at such a low rate as not to warrant undue regulation when
a simple disclaimer on a label would suffice.
even with the so called bad flavors vaping is still 98% safer
than cigarettes giving it the potential for harm right up there
with drinking tap water.
yep,i'm going with its safe.
regards
mike
I suppose you didn't read past the heading;
A multi-agency SWAT team hit Venice, CA , Rawesome Foods arresting three people and dumping $10,000 worth of raw milk:
See the part where it says "Multi Agency"?
Read the rest of the article, caramel. It's very interesting.
Here's another article from National Review for your viewing pleasure:
National Review
Your posit has been that the FDA and other US Federal agencies haven't SWAT TEAMS,
however, they do.
Surely you'll take Forbes and National Review articles at their word.
Nobody is making anything up
Why insist that this isn't happening when the evidence is being presented to you.
Federal Agencies usually act together with local authorities though not always.
Moreover, a SWAT TEAM is a police unit whether federal or local.
Had I the time or inclination I'd list about a dozen FEDERAL SWAT raids on
organic farms, retailers, dairies, ETC which have occurred since around 2009
However, I'd prefer for you to do the research yourself
so you can find what's happening on your own as it's evident that you prefer to argue than to
admit that your argument is invalid.
Have a nice day, caramel.
Stay out of trouble.
Regards,
Hazy
I hope this doesn't upset anybody or violates any rules
but in the interest of having a common unit of verbal exchange, ie communication
I feel the need to define irony:
i·ro·ny1
ˈīrənē/
noun
noun: irony
the expression of one's meaning by using language that normally signifies the opposite, typically for humorous or emphatic effect.
"“Don't go overboard with the gratitude,” he rejoined with heavy irony"
synonyms: sarcasm, causticity, cynicism, mockery, satire, sardonicism
"that note of irony in her voice"
As well as police:
po·lice
pəˈlēs/
noun
plural noun: police
1.
the civil force of a national or local government, responsible for the prevention and detection of crime and the maintenance of public order.
synonyms: police force, police officers, policemen, policewomen, officers of the law, law officers, authorities, constabulary;
note to moderators: If this post violates any rules please be assured my intention is solely clear communication
and is not my intention to ridicule or insult.
The definitions posted are from Merriam Webster's and have not been looked up
in the urban dictionary.
Please feel free to delete this post if necessary
Hazy
but in the interest of having a common unit of verbal exchange, ie communication
I feel the need to define irony:
i·ro·ny1
ˈīrənē/
noun
noun: irony
the expression of one's meaning by using language that normally signifies the opposite, typically for humorous or emphatic effect.
"“Don't go overboard with the gratitude,” he rejoined with heavy irony"
synonyms: sarcasm, causticity, cynicism, mockery, satire, sardonicism
"that note of irony in her voice"
As well as police:
po·lice
pəˈlēs/
noun
plural noun: police
1.
the civil force of a national or local government, responsible for the prevention and detection of crime and the maintenance of public order.
synonyms: police force, police officers, policemen, policewomen, officers of the law, law officers, authorities, constabulary;
note to moderators: If this post violates any rules please be assured my intention is solely clear communication
and is not my intention to ridicule or insult.
The definitions posted are from Merriam Webster's and have not been looked up
in the urban dictionary.
Please feel free to delete this post if necessary
Hazy
I suppose you didn't read past the heading;
A multi-agency SWAT team hit Venice, CA , Rawesome Foods arresting three people and dumping $10,000 worth of raw milk:
See the part where it says "Multi Agency"?
Read the rest of the article, caramel. It's very interesting.
Here's another article from National Review for your viewing pleasure:
National Review
Your posit has been that the FDA and other US Federal agencies haven't SWAT TEAMS,
however, they do.
Surely you'll take Forbes and National Review articles at their word.
Nobody is making anything up
Why insist that this isn't happening when the evidence is being presented to you.
Federal Agencies usually act together with local authorities though not always.
Moreover, a SWAT TEAM is a police unit whether federal or local.
Had I the time or inclination I'd list about a dozen FEDERAL SWAT raids on
organic farms, retailers, dairies, ETC which have occurred since around 2009
However, I'd prefer for you to do the research yourself
so you can find what's happening on your own as it's evident that you prefer to argue than to
admit that your argument is invalid.
Have a nice day, caramel.
Stay out of trouble.
Regards,
Hazy
Sorry to disappoint you Hazy, but I did read the "multi-agency" part. It just confirms that FDA by itself can't enforce anything. They need police / judicial for that. However police / judicial already have everything they need in order to adress homicide (by diacetyl poisoning or whatever). At which point the role of FDA re vaping becomes very questionable.
Anyway it became a moot point after steve named "the Wolf" as his choice of agency to be in charge of vaping.
Did you open the link? Pretty much every very government agency has SWAT teams. They call and have the local police participate as common courtesy...
FDA does not have a SWAT team and they call local police for enforcement, not as a courtesy.
Correct, you didn't say others shouldn't vape it. Not sure why you keep pointing this out. You did move the goalposts though from what you previously said in post number 64 where you said "I have posted here (and two or three others did as well), that I dont want to vape anything containing diacetyl (and other diketones), period." I noted that there was more than this to your first post by noting that you spoke in "we" terms rather than only "I don't want to vape anything containing diacetyl period."
If you are arguing that it should be disclosed, then you are arguing it should be regulated. "Should be disclosed" is regulation. If okay with any vendor not disclosing, then not calling forth a regulation for all vendors.
If you choose with your wallet, then no need for any vendor to disclose. You may have that desire and hope, but not a requirement for all vendors, thus not a "should be" situation.
In current shared reality, I believe you are aware that many vendors choose not to disclose. Therefore, this ought to be okay with you unless you are arguing for a regulation whereby it is mandatory that all vendors do disclose and if they do not something bad/punishable happens to them. Whereas, you are also claiming that you choose with your wallet. Therefore, it only choosing with your wallet, then you will likely choose among the vendors that do disclose and avoid those that do not.
Advocating for safety of one's own self is reasonable and to be expected.
Advocating for safety of others is where things get dicey. FDA is advocating for safety of others. Why are they taking flak, do you think?
Again, the rather simple point in all this is that everyone reading this thread likely knows this issue is being addressed and there are vape products available right now that are (in all likelihood) diacetyl-free. Thus you can choose with your wallet. Industry is fine as it is. Plus will likely improve in the way that diacetyl crowd would like to see, but might not get to a point that diacetyl-free crowd would consider ideal.
The less simple part is when a fellow vaper starts advocating that all vendors must comply with diacetyl-free crowds demands and do some sort of regulation. However that is worded, expect to receive some flak, because you just done ventured into the territory of industry regulations to appease something that you want. You are telling industry how to run its business. And at times you are suggesting that if a business doesn't comply it deserves to be put out of business.
"You" in the above paragraph is general you, and may not be specifically applicable to a diacetyl-free member participating in this thread. Then again, it might.
If you think "they should have to prove it," then you are advocating for what the FDA is advocating for. Perhaps not everything the FDA is advocating for, but at least some of it.
Furthermore, as I did on the original Dr. F. thread and on this thread, I will again establish that if you base your diacetyl-free position mostly to entirely on third party lab results, then you cannot claim to be one that is truly in the know. For all you know those tests were doctored, in error, or otherwise false. Your advocacy therefore is not based on actual science that is providing you 100% certainty, but is based on faith/trust. Which will come up if you ever feel mislead. And IMO, you deserve to take flak for this point because it is lacking integrity to claim you were mislead when in reality you could've done this on your own, but instead chose to base it on what another person says.
The other rather simple point is you don't want to do own testing cause it is too expensive. But when any vendor suggests the same, suddenly they are a bad/unwanted vendor. Can you take a guess how I might react to a vaper who says this is a requirement for them personally but doesn't want to pay for the testing themselves?
This is where it gets "sticky". On one hand, there is a valid argument to require disclosure so that consumers can choose with their wallet (informed choices). On the other hand, that type of regulation requiring disclosure and labeling can be abused, such as what's happening with CA Prop 65. So, do we tell people that their on their own, or do we make sure that disclosure regulation is worded in such a way in that it cannot be abused by those in power?
In the world of the federal government there is no such thing as 'a little bit of regulation".
I don't know how it cannot be abused. Even on this thread, I don't think the people who desire disclosure (from all vendors) would agree on it being exactly the same way. And if perchance all on this thread did (via posts that attempt to prove me wrong), then I would say not all vapers would agree. Some would want lab test results or it is meaningless to them. Others would say that is unnecessary and that a simple sentence or two on a label is all the information they are requesting.
People are on their own in this situation, but not isolated. Industry has changed on this. How has that occurred in these under regulated times we live in? I would suggest it is because a vendor has heard feedback from consumers who say they love the quality the vendor provides, but really wish they disclosed the information and if they do not, then the consumer may look elsewhere. Vendor heard that and chose to decide in way that makes sense for them. And here we are, where some do and some don't. But reality shows that some do and that if you are so concerned with this issue that you absolutely will not purchase from a vendor who does not, then you do have options in the under regulated market.
I can't disagree with your statement given the current environment and the politics of vapor products. However, just to be clear, I wasn't recommending regulation, but rather posing a question regarding "information only" regulation and how it might be crafted to resist corrupted use.
Re: bold - that isn't just 'sticky', it's an impossibility because power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely (Lord Acton). And the 'do we make sure' part requires more regulation upon regulation. That is how 'solutions' become worse than the problems. Where making children's pajamas fireproof, exposed children to carcinogenic substances, just for one example.
- Status
Similar threads
