The Anti-Diacetyl Meeting Room

[markarich159]

CASAA is not looking out for the vaping industry anymore than we are looking out for the tobacco industry. We have no interest in promoting their financial interests over the health interests of the consumer. That is not our job. Our job is to just keep the product itself available, so consumers have a CHOICE.

Just re-read that last paragraph and think about what you said. If your job is to just keep the product itself available; then logically; your primary focus of interest is the industry/ suppliers. From your subforum:

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/casaa/76645-attention-suppliers.html

If this thread illustrates your true concern above and over the diacetyl issue, you really should change your name and acronym. You can't serve 2 masters. You're either for the consumer or you're for the industry(they're two seperate and oppposing factions). I don't want to further derail or change the tone of this thread, but , again, as always, I find this disturbing.

 

[Shan B]

SimpleSins I did read all 17 pages, enough so that I am SO tired of elders such as yourself so angry and bitter at the world for mistakes YOU have made or things you can't change at the snap of YOUR fingers. I'm noticing you take offense easily to anyone who doesn't 100% agree with you, but realize. YOU chose to smoke and again YOU choose to vape. Just the same as you have the choice to moan at people, like me, or REALLY make a difference, and bark up the right tree of the companies at fault here. If you want change it's not going to be in a forum of people who don't care for your attitude or your approach to forcing your opinion on people. These companies have e-mails, phones, etc... start there.

My mom is 67 and has the same approach you do on getting your point across. And would be the same reason her and I know to avoid certain subjects, even if we agree on them. All your sarcasm does is validate these people I'm talking about. You're like a bible basher, you don't care WHO you step on or who you bash, as long as you get YOUR point across. I'm not going to argue with you, but yet AGAIN tell you, your beef is NOT within your own community of fellow vapers, it lies within the companies that manufacture and allow it to be used. PERIOD. You are barking up the wrong tree. You think belittling people's opinions HERE is getting you anywhere with these companies? You want change? You want to see improvements then go demand these companies to disclose all ingredients used, because the way you are talking to people here isn't getting you anything but a negative view as a person.

I understand trying to milk a few years, but the way you talk to people is slightly disrespectful and rude, in trying to make YOUR point valid. I said (which you didn't bother to quote) that they should list the ingredients, as well as the amounts used, no matter how minuscule. Which I think any company should have to do before putting any product in an open market. So why are you getting snippy with me?? Musta been something I said. Doesn't feel so nice when someone calls you out now does it? You aren't any better than any of the people here, so please, stop acting like only YOUR opinion is the only one right here.

A LOT OF THE ABOVE TYPE BEHAVIOR EDITED FOR LENGTH

I love how you call the kettle black, but yet are the main cause of people arguing back and forth. As I said again and again. If you want change go get it, the only thing you will get in an open forum is arguing, which I see you enjoy. I never said Diacetly was okay to use, because in ANY circumstance, it's not. But like any drama addict, you'll pick apart what a person says to decode it to your own liking, to again, get YOUR point across. As I'm sure you will this post or any other post that doesn't bow down or put you on a pedestal.

I never once said your opinion was wrong, or anyone's for that matter, only the approach you take on getting your voice heard. You shine with knowledge, but the way you talk to people is just flat out UGLY, making any valid points you may have questionable.

This will be my last post here, as I want to avoid giving fuel to your anger towards whatever or whoever. I hope companies stop using Diacetyl, which I think over time will happen. Change doesn't happen over night. Just keep using companies that DO clear their names. Keep posting facts, but I would suggest keeping your angry and bitter opinions to the companies it should be directed at, not people who agree with you.

I'm not going to stop ordering from some companies just because a dozen of their products might have diacetyl in them, but rather avoid the one's that do. When most companies remove Diacetyl, will there be other chemicals to be targeted? I'm sure there will be. The water we drink, the food we eat, and the air we breath all have life threatening chemicals in them. It took people darn near 15 years to out chemtrails and the compounds in them, voices are just now being heard and "unsafe level" tests are being conducted, just the same as fluoride being around for 30++ years. Companies, people, including our own government use chemicals in EVERYTHING that will someday lead to our demise. I hope with the pressures of people being aware of the damages of diacetyl something will be done... as you see a lot of companies have already removed it from their ingredients. The companies who don't remove it will surely feel the effects of it in their wallets.

I'm sure this will be picked apart, yet again.

 

[markarich159]

Where is your study for the levels of diacteyl in e-liquid? The studies I've seen and the OSHA reports indicate that the danger is in large amounts and that they have no answer for minute exposure. YOU are making the assumption that minute exposure is just as bad as large exposure and therefore dangerous in e-cigarettes.

Diacetyl - Medpedia

Read the bibliography of this page , it contains all the major studies done up to 2008 and there has been at least one more major peer-reveiwed study since then.

Where is your study for the levels of diacteyl in e-liquid? So now you WANT studies; any other time ecig/eliquid is mentioned studies are unimportant to you. Again, you can't have it both ways. Don't dig yourself any deeper, it now sounds like you're actually defending diacetyl . And, I'm done; this is now approaching ridiculous.

 

[kristin]

Please help me to understand why your postings seem to be at odds with the mission statement of CASAA-

"Our mission is to ensure the availability of effective, affordable and reduced harm alternatives to smoking by increasing public awareness and education; to encourage the testing and development of products to achieve acceptable safety standards and reasonable regulation; and to promote the benefits of reduced harm alternatives."

Maybe I grew up in the wrong generation. My example of a consumer advocate was Ralph Nader, and I cannot conceive of him worrying about hurting the corporate wallets or 'who might hear' when it came to protecting the consumer from business interests who didn't really give a damn.

CASAA is protecting the consumer against misinformation from the government and public health groups about smokeless alternatives. CASAA is about your right to access those alternatives. Nader was a consumer advocate against bad business practices. I hate to use it, but CASAA is more like the NRA. They don't protect gun companies, they protect your right to bear arms. They have an advantage, because the right to bear arms is an actual right. There is no "right to vape."

Maybe once our mission is complete and harm reduction is accepted and practiced without opposition, CASAA could focus on protecting consumers against bad business practices in the industry. Right now, the focus is trying to protect the consumer's ability to access the products at all and hear the truth about them as compared to smoking.

 

[SimpleSins]

EDITED ONCE AGAIN FOR BREVITY
I'm sure this will be picked apart, yet again.

Gosh I'm sorry if I said something to make you feel that way. And thank you for adding so much information to the discussion.

 

[kristin]

Diacetyl - Medpedia

Read the bibliography of this page , it contains all the major studies done up to 2008 and there has been at least one more major peer-reveiwed study since then.

Where is your study for the levels of diacteyl in e-liquid? So now you WANT studies; any other time ecig/eliquid is mentioned studies are unimportant to you. Again, you can't have it both ways. Don't dig yourself any deeper, it now sounds like you're actually defending diacetyl . And, I'm done; this is now approaching ridiculous.

Quit putting words into my mouth or implying I have ever said any such thing. CASAA is collecting money to fund studies. I have NEVER been against studies.

I am not "defending diacetyl," I'm just not freaking out over it any more than I'm freaking out over the levels of carcinogens or the DEG found in e-cigarettes.

If you are afraid of diacetyl, then don't buy liquid with it. But don't raise a panic over it without any evidence that it is even dangerous at the levels found in e-liquid. Caution does not have to mean panic and I'm seeing unsubstantiated panic in people.

 

[shanagan]

Before one more person says AGAIN that we don't know that harm has been shown at levels in the .02 ppm range, please, PLEASE read this 6 factory study published in 2006.(I've posted it about four times already, but have received zero response upon this link, so I will post an excerpt of the study's findings as well:

At this time, insufficient data exist
on which to base workplace exposure
standards or recommended exposure
limits for butter flavorings.
Because the risk for occupational
lung disease may be partly due to
short-term peak exposures, an exposure
limit based on an 8-hour TWA
may not be sufficient to protect
workers. Moreover, because flavorings
are complex mixtures of many
chemicals, most of which have not
been evaluated with respect to inhalation
toxicity, focusing solely on
diacetyl air concentrations may not
be adequate to assess risk in different
plants using a variety of different
flavorings. Few flavoring chemicals
have an Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA)-
permissible exposure limit (PEL) or
a NIOSH-recommended exposure
limit (REL).14 The lowest mean
TWA diacetyl air concentrations that
we measured in mixing areas (0.02
ppm personal exposure and 0.2 ppm
area air concentration) were at a
plant with an affected mixer (plant
D); therefore, it would seem prudent
to maintain worker exposures to diacetyl
below these levels.
Because entirely safe levels of occupational
exposure to butter-flavoring
chemicals are not known, it is
important to limit worker exposures
as much as possible. The most reliable
way to do this will require
microwave popcorn companies to reengineer
their production processes
to closed systems that eliminate the
need for workers to handle flavorings
in open containers and to open
the lids of heated tanks to check on
their contents.

 

[shanagan]

Quit putting words into my mouth or implying I have ever said any such thing. CASAA is collecting money to fund studies. I have NEVER been against studies.

I am not "defending diacetyl," I'm just not freaking out over it any more than I'm freaking out over the levels of carcinogens or the DEG found in e-cigarettes.

If you are afraid of diacetyl, then don't buy liquid with it. But don't raise a panic over it without any evidence that it is even dangerous at the levels found in e-liquid. Caution does not have to mean panic and I'm seeing unsubstantiated panic in people.

Sticking one's head in the sand in re: potential danger does not solve anything. We all know there are people (hey, like smokers) who will stick their head in the sand and ignore health risks as long as someone, somewhere says "hey, no need to panic here."

 

[hairball]

Yes, Trashguy, Esmoke came up in the other thread on diacetyl, where one of our wise elders mentioned esmoke as the only vendor in the United States who is actually doing the lab tests that show safe, noncontaminated mixing of ingredients. That's not to say the others are contaminated; it is just that esmoke has gone above and beyond what any other vendor has done to ensure the integrity of their product and to have the ingredient information readily available for their customers in order to make as educated a choice as possible. That's not to say that all the ingredients are 100% safe, but the opportunity is there for you to investigate as much as you need to feel comfortable and to look for those that you know you want to avoid.

This would be great if all vendors would do this. This would stand up in court so that the FDA would have an even harder time trying to ban ecigs. Any thoughts?

 

[banjo]

I'm sorry Kristin about the attacks on you and other posters. I started this thread - read the first post - to warn against and avoid this type of flaming, sniping, and personal attacks by posters. It hasn't worked. I'm now wishing that some moderator would just close this thread down.

 

[kristin]

Just re-read that last paragraph and think about what you said. If your job is to just keep the product itself available; then logically; your primary focus of interest is the industry/ suppliers. From your subforum:

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/casaa/76645-attention-suppliers.html

If this thread illustrates your true concern above and over the diacetyl issue, you really should change your name and acronym. You can't serve 2 masters. You're either for the consumer or you're for the industry(they're two seperate and oppposing factions). I don't want to further derail or change the tone of this thread, but , again, as always, I find this disturbing.

That thread was started back in March for a poll to determine if the FDA was intercepting a lot of shipments, since CASAA DOESN'T communicate or work with vendors, so we didn't know the extent of the problem. This was in relation to the AAPHP petitions and convincing ECF members that this IS a problem and would affect their ability to get supplies from U.S. suppliers. CASAA was attempting to get people to comment on the AAPHP petitions and it had nothing to do with concern about the vendors' actual business - just fact finding. You are twisting it into something it is not.

The only concern CASAA has for vendors is that if their product gets banned, consumers will not be able to get e-cigs and supplies and millions of smokers who have not yet switched will continue to smoke.

If oil companies came out with an alternative fuel that was good for the environment and the government was trying to ban it and environmental groups came out to support the new fuel, do they represent the oil companies or their own gaols to protect the environment?

Representing a product does not mean you automatically represent the industry as a whole.

 

[markarich159]

Sticking one's head in the sand in re: potential danger does not solve anything. We all know there are people (hey, like smokers) who will stick their head in the sand and ignore health risks as long as someone, somewhere says "hey, no need to panic here."

Thank you, my inital point exactly. And "hey, no need to panic here." is definitely not something we need to hear from a group which most vapers associate with consumer advocacy.

 

[kristin]

Sticking one's head in the sand in re: potential danger does not solve anything. We all know there are people (hey, like smokers) who will stick their head in the sand and ignore health risks as long as someone, somewhere says "hey, no need to panic here."

Who is ignoring the health risks? There is a difference between awareness and panic.

Does the diacetyl in vapor even reach 0.02ppm? The FlavourArt site calculated that butter-flavored e-liquid, which has one of the highest concentrations of diacetyl, would have 0.009ppm. Once that turns to vapor and is mixed with air and inhaled, the ppm would be even lower.

It just doesn't seem to be at a dangerous level to me. If someone else is still concerned, then they should avoid it. But boycotting vendors and causing a panic seems excessive over these levels. Especially when ther haven't been any reports of diacetyl-related symptoms in e-cigarette users, either?

Again, I'm not suggesting people don't talk about it, just that people shouldn't overreact.

 

[markarich159]

CASAA is protecting the consumer against misinformation from the government and public health groups about smokeless alternatives.

And, of course, your highly qualified CASAA staff of experts and PhD's in the fields of Medicine, Chemistry, Biochemistry, Pharamacology, Toxicology, Pulmonology, Quality Assurance etc.. are more then up to the task to contradict people in the healthcare medium(who are members of these public health groups-i.e. AMA, ACA, etc..) who have devoted their entire educations and adult lives in pursuit of service to public healthcare; Trump their "misinformation" intellectually and come out on top for a US industry in which vendors are making eliquid intended for direct pulmonary inhalation(in god knows what manner) and resisting the removal of a known pulmonary toxin. HMMMM.....OK????? Something sounds Off here.......

 

[GoodDog]

I understand trying to milk a few years, but the way you talk to people is slightly disrespectful and rude, in trying to make YOUR point valid. I said (which you didn't bother to quote) that they should list the ingredients, as well as the amounts used, no matter how minuscule. Which I think any company should have to do before putting any product in an open market. So why are you getting snippy with me?? Musta been something I said. Doesn't feel so nice when someone calls you out now does it? You aren't any better than any of the people here, so please, stop acting like only YOUR opinion is the only one right here.


I love how you call the kettle black, but yet are the main cause of people arguing back and forth. As I said again and again. If you want change go get it, the only thing you will get in an open forum is arguing, which I see you enjoy. I never said Diacetly was okay to use, because in ANY circumstance, it's not. But like any drama addict, you'll pick apart what a person says to decode it to your own liking, to again, get YOUR point across. As I'm sure you will this post or any other post that doesn't bow down or put you on a pedestal.

I never once said your opinion was wrong, or anyone's for that matter, only the approach you take on getting your voice heard. You shine with knowledge, but the way you talk to people is just flat out UGLY, making any valid points you may have questionable.

Wow, you're reading SimpleSins posts differently than I am! I see her posting facts when someone like you comes here and throws daggers and emotional chatter while in the next sentence agreeing that we should have a choice. I don't see her attacking posters like you and others are attacking her.

SimpleSins, many, many, many here appreciate and applaud your relentless calm in the midst of unfounded attacks. There are many of us that agree with you and want to keep this issue in the forefront and not let it get swept under the rug like it has in the past. It seems this is the only way to get vendors to listen and realize that we are now demanding change.

I'm quickly becoming disillusioned with CASAA and the repetitive canned verbiage that comes out of there. If we close our eyes that does not mean no one else sees and insinuating we should not talk about health & safety concerns for fear the antis may hear is too ridiculous for words.

 

[Travis798]

*sigh* I remember when I used to like coming to these forums. Now it seems almost everything I read simply gets over-taken by people whose obvious feelings of inadequacy cause them to uncontrollably attack others and make huge issues out of things that they don't even understand.

Some people on here want to act as though they are an authority on the subject, forgetting the fact that there are no authorities on this subject, since there are no known safe NOR dangerous levels of diacetyl. People are arguing with each other over nothing. Everybody is saying that it is probably in a vendors best interest to disclose. Some people seem to want it banned altogether, which isn't their call. Removing diacetyl will change the flavors of some juices, and since I'm not personally worried about the levels of diacetyl involved, I should be able to buy flavors with it if the vendor is willing to make it. Thats my choice. If I die, it's my death, not yours.

How many of us have eaten butter flavor microwave popcorn? I know I have. I've breathed diacetyl and lived to tell the tale. The FDA, OSHA and NIOSH's own reports even state they THINK diacetyl is the main problem, but they aren't even quite sure about that since these factories are full of other flavorings as well. Their conclusions are based on empirical data, which is observed as a valid scientific theory. Empirical data also tells me that we have been vaping diacetyl and our lungs are improving, not decaying, and therefore it MAY be safe at the levels we are consuming.

Everyone agrees that it MAY be dangerous and suppliers SHOULD disclose whether or not they use it. Where we start to differ is some people DEMAND it be removed, and some people say it should be user choice. This thread is not about diacetyl at all. It's about some people that want to make their own choices and feel others should be responsible enough to do their own research just as they have done, and other other people that want to exhibit control and make demands because they feel we all need to be told what we can and can not have. Diacetyl just happens to be a convenient catalyst for those that want control to make another argument for it.

The solution is simple. If you believe diacetyl to be bad in any concentration, stay away from it. If you believe it is an acceptable risk vs smoking, make your choices accordingly. In reality, diacetyl is deserving of one sticky saying that it may or may not be dangerous and if you are worried about it, please find a vendor that is proven to not use it and be happy.

 

[kristin]

Thank you, my inital point exactly. And "hey, no need to panic here." is definitely not something we need to hear from a group which most vapers associate with consumer advocacy.

If you are so concerned about policing vendors, why don't you start a group that does just that?

If CASAA didn't keep calm and try to present the KNOWN FACTS, we would be pretty ineffective in keeping legislator from banning e-cigarettes. The FDA tried to raise panic over "carcinogens" and "anti-freeze." Should CASAA have just accepted that and called for boycotting vendors? Or was it better to step back and say, "Wait a minuite, folks. How much are we talking about here? Is it really dangerous? Let's look at the facts and not make assumptions that the levels of carcinogens actually cause cancer or that all e-cigarettes contain toxic levels of DEG."

So, naturally I'm cautious about announcing that e-cigarettes containing ANY diacetyl are automatically "dangerous."

I've made a point to say when I was posting my PERSONAL opinion. Just because I feel a certain way it doesn't mean that it's CASAA policy (unless I acknowledge that it is official policy) nor that the rest of the board or our members feel the same way. I am one member of the board and I have a right to my opinion. For all I know, we'll discuss this at the next meeting and the rest of the board will vote to have an official stance against diacetyl.

One thing people forget is that I am not only on CASAA's board, I am also a CONSUMER myself. Of course these things are of concern to me!

Let me reiterate that CASAA was set up by CONSUMERS concerned about e-cigarettes being banned because of lies and misinformation. At the time, policing the industry was not a priority, because that was what the FDA and BBB were for. But no one was defending the benefits of vaping or other smokeless alternatives. That is why CASAA was formed, not to protect consumers from unscrupulous vendors. That doesn't mean CASAA won't develop into that role in the future, but right now the future of e-cigarettes themselves are in danger. If we let them get banned, there will be nothing for us to regulate.

 

[markarich159]

Who is ignoring the health risks? There is a difference between awareness and panic.

Does the diacetyl in vapor even reach 0.02ppm? The FlavourArt site calculated that butter-flavored e-liquid, which has one of the highest concentrations of diacetyl, would have 0.009ppm. Once that turns to vapor and is mixed with air and inhaled, the ppm would be even lower.

go here i don't feel like retyping:

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-diacetyl-their-e-liquids-27.html#post2020251

It just doesn't seem to be at a dangerous level to me.

Well, there we have it - no more need for any studies then. Who needs that Science stuff anyway.

 

[SimpleSins]

Who is ignoring the health risks? There is a difference between awareness and panic.

Does the diacetyl in vapor even reach 0.02ppm? The FlavourArt site calculated that butter-flavored e-liquid, which has one of the highest concentrations of diacetyl, would have 0.009ppm. Once that turns to vapor and is mixed with air and inhaled, the ppm would be even lower.

It just doesn't seem to be at a dangerous level to me. If someone else is still concerned, then they should avoid it. But boycotting vendors and causing a panic seems excessive over these levels. Especially when ther haven't been any reports of diacetyl-related symptoms in e-cigarette users, either?

Again, I'm not suggesting people don't talk about it, just that people shouldn't overreact.

Since you note that it doesn't seem a dangerous level to you, do you mind if I ask what your area of expertise is? Frankly, if I've got scientists and physicians and OSHA saying that they cannot find a safe level to vaporize this into one's lungs, so I'd like to know how to weigh the options.

And I don't see where anyone has called on anyone to boycott vendors (except those who have said repeatedly that those that are opposed to diacetyl should just not buy the juice- which is pretty much a moot point since if we don't know who is using it we can't really avoid it). The closest the anti-diacetyl faction has come is to say that they will choose to purchase their juice from vendors who either do not use it or who are transparent about where it is so it can be avoided, and that they will not use those who either refuse to disclose.

 

[AngusATAT]

Thread closed per OP request.