Still is a big problem, and while it's quite survivable, it's no fun and can have serious long term effects.
The Diketone Debate: Which Position Do you Take?
- Thread starter Mr.Mann
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Still is a big problem, and while it's quite survivable, it's no fun and can have serious long term effects.
Whatever goes into our E liquid; good or bad, should be fully disclosed. I think that the sooner we hash out all the possible problems we come across in the vape world, then the better it will be for us in the long run. If big tobacco had followed an open book policy from the onset, more people would be alive today, as they would have stuck with pipes and cigars.
So yes...Disclosure.....Honesty.....and open mindedness will not only keep us out of harm's way, but will improve the quality of our product.
So yes...Disclosure.....Honesty.....and open mindedness will not only keep us out of harm's way, but will improve the quality of our product.
I recently discovered that TFA has a "DX" - no diketones -- version of Bavarian Cream, but the only place I've seen it is at bullcityvapor, and they're out of stock -- does anyone know any other places that have this flavor? I've got the "notify me" thing active at bullcityvapor, but god only knows how long till they restock.
Andria
Andria
Just TFA at the moment, plus I am not even sure how much these other sites care.
It's in stock here Andria - it's a place I buy some ready to use liquids and flavourings from, and a very good supplier to buy from with reasonable shipping charges:
DX Bavarian Cream
Ok, thanks!! 1.99 GBP translates to $3.12 -- how big a bottle is that? If it's a big bottle, then it's a good price.
And I have to wonder about shipping, from the UK... gotta be more costly than domestic?
Andria
EDIT: nevermind, I explored, and discovered it's only 10ml, so it's a bit costly, plus the shipping is surely more than $2.50-$3. Guess I'll just wait till whenever bullcity gets it back in stock.
Last edited:
It's £3.70 shipping - OK if it's something you need quickly
D=Diacetyl X= Zero
I'm split between 2 and 3. I prefer vendors who disclose, but I consider that to be a personal choice. If anything I view it as a way to filter out vendors that care vs. vendors that don't. I've read some reports that cast some doubt on weather they have nailed the culprit as being the broad category of all diketones and I think this is an area that's still in the grey zone. Making assumptions too soon can lead to limiting interest in further research (sorta like nailing nicotine as THE addictive substance and looking no further). 0mg vapor products are being produced for other reasons, including weight control and diabetes. The question of diketones in flavors I think, belongs to a larger base than ecigs alone. I do know people have been vaping for almost a decade now without a single case of OB being diagnosed - and from my understanding, OB is distinctive, not easily confused with COPD although both are obstructive diseases (asthma is a restrictive disease). They have different profiles on pulmonary function tests.
I also don't think it's the most important thing facing vaping since there's still question whether vapers can use ANY flavors at all. Testing costs money and in an ideal world, I'd gladly pay for it to be done. But this isn't an ideal world and vapers have limited resources for fighting broad bans. In this case, I'd rather see those resources directed at fighting bans. I'm also worried about smokers who are being mislead that vaping is worse and causing them confusion. I think this industry is virualant enough that diketones can take a back seat for now without being forgotten once vaping passes this current hurdle. We need numbers now - in all areas.
So I voted for 3 but it's not because I don't care. I will reward those vendors supporting activism (#1) and then those who are also testing (#2), but for now, I'd prefer it to remain a personal choice because I'm aware that it's extremely difficult to eliminate completely. There is also the chance that we're chasing the wrong villian or more specific testing / equipment needs to be developed. I'd hate to see a flavor ban put vaping into the dark ages which is what will happen if we need to depend on a black market for vaping.
I also don't think it's the most important thing facing vaping since there's still question whether vapers can use ANY flavors at all. Testing costs money and in an ideal world, I'd gladly pay for it to be done. But this isn't an ideal world and vapers have limited resources for fighting broad bans. In this case, I'd rather see those resources directed at fighting bans. I'm also worried about smokers who are being mislead that vaping is worse and causing them confusion. I think this industry is virualant enough that diketones can take a back seat for now without being forgotten once vaping passes this current hurdle. We need numbers now - in all areas.
So I voted for 3 but it's not because I don't care. I will reward those vendors supporting activism (#1) and then those who are also testing (#2), but for now, I'd prefer it to remain a personal choice because I'm aware that it's extremely difficult to eliminate completely. There is also the chance that we're chasing the wrong villian or more specific testing / equipment needs to be developed. I'd hate to see a flavor ban put vaping into the dark ages which is what will happen if we need to depend on a black market for vaping.
Thanks for voting for the one that best fits your position even if it could've been better worded.
Thank you for this thread. I feel very strongly about it and really wanted to say it should not be allowed in any liquid but to often now, people do not have a choice and I think it is important to have that option. I for one, believe that I have the right to know what is in the flavorings I purchase.
My position in regards to personal choice is that it should be mandatory to disclose the use of Diketones in your flavors, but from a public health perspective, it should not be used at all. I voted for the second option.
The reverse is also true, here are excerpts from an e-mail conversation that took place with a fairly well implanted canadian vendor advertising their juices as Diketones free in big bold red letters straight on the front page.
"Before when I smoked, I took about 600 different chemicals, now that I vape I take in about 4."
A classic, but ludicrous statement that is actually hurting the credibility of vaping. That's like saying cigarettes only have like 2 chemicals in them : Tobacco and Nicotine.
"I do not have the test results to put you at ease about the flavours so I can not guarantee that they are not in there. I truly believe that if I did have the results they could change from batch to batch. I really do not know the answers here."
- Jeeeezz........
"Until more testing is done, we won’t know. This is what I know"
- 8-o
They have changed their disclaimer since, but I still haven't found a way to completely wash off the ....ty taste those e-mails left in my mouth. I realized that all I can really do is stick to fruits and hope for the best.
I have checked out the study on the first few pages of this thread and it's about damn time someone took a serious look at this, even thought the results come back as being an "avoidable risk", vendors should be 100% able to back up any claim they make.
We switched to vapor BECAUSE of health concerns and tobacco industry shenanigans, so please leave those games to BT.
The reverse is also true, here are excerpts from an e-mail conversation that took place with a fairly well implanted canadian vendor advertising their juices as Diketones free in big bold red letters straight on the front page.
"Before when I smoked, I took about 600 different chemicals, now that I vape I take in about 4."
A classic, but ludicrous statement that is actually hurting the credibility of vaping. That's like saying cigarettes only have like 2 chemicals in them : Tobacco and Nicotine.
"I do not have the test results to put you at ease about the flavours so I can not guarantee that they are not in there. I truly believe that if I did have the results they could change from batch to batch. I really do not know the answers here."
- Jeeeezz........
"Until more testing is done, we won’t know. This is what I know"
- 8-o
They have changed their disclaimer since, but I still haven't found a way to completely wash off the ....ty taste those e-mails left in my mouth. I realized that all I can really do is stick to fruits and hope for the best.
I have checked out the study on the first few pages of this thread and it's about damn time someone took a serious look at this, even thought the results come back as being an "avoidable risk", vendors should be 100% able to back up any claim they make.
We switched to vapor BECAUSE of health concerns and tobacco industry shenanigans, so please leave those games to BT.
Last edited:
"I know what the supposed issues are, but I don't care"
is how I voted.
Though my reasoning and interpretation of how that ought to be worded is, "I know what the supposed issues are, but I don't care for they hype around this topic that is playing into hands of ANTZ."
or
"I know what the supposed issues are, and I do care, because ANTZ very much will care that we are now on board with 'mandatory' regulations."
I've read about 6 pages of this thread before chiming in with this post. I'll likely read the other pages before I post anything again.
I so far haven't seen an answer to how mandatory disclosure would be enforced, and as we are in an era when enforceable regulations are clearly on the table, then I interpret those votes as, "yes FDA, please help us out with those vendors/manufacturers who refuse to get on board with the problem du jour, and please enforce them with your clear authority to make them conform to our wishes."
While I've seen many posts that are in vein of "I'd like that information disclosed" Or, "I'd like to know what's in my eLiquid." Yet, that can, and likely is already being, done within a free market, here in the information age, without need for mandatory disclosure. If you "want to know" then stick with vendors who are proud to disclose such info. But to say it must be mandatory, then you are clearly inviting a 3rd party into the mix that you may wish to place limits on, but the other vaper down the line may say that 3rd party isn't going far enough, and hence even more must be disclosed.
And fact is, you won't know for sure until / unless you test for yourself. You'll likely trust the vendor that tells you what you want to hear, but until you verify it with own lab testing done by you, then you are relying on faith / trust / credibility, which is reasonable, but is not knowledge. Why not make it mandatory that if you want to vape, you must pay for all your own lab testing, or even better must set up a lab of your own to test your own vape stuff? Cause the option of "you must pay for all your own lab testing" is precisely what the FDA is going for, and hoping you see that they are just looking out for your own safety, along with all those who realize that vaping, as it has been between 2009 to present, has been a rather dangerous gamble that "no one knows for sure" what is in this vapor stuff.
Then if not going along with mandatory, but claiming something that leads a person to believe what they are vaping is relatively safe, means to me that vaping is about to get its own Master Settlement Agreement. Because of this poll and this issue, I now see this as a likely scenario with vaping. I also see it as more possible than not that the political momentum that was recently gained for vaping (when Pubs took over Congress) could be for naught as 83% of vapers have huge concern over diketones and so it really doesn't matter what ANTZ is up to or what people in Congress they have bought off. Instead, we vapers haven't thought this through on the political level enough to realize we just served a political football up to ANTZ on a silver platter. With a pretty pink bow.
A so called sane vaper will say that this issue is avoidable by removing diketones. Never mind the umpteen other things that surely will come along to test this sort of thinking.
A sane person who doesn't vape and who outnumbers vapers by a 50 to 1 margin will say this issue is avoidable if you just stop vaping.
Hmmm, I wonder which of those two sides will win?
is how I voted.
Though my reasoning and interpretation of how that ought to be worded is, "I know what the supposed issues are, but I don't care for they hype around this topic that is playing into hands of ANTZ."
or
"I know what the supposed issues are, and I do care, because ANTZ very much will care that we are now on board with 'mandatory' regulations."
I've read about 6 pages of this thread before chiming in with this post. I'll likely read the other pages before I post anything again.
I so far haven't seen an answer to how mandatory disclosure would be enforced, and as we are in an era when enforceable regulations are clearly on the table, then I interpret those votes as, "yes FDA, please help us out with those vendors/manufacturers who refuse to get on board with the problem du jour, and please enforce them with your clear authority to make them conform to our wishes."
While I've seen many posts that are in vein of "I'd like that information disclosed" Or, "I'd like to know what's in my eLiquid." Yet, that can, and likely is already being, done within a free market, here in the information age, without need for mandatory disclosure. If you "want to know" then stick with vendors who are proud to disclose such info. But to say it must be mandatory, then you are clearly inviting a 3rd party into the mix that you may wish to place limits on, but the other vaper down the line may say that 3rd party isn't going far enough, and hence even more must be disclosed.
And fact is, you won't know for sure until / unless you test for yourself. You'll likely trust the vendor that tells you what you want to hear, but until you verify it with own lab testing done by you, then you are relying on faith / trust / credibility, which is reasonable, but is not knowledge. Why not make it mandatory that if you want to vape, you must pay for all your own lab testing, or even better must set up a lab of your own to test your own vape stuff? Cause the option of "you must pay for all your own lab testing" is precisely what the FDA is going for, and hoping you see that they are just looking out for your own safety, along with all those who realize that vaping, as it has been between 2009 to present, has been a rather dangerous gamble that "no one knows for sure" what is in this vapor stuff.
Then if not going along with mandatory, but claiming something that leads a person to believe what they are vaping is relatively safe, means to me that vaping is about to get its own Master Settlement Agreement. Because of this poll and this issue, I now see this as a likely scenario with vaping. I also see it as more possible than not that the political momentum that was recently gained for vaping (when Pubs took over Congress) could be for naught as 83% of vapers have huge concern over diketones and so it really doesn't matter what ANTZ is up to or what people in Congress they have bought off. Instead, we vapers haven't thought this through on the political level enough to realize we just served a political football up to ANTZ on a silver platter. With a pretty pink bow.
A so called sane vaper will say that this issue is avoidable by removing diketones. Never mind the umpteen other things that surely will come along to test this sort of thinking.
A sane person who doesn't vape and who outnumbers vapers by a 50 to 1 margin will say this issue is avoidable if you just stop vaping.
Hmmm, I wonder which of those two sides will win?
I enjoyed reading the other 18 pages of this thread while vaping Butter (that may or may not contain diketones).
I stand by my earlier statement. Until / unless you do own testing in own lab, you won't know. You may think you know, but you don't, and would be very easy to establish in a conversation where the light would be shown to you, that you do not know. So, requiring vendors to do the work you could start doing today is IMO ludicrous. Might be cost prohibitive for you, but if you truly want to vape and truly care about this issue, you'd be doing your own testing, proudly. Or you'd avoid vaping altogether as is what most people (almost all non-vapers) would conclude within reason.
I'm glad I still live in a world where diketones are still present in eLiquid and some vendors are disclosing the information because some consumers are very concerned, even while those consumers are relying solely on credibility of 3rd party information. I don't think we'll ever be in this other hypothetical world of mandatory testing/disclosure for all vendors, but it does make for interesting reading for how the vaping mind works and how some of us want to put eggs in the ANTZ basket.
I stand by my earlier statement. Until / unless you do own testing in own lab, you won't know. You may think you know, but you don't, and would be very easy to establish in a conversation where the light would be shown to you, that you do not know. So, requiring vendors to do the work you could start doing today is IMO ludicrous. Might be cost prohibitive for you, but if you truly want to vape and truly care about this issue, you'd be doing your own testing, proudly. Or you'd avoid vaping altogether as is what most people (almost all non-vapers) would conclude within reason.
I'm glad I still live in a world where diketones are still present in eLiquid and some vendors are disclosing the information because some consumers are very concerned, even while those consumers are relying solely on credibility of 3rd party information. I don't think we'll ever be in this other hypothetical world of mandatory testing/disclosure for all vendors, but it does make for interesting reading for how the vaping mind works and how some of us want to put eggs in the ANTZ basket.
Jman8, I often like reading your posts and positions you take (and I enjoyed a lot of those two posts), but I think you are being a bit extra here about the scope and reach of other's opinions.
Being a vaper in and of itself is fuel for the ANTZ fire!
I don't personally buy into this notion that if we as vapers talk, continue to talk, about things (many of which are serious matters) that we are somehow helping to create something that existed since, damned near, vaping's inception: ANTZ.
That's like saying don't put cloud-chasing videos up online since it will only piss off ANTZ and fuel their fire.
And even if they were to cite this thread, this forum or any one post on ECF as to their reasoning, am I to believe that is anything more than just a tactic? And how are we to evade those type of tactics? Like ANTZ were sitting around scratching their heads with something to be against until they read ECF. Okay, at least I can now grapple with the reality that one day vapers might be coming for me and all those that voted in an ECF poll. It might be time to take this down becasue apparently some vapers might actually be putting it out there that "they" (we) are to blame for what might be coming. Wow.
Hmm..maybe if everyone that took this poll had just voted for "I know what the supposed issues are, but I don't care," then maybe the ANTZ and the federal government would've looked at it and said, "Oh, I guess we have nothing to be against or to regulate since none of them are for any type of mandatory standards in their own industry." Yeah, I can see that.
Do you really think the ANTZ or the federal government need a license or a push or a justification from us to do what it already wished to do? Based on that logic, we would basically have to not be critical of our own if it casts us in a not-so-shinning light -- I wholeheartedly disagree with that stance if anyone believes it. Now, if that word "mandatory" makes you ill to the stomach, I can understand; but it is preposterous to suggest to us that we are/will be at fault, or even partially at fault for expressing our views on this issue.
Being a vaper in and of itself is fuel for the ANTZ fire!
I don't personally buy into this notion that if we as vapers talk, continue to talk, about things (many of which are serious matters) that we are somehow helping to create something that existed since, damned near, vaping's inception: ANTZ.
That's like saying don't put cloud-chasing videos up online since it will only piss off ANTZ and fuel their fire.
And even if they were to cite this thread, this forum or any one post on ECF as to their reasoning, am I to believe that is anything more than just a tactic? And how are we to evade those type of tactics? Like ANTZ were sitting around scratching their heads with something to be against until they read ECF. Okay, at least I can now grapple with the reality that one day vapers might be coming for me and all those that voted in an ECF poll. It might be time to take this down becasue apparently some vapers might actually be putting it out there that "they" (we) are to blame for what might be coming. Wow.
Hmm..maybe if everyone that took this poll had just voted for "I know what the supposed issues are, but I don't care," then maybe the ANTZ and the federal government would've looked at it and said, "Oh, I guess we have nothing to be against or to regulate since none of them are for any type of mandatory standards in their own industry." Yeah, I can see that.
Do you really think the ANTZ or the federal government need a license or a push or a justification from us to do what it already wished to do? Based on that logic, we would basically have to not be critical of our own if it casts us in a not-so-shinning light -- I wholeheartedly disagree with that stance if anyone believes it. Now, if that word "mandatory" makes you ill to the stomach, I can understand; but it is preposterous to suggest to us that we are/will be at fault, or even partially at fault for expressing our views on this issue.
Last edited:
Where have I said or implied that as vapers talk, we are helping to create ANTZ?
My comments are based on the idea that 85+ percent of vapers think Diketone should be mandatory disclosure or removed from eLiquid (no matter what!). I wonder how many of those vapers shared that sort of commentary in what they wrote to FDA during the comment period? If not, why not if this is what you truly feel? I'm guessing very few did because it would be exactly why the FDA proposed regulations for the entire industry, paid for by vapers, to make sure the product they have is safe and that it is never ever marketed to children.
If FDA came out tomorrow with Final Rule and half of that was "just say no kids" type of stuff and other half was mandatory disclosures (warning labels) for all vendors, to within one year, conform to law about disclosures around nicotine, ingredients, and especially Diketones, then I see around 85% of vapers (that voted here) as being very happy with FDA regulations. How could you not be? And if your favorite small time vendor went out of business over this while the Vuse and NJoy make a killing, then so what, good riddance. 80% of vapers are happy, ANTZ likely satisfied that a good start has been made and general public satisfied that it is being regulated.
The word "mandatory" doesn't make me ill to my stomach. I am disappointed that upwards of 90% of vapers are okay with mandating regulations on vendors, as I thought we just fought a campaign on this this year, like 4 months ago at most. FDA is in process of coming up with Final Rule. At some point that Rule has to be run by Congress and if Congress is under the impression that 80% of vapers want mandated regulations on eCig products, then I'm not sure why we even had a campaign to resist FDA regulations. What is the rationale there?
Today it is diketone and tomorrow it will be something else. That next thing may be far less of an issue, or might be way bigger than diketone. But the principle of the matter is that in order to fix that problem within the industry, the vast majority of vapers favor mandatory regulations or regulating that item out of existence. Why? Because it is dangerous (gong sound here). Never mind that from 2007 ish to 2014 ish, vapers were touting the relative safety of vaping nicotine (with flavors). That can all be discarded, because what ANTZ have been saying all along is most accurate. Nobody knows what's in this eLiquid stuff, and for that reason, plus the idea that it is probably dangerous, we ought to all be okay with mandatory regulations.
How many instances are we currently looking at where vaping flavors has caused significant / irreversible harm to vapers?
After you answer that pertinent question, let me know how much safer you think vapers / public will be in the regulated market?
This is what I was getting at:
If I misunderstood then that is my fault. To me, it looks/looked like you are saying that we are doing them a favor by talking among ourselves about what some of us want. I don't see how any number of "votes" in this thread is anymore credible than counting 'likes' on Suicide Bunny's page or all the recipes and threads in the DIY forum that use diketone-based ingredients -- all of which trump this poll's participation.
And I think referring to "83% of vapers" is a bit over-the-top. It's 83% of people (83% all of 195 vapers, hardly a large percentage of vapers) that voted on an ECF poll that was not balanced enough from the start. I've conceded that point early on.
As I've said before, I think (and I bet most other vapers do too) that it should be mandatory that vendors disclose nicotine content. Some may say that it is merely a courtesy offered by vendors, but I think in our industry it is mandatory to not use "proprietary" nicotine content where the vendor leaves it very unclear about how much is supposed to be in there. It's not federal law for eliquid (is it? LOL), but it is our own type of rule that says you must tell the customer approximately how much nic is in that liquid. That is not a rule shared by the supplement industry with regard to stims/alkaloids in their products.
But, I don't want the federal government, state governments or even any eliquid council to make sure all eliquid comes standard with certain things -- though I still want certain things to be across-the-board. I get why that may be contradictory or impossible without some type of enforcement, so I am stuck here trying to rationalize it. Oy.
Not sure why you are asking me that. I never said that with disclosure vapers would be "safer" -- though some are saying that, and a few of their voices are much louder than 'voices' here. I don't remember saying that regulations would fix anything per se, but in this climate I think offering a clear(er) choice to customers would help alleviate a lot of current drama, and that drama is causing some harm to the community.
I have no problem with a vendor saying 1) we have no idea if our liquids have diketones 2) we do know our liquids have diketones and/or 3) here are our tests and testing protocols that prove how much/how little they do have. That type of disclosure is what I have said I want from all the liquids I buy. Is it possible? Yeah. Is it likely? Not really. Am I okay with that? Sure, but I will eventually have more options and that is good enough.
p.s. I use concentrates that have diketones, so I am not that guy. I just would rather know before I buy and especially before I mix.
Last edited:
Jman8 you remind me of the bishops during the inquisition. They tried to silence all people that brought theories that threatened their control on society. Scientist were put in jail or burnt alive. They were doing the devil's, (ANTZ), work said the bishops.
Isn't you in another thread, that called docs Kistler and Faralinos Antz, because they recommended to rid diketones (dr. F.) or organic ingredients, (doc k) in e-liquids ?
You are now trying to silence this survey. You are saying Mr.Man is doing the devil's work by giving the voice of reason a chance to be heard, ( in your view this is the voice of the ANTZ).
Diketones are a known proven dangerous component found in of 70% of the e-juices tested. They are an AVOIDABLE risk. Everyone will be safer if we get rid of them, ( and the vendors that sell it to their unwary consumers).
What is you REAL agenda here ? Who are you protecting ? What are your intentions ? Why are you afraid of the truth ?
(Remember that those bishops were not successful and the Age of reason arose out of it).
Isn't you in another thread, that called docs Kistler and Faralinos Antz, because they recommended to rid diketones (dr. F.) or organic ingredients, (doc k) in e-liquids ?
You are now trying to silence this survey. You are saying Mr.Man is doing the devil's work by giving the voice of reason a chance to be heard, ( in your view this is the voice of the ANTZ).
Diketones are a known proven dangerous component found in of 70% of the e-juices tested. They are an AVOIDABLE risk. Everyone will be safer if we get rid of them, ( and the vendors that sell it to their unwary consumers).
What is you REAL agenda here ? Who are you protecting ? What are your intentions ? Why are you afraid of the truth ?
(Remember that those bishops were not successful and the Age of reason arose out of it).
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
