I noticed that Signature Smoke juice & Vaperite both list on their juices that they don't use Diacetyl.
Starting a LIST of diacetyl-free ejuice suppliers. Please, keep to JUST listing the supplier names!
- Thread starter texastumbleweed
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Betamorph Ecigs Makes his own juice and is a friend of mine, He will not make juices that are unsafe. I know we were talking and the amount of time and effort he has spent dealing with suppliers on the flavorings is amazing. He even went so far as to create his own Extracts for juices like coffee. He was doing a interview on Feelin' Foggy and even told some customers he would not make them the juices they wanted because of popcorn lung and the fact he couldn't put his reputation on the line for what if's. I am not employed with him and have no affiliation outside of being a loyal customer, But I would be the first to put my name on the line for him.... He has always put his customers first!
Also an employee at his store and you can read on his site, SHe has a Bachelors of Science degree in Biological Sciences from Colorado Mesa University with a minor in Psychology and emphasis in Chemistry.http://www.betamorphecigs.com/about-us/
Also an employee at his store and you can read on his site, SHe has a Bachelors of Science degree in Biological Sciences from Colorado Mesa University with a minor in Psychology and emphasis in Chemistry.http://www.betamorphecigs.com/about-us/
Last edited:
I think this is a good example of why vendors should publish their tests: Grant's VC is widely (v widely) thought to use Capella VC in it. Capella VC uses Acetyl Propionyl. However Grant says his juice has been tested and does not contain Acetyl Propionyl. It does not add up.
Grant's test was done by ECITA (a UK vaping trade body). They are unresponsive when asked about these tests. It is possible that the gas chromo/mass spec they do will not show 'trace' amounts in the results. But what defines 'trace'?
Vaperite's French Vanilla does. They say so right here:https://www.vaperite.com/organic-flavored-french-vanilla.html
Last edited:
There's a few more that Vaperite sells that have diacetyl, but they (for the most part) are labelled as such. At least they are being up front about it and not hiding behind similar ingredients with a different name. But hey, if one wants the really good custard, I am sure they don't care anyway.
Here is one of the ECITA tests that is floating around on the web. Diacety is not detected (with a limit of detection of 0.1%) I am not confident that 0.1% is low enough. Anyone who can do the math to compare this to the rat-studies please chip in here.
Also here is a pdf from FEMA (the flavorings body in US) giving info about Diacetyl substitutes and their danger. Note that they are not all classed as alpha-diketones.
I don't think anyone is claiming GVC contains Diacetyl, however, if it is true that Capella's is being used, Acetyl Proprionyl is indeed in the mix due to it being in the flavoring (this is coming from speaking with Tom from Capella's). Depending on the depth of testing, this chemical can show as Diacetyl when it is, in fact, not, however, many feel it is still just as dangerous when it comes to vaping, so they prefer to avoid it altogether.
I personally have mixed feelings. I enjoy Capella's VC and use it in my own e-liquid blends and I've felt no ill-effect from using it, however, that doesn't mean it's safe to use (nor any flavor using Acetoin or AP for that matter) or that it's not doing some harm. When compared to smoking, where you are inhaling burnt plant matter sprayed with a chemical cocktail, including Diacetyl, I see this chemical as the lesser of two evils. Studies still, to date, have not been performed to conclude the effects of Diacetyl or its alternatives on the human body (specifically the lungs or CNS) when small amounts are vaporized in the e-liquids we use, so we have little information to go on at this point. Perhaps we will in the future.
That being said, I do tend to lean towards it not being as destructive or unhealthy as some claim due to statistics from existing vapers using Capella's and inhaling far more than the average vaper (i.e. those that are cloud chasers, who go through 3-5x more e-liquid / day than your average vaper does). If Acetoin or Acetyl Proprionyl was indeed as dangerous as others are claiming, I feel we'd see some sort of health related reports from vapers given this flavoring has been available for quite a while now and it's become quite the standard when it comes to vanilla custard flavoring.
I personally have mixed feelings. I enjoy Capella's VC and use it in my own e-liquid blends and I've felt no ill-effect from using it, however, that doesn't mean it's safe to use (nor any flavor using Acetoin or AP for that matter) or that it's not doing some harm. When compared to smoking, where you are inhaling burnt plant matter sprayed with a chemical cocktail, including Diacetyl, I see this chemical as the lesser of two evils. Studies still, to date, have not been performed to conclude the effects of Diacetyl or its alternatives on the human body (specifically the lungs or CNS) when small amounts are vaporized in the e-liquids we use, so we have little information to go on at this point. Perhaps we will in the future.
That being said, I do tend to lean towards it not being as destructive or unhealthy as some claim due to statistics from existing vapers using Capella's and inhaling far more than the average vaper (i.e. those that are cloud chasers, who go through 3-5x more e-liquid / day than your average vaper does). If Acetoin or Acetyl Proprionyl was indeed as dangerous as others are claiming, I feel we'd see some sort of health related reports from vapers given this flavoring has been available for quite a while now and it's become quite the standard when it comes to vanilla custard flavoring.
Last edited:
I think the problem is that vendors don't know what's in the flavorings they use, and can't really know without independent testing. Obviosly some do independent testing and some (many) don't. I'm not sure if that is one of AEMSA's requirements either.
Nice post!
I would only add that the high-level consumers (cloud chasers) ain't been chasing clouds for years. It's a rather recent phenomenon -- especially as it pertains to the masses. And those insidious issues attributed (rightly or wrongly) to diacetyl, developed over several years.
Even still, I take no issue with your post -- it's quite levelheaded.
Last edited:
According to AEMSA's E-Liquid Manufacturing Standards Section 2.05 - A 1, Diacetyl is listed as a chemical that should not be added to or used in the creation of e-liquids. This statement, however, should be evaluated as I don't know of any e-liquid manufacturer that intentionally adds Diacetyl, as a stand-alone chemical, to their e-liquids. They add flavoring which contains Diacetyl, which is where the issue lies - vendors don't properly research their flavorings, so they could, on a technicality, get around this altogether.
It should read that flavorings containing Diacetyl should not be used or added to e-liquids, for clarity. That would, in itself, require any vendor that wishes to conform to AEMSA E-Liquid Manufacturing Standards to drop all flavors that contain Diacetyl in any amount.
Never mind (I edited this post). I understand what you're saying. Vaperite does sell liquid that contains diacetyl, but I don't know if they in fact add diacetyl -- there's a difference!
Indeed there is!
AEMSA also calls for proper labeling & disclosure. So if Acetyl Proprionyl or Acetoin is in an e-liquid, it should be clearly stated on their website and/or on the product labeling.
That being said, IMHO, there's no excuse for a vendor to not know if Diacetyl, Acetoin or Acetyl Proprionyl is in the flavoring they use to flavor their e-liquids (this isn't aimed at VapeRite). I've been in contact with the majority of the major flavor manufacturers in the past week (Capella's, TFA/TPA, Inawera, Hangsen, FlavorWest and a few unknowns just to ask) and they've all been very cooperative when it comes to telling me what flavors have these chemicals. For a vendor to not know isn't because the information isn't out there, it's because they either don't care, they're being lazy or they don't want to push the issue.
I didn't badger any of these companies. I sent one e-mail to each, got the information I needed and followed up if I had any questions. I'd think vendors with a more established relationship with some of these manufacturers would be able to get the information 10x easier and 100x faster than I did. I don't have a wholesale account with any of them, nor do I know any of these people personally, so if they can give me this information, any vendor can get it and tell their customers.
From my understanding, I thought there are different purity standards involved too. The TPA example was the manufacturer tested to 95% (apx) as allowed by the FDA. But that remaining 5% was what contained diacetyl when TPA tested to 98% (apx). That's why flavorings sold for eliquids needed to be rechecked/reworked by flavoring manufacturers.
Last edited:
I didn't notice anything specific on their standards PDF about purity of flavoring or PG/VG; only Nicotine is outlined - Section 2.02.
http://www.aemsa.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/AEMSA-Standards_Version-1-8.pdf (link to AEMSA E-Liquid Manufacturing Standards PDF on AEMSA's website)
Requiring flavoring to meet or exceed their standards would require all flavor manufacturers to step up and provide COA's. While I'd love to see that happen, I don't see it happening anytime soon, especially when some vendors offer 100+ flavors (FlavorWest & OneOnOne are the two offer the top of my head that I know have well over 100 flavors). It can be done, it'd be nice if they would do it, but it's not something that will happen in the next month or so, IMO.
Don't get me wrong though, I WANT to see more manufacturers step up and let us know what's in the flavors we use.
I think the questions and work you've done here is excellent. I'd like to see it continue. I'm not on any side other than figuring it out.
You state that it's possible for eliquid vendors to know when there is diacetyl in their flavorings. I question that as long as flavoring manufacturers are allowed to claim "diacetyl-free" to FDA min requirements of 95%. Why wouldn't a vendor believe them? Yet if the resulting eliquid is tested at 98%, there could be trace amounts of diacetyl / or it's replacements found due to the higher standard of testing applied to eliquids, but not to flavorings.
I don't know what AEMSA standards are, heck I'm not even sure I'm understanding this right. I just seem to sense a disconnect between flavoring manufacturers and what ppl are expecting from them for use in eliquids.
IMO we are talking about very small trace amounts anyway. It just appears that there are some flavoring manufacturers who are interested in marketing to the ecig industry and volunteered to test/rework their flavors accordingly. Then it seems like there are others. All of them can claim their flavors are "diacetyl free". I thought this was a list to identify the difference between the two.
One solution would be for a vendor to indepently test eliquids to confidently state the flavors they use are diacetyl (or replacements) free for the specific market of eliquids when the flavoring manufacturer doesn't provide a COA. Yea, I know that sounds kinda laughable.
In lieu of that, maybe stating the purity level of FDA min or 98% would help. Then the customer/vendor can make the decision whether to risk trace amounts of diacetyl/replacements or to go with something that has passed a higher standard for the ecig market.
No matter which, vaping is still a helluva lot better than smoking.
You state that it's possible for eliquid vendors to know when there is diacetyl in their flavorings. I question that as long as flavoring manufacturers are allowed to claim "diacetyl-free" to FDA min requirements of 95%. Why wouldn't a vendor believe them? Yet if the resulting eliquid is tested at 98%, there could be trace amounts of diacetyl / or it's replacements found due to the higher standard of testing applied to eliquids, but not to flavorings.
I don't know what AEMSA standards are, heck I'm not even sure I'm understanding this right. I just seem to sense a disconnect between flavoring manufacturers and what ppl are expecting from them for use in eliquids.
IMO we are talking about very small trace amounts anyway. It just appears that there are some flavoring manufacturers who are interested in marketing to the ecig industry and volunteered to test/rework their flavors accordingly. Then it seems like there are others. All of them can claim their flavors are "diacetyl free". I thought this was a list to identify the difference between the two.
One solution would be for a vendor to indepently test eliquids to confidently state the flavors they use are diacetyl (or replacements) free for the specific market of eliquids when the flavoring manufacturer doesn't provide a COA. Yea, I know that sounds kinda laughable.
In lieu of that, maybe stating the purity level of FDA min or 98% would help. Then the customer/vendor can make the decision whether to risk trace amounts of diacetyl/replacements or to go with something that has passed a higher standard for the ecig market.
No matter which, vaping is still a helluva lot better than smoking.
Last edited:
The majority, yes. The clearly label which ones do and do not contain Diacetyl, Acetoin and Acetyl Proprionyl on their site. If you don't buy direct from them, it'd be up to the vendor who's reselling for them to label the products on their site. ECigExpress has a note on flavors (from FlavourArt and other vendors) and RTSVapes only sells those that do not, IIRC.
What's a little creepy is that a juice maker can say that their juices which contain these substances are all-natural -- and from what I understand, technically be correct..
Yep, slowly making that shift to vaping unflavored full-time...
Yep, slowly making that shift to vaping unflavored full-time...
The flavoring portion of ejuice being such a small amount, its "remaining 5%" would easily pass the "98% free of ____" test of the finished liquid product.
In other words, if 4% of the flavoring was an undesired molecule, and that flavoring was only 10% of the completed eliquid, then there would only be 0.4% in the juice. (The liquid would then easily test at being 98% free of that chemical.)
So 98% testing of eliquid would not be more strict than 95% testing of flavoring. It would be more lax.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
