The Diketone Debate: Which Position Do you Take?

[Mr.Mann]

As this guy on The Click Bang show reported, reading through this and other threads concerning diketones is often a bunch of addicts finding illogical reasons to defend a known poison as they are protecting their habit at all cost. ''It tastes good'', ''I love my custard'', ''I only use a bit'', ''dont limit my freedom'', ''it is not as bad as cigarette'', ''it is not proven'', ''only happens in popcorn factories'' .... and a whole lot more excuses to keep a dangerous ingredients in e-liquids.

Sorry to say but imo, diketones in e-liquids WILL disappear. Either the industry will do it or the FDA will force it. There are NO reasons for allowing vendors to sell a dangerous substance to consumers when it is NOT needed and is easily replaced.

Tang,

With respect, be careful with approaching the argument like that, for if you do, you just made damn near all liquid problematic. How would you defend nicotine in eliquid when it is a "known poison"? At a high enough concentration, nicotine CAN actually kill someone. Yet many of us use it daily. And before you think that I am trying to advocate for diketones in flavorings by pointing out the flaw in an argument like that, know that I am not, just simply saying you can't use words like "poison" and then say but nicotine is fine becasue of the actual dosage. The amount always matters and is not illogical. There are nuances to this debate that need to be included and should not be dismissed as "addicts finding illogical reasons..."

No flavoring is necessary for vaping. Remember that. And unless you can and have stopped using flavoring altogehter, you are not much different than someone else that has their preferred flavors. It goes both ways. Either you understand why people want to vape their preferred flavors or you don't. I understand it, though I choose different flavors (when I can).

And also, Dr.F's study was largely predicated on the comparisons with eliquid and cigarettes with respect to diketones, so that argument is perfectly reasonable (unless you don't want to bring up Dr.F's findings). That perspective has to be kept (especially if you were a previous smoker -- were you?).

Do I want to have diketone-free concentrates to use for my mixes? Hell yes! I also want to help -- and try to help -- others to find such things. I truly wish this could be easier to know what's what out there, but I know how difficult it would be to snap fingers and have all premade liquids to be free of it. It is NOT "easily removed." Most flavorings out there are not even meant for vaping (very little are, and you won't see too many manufacturers claim there flavorings are meant for vaping). Diketones are in flavorings becasue it is fine to eat and those happen to be the flaovirngs we use to vape. Vendors don't add diketones (as I hope you know), and sometimes the flavoring manufacturers are not even adding it (as it can occur naturally). It is going to be a long arduous process to know what is what for premade liquids -- so let's not make it seem like its on par with food coloring (i.e., "easily removed").

Lastly, know that you, Click Bang, the government or any other source will never, ever be able to stop anyone personally from using these ingredients becasue they can always buy them directly form the manufacturer (or they can even DIY flavorings), so particularly in that case, personal freedom plays a huge role and can not be excluded form the topic. What I want to use is my choice (good or bad) and what others want to use, or not use, is their choice (just like it was with smoking). But hopefully we will all be able to access what we want and be clear on where to get it -- and that's what I want, the ability to make informed choices. Luckily now, any DIYer that wants to still use flavors and avoid diketones can, but consumers of premade eliquid will have a much harder time.

 

[Tangaroav]

Tang,

With respect, be careful with approaching the argument like that, for if you do, you just made damn near all liquid problematic. How would you defend nicotine in eliquid when it is a "known poison"? At a high enough concentration, nicotine CAN actually kill someone. Yet many of us use it daily. And before you think that I am trying to advocate for diketones in flavorings by pointing out the flaw in an argument like that, know that I am not, just simply saying you can't use words like "poison" and then say but nicotine is fine becasue of the actual dosage. The amount always matters and is not illogical. There are nuances to this debate that need to be included and should not be dismissed as "addicts finding illogical reasons..."

No flavoring is necessary for vaping. Remember that. And unless you can and have stopped using flavoring altogehter, you are not much different than someone else that has their preferred flavors. It goes both ways. Either you understand why people want to vape their preferred flavors or you don't. I understand it, though I choose different flavors (when I can).

And also, Dr.F's study was largely predicated on the comparisons with eliquid and cigarettes with respect to diketones, so that argument is perfectly reasonable (unless you don't want to bring up Dr.F's findings). That perspective has to be kept (especially if you were a previous smoker -- were you?).

Do I want to have diketone-free concentrates to use for my mixes? Hell yes! I also want to help -- and try to help -- others to find such things. I truly wish this could be easier to know what's what out there, but I know how difficult it would be to snap fingers and have all premade liquids to be free of it. It is NOT "easily removed." Most flavorings out there are not even meant for vaping (very little are, and you won't see too many manufacturers claim there flavorings are meant for vaping). Diketones are in flavorings becasue it is fine to eat and those happen to be the flaovirngs we use to vape. Vendors don't add diketones (as I hope you know), and sometimes the flavoring manufacturers are not even adding it (as it can occur naturally). It is going to be a long arduous process to know what is what for premade liquids -- so let's not make it seem like its on par with food coloring (i.e., "easily removed").

Lastly, know that you, Click Bang, the government or any other source will never, ever be able to stop anyone personally from using these ingredients becasue they can always buy them directly form the manufacturer (or they can even DIY flavorings), so particularly in that case, personal freedom plays a huge role and can not be excluded form the topic. What I want to use is my choice (good or bad) and what others want to use, or not use, is their choice (just like it was with smoking). But hopefully we will all be able to access what we want and be clear on where to get it -- and that's what I want, the ability to make informed choices. Luckily now, any DIYer that wants to still use flavors and avoid diketones can, but consumers of premade eliquid will have a much harder time.

Nicotine in the amount that smokers and vaper can inhale is not dangerous and can not be classified as a poison. I understand your point of view and your reasonning. It sure sounds logical. But to an outsider it also sounds like an addict justifying and defending his addiction. (I say this with all the respect you rightly earned and deserve on these forums). Let's face it WE are ALL addicts here. ( well, the great majority of us).

Diacetyl is a proven poison and very detrimental to our lungs even in relatively low levels. The risks to one's health are not acceptable. Diacetyl is already forbiden by FDA as an additive to cigarettes, ( as reported by Click Bang). We can all understand that it will be forbiden in e-liquids by the FDA. To think otherwise is really futile to say the least.

Diketones ARE easy to remove. A few vendors are already doing it. You have informed us of a few in other threads and I thank you for it. As for the trace amount that could be produced naturally in chemical reactions when mixing, heating, and vaporizing, this is really not a valid argument not to remove what can be easily be removed.

Anybody can break the rules and mix anything they want in their e-liquids, that's really their problem and I couldn't care less. But vendors selling e-liquids MUST be held accountable and must be regulated to protect consumers. Ideally it would be self regulation but imo this is not realistic to hope for.

 

[Mr.Mann]

Nicotine in the amount that smokers and vaper can inhale is not dangerous and can not be classified as a poison. I understand your point of view and your reasonning. It sure sounds logical. But to an outsider it also sounds like an addict justifying and defending his addiction. (I say this with all the respect you rightly earned and deserve on these forums). Let's face it WE are ALL addicts here. ( well, the great majority of us).

Diacetyl is a proven poison and very detrimental to our lungs even in relatively low levels. The risks to one's health are not acceptable. Diacetyl is already forbiden by FDA as an additive to cigarettes, ( as reported by Click Bang). We can all understand that it will be forbiden in e-liquids by the FDA. To think otherwise is really futile to say the least.

Diketones ARE easy to remove. A few vendors are already doing it. You have informed us of a few in other threads and I thank you for it. As for the trace amount that could be produced naturally in chemical reactions when mixing, heating, and vaporizing, this is really not a valid argument not to remove what can be easily be removed.

Anybody can break the rules and mix anything they want in their e-liquids, that's really their problem and I couldn't care less. But vendors selling e-liquids MUST be held accountable and must be regulated to protect consumers. Ideally it would be self regulation but imo this is not realistic to hope for.

Note: My response is mostly focusing on this notion of "easily removed." There are other things in your post I'd like to discuss, but this one thing is what keeps jumping out.

When you say it is easy to remove, are you saying it is easy for vendors to test every single flavoring they use and then test their finished products? Are you saying it is easy to remove because vendors have the power to just "remove" it like it is a hair in their bottle? No, it is not easy to pull pre-existing products and flavorings and shut down shop until you can be 100% certain to be 100% free of diketones. Do you know how long it can take to develop one above-average recipe, and then try and substitute some new ingredient in place of another? Easy?! Not even. By and large, it just doesn't work like that -- and that would be only a small part of that process. Plus, imagine dealing with all your customers as they are purchasing revisions and demanding back the old product.

Tang, when you repeat things like "easily removed", I wonder what you are talking about. Could you explain from your view how diketones are easily removed? Do you mean from the flavoring or from the eliquid? To "remove" it from the eliquid, you have to test every single flavoring you use so you can determine if it is there to begin with. I am just a DIYer and I have over 200 flavorings (I am 'addicted' to mixing flavors! LOL). How much money and time do you think that will take to test them all? How much time in between do you think it will take to find new and appropriate flavorings to replace the old ones (if they come back as having having diketones) without your end-product suffering? And remember, the new flavorings will have to go through that same process of verification (becasue we all know you can't simply take the word of the manufacturer). It is totally doable, yes, to create diketone-free eliquids, but saying it is "easy" for established businesses to go through the rigors of testing/reformulating/discarding stock/etc is unnecessarily dismissive.

To concede some aspects of what you are saying though, as an eliquid DIYer (not a vendor) I can attest to how nowadays it is quite easy to not use flavorings that have diketones (though that has to be taking the word of the manufacturer, and we know that is tricky). Things are changing and a lot more info is out there, but that is different for one operating on a tiny scale and not having to really consider pre-existing stock/orders/recipes/customers/etc. I am all for diketone-free eliquids and concentrates, but me buying a 5 mL plastic bottle at $1.69 of Capella's Vanilla Custard v2 is totally different than realizing that the barrels of v1 Custard I was using in my products might have to be trashed (maybe they can write it off?) After all, a vendor can't go into a flavoring and remove diketones from it; not easily or at all. Buying a v2 or a DX is easy peasy, but don't think that it can just be substituted on a 1:1 basis without hiccups all over the place.

Lastly, yes, there are some vendors that have been doing what it takes to become certifiably diketone-free vendors, but I think they would cringe at the idea that it was "easy" for them to do it. I think that is actually doing them a disservice to suggest it is an easy task. Ask them and I bet most would tell you it was a difficult, time-consuming and costly process. That said, another concession to you would be that any NEW vendor does not get my lenience for not being able to begin with a diketone-free line. But that is not about them "removing" anything, it's about them -- in today's climate and awareness -- not beginning to sale products with these ingredients. Unfortunately though, that is assuming that everyone with the aspirations of selling eliquid is enough in-the-know about all of this, and if reading the DIY forum is any indication of that, it's not looking too good. I've seen hoards of recipes that are kinda on the insane side if one has any amount of care about this. But I digress.

p.s. You may want to try TFA's Vanilla Swirl for your DIYing. I have found it to be a great replacement for Vanilla Custard. Linda did a bang-up job with that one! It'll take a good deal of work for you to get it just right (if replacing), but it's pretty dern good considering. I use it at 0.5-1.5% depending on the recipe.

 

[Oliver]

Mr Mann,

As someone who has spoken with several manufacturers that have taken the necessary steps to remove diketones from their e-liquids, I can say you are quite correct. The process is not easy, requires significant R&D to replace existing flavors, and comes at a significant cost.

That said, what I have been struck by, when speaking with these manufacturers, is a sense that this is the only ethical way to remain in business. If an additional risk is discovered, and it is removable, then this must occur no matter what the cost.

So, when you say that it's difficult to do - this is obviously correct. The question is, what are the ethics of not doing it?

 

[Tangaroav]

Mr.Mann,

I agree with you that it is a major overhaul from a business point of view. What I meant as you pointed out, is that it is relatively as easy for e-liquid vendors to offer diketone free mixtures as it is to offer e-liquids chuck full of diketones. Established vendors hopefully will be pressurized from market forces to start offering e-liquids that are diketones free.

p.s. ; I am now in my tobacco flavor e-liquid phase of my DIY.... and heading to the http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-flavoring-manufacturers-open-discussion.html to learn more about it.

 

[Mr.Mann]

Mr Mann,

As someone who has spoken with several manufacturers that have taken the necessary steps to remove diketones from their e-liquids, I can say you are quite correct. The process is not easy, requires significant R&D to replace existing flavors, and comes at a significant cost.

That said, what I have been struck by, when speaking with these manufacturers, is a sense that this is the only ethical way to remain in business. If an additional risk is discovered, and it is removable, then this must occur no matter what the cost.

So, when you say that it's difficult to do - this is obviously correct. The question is, what are the ethics of not doing it?

SmokeyJoe, thank you for chiming in.

Unfortunately, there are vendors (whether online or B&M) not keenly even aware of the problem. So for them, it's just that they're ignorant of the problem. Is ignorance an excuse? I think it is actually one of the better excuses for not doing anything, but that doesn't make the problem less real.

For instance, I recently talked with a vendor that had no idea what I was talking about with regard to diketones. It was sad to speak to him becasue he kept saying "we don't add anything to our eliquids, it's just flavoring, nic, PG and VG." I tried to explain to him the details and then he assured me there was no diacetyl in his product. But even with that, he kept saying they didn't put "anything else" in their liquid (like it is itself an additive in the final product). But he can't claim ignorance anymore though considering it had been brought to his attention in some manner.

Now, as for the ones that we both know full-well that know it's a problem and still will not budge? Not even put a disclaimer on the bottle? I don't think they are too ethical at all. I guess they can hide behind their general disclaimer of the buyer assumes all risks. For many vendors out there, unfortunately, Tang's post about "illogical reasons" does in fact apply to them. I don't see how ANY vendor that is on ECF or any other forum for that matter can claim ignorance. And actually, it is becoming less and less believable that too many vendors can continue to be ignorant. That may be a little past its expiration date.

Mr.Mann,

I agree with you that it is a major overhaul from a business point of view. What I meant as you pointed out, is that it is relatively as easy for e-liquid vendors to offer diketone free mixtures as it is to offer e-liquids chock full of diketones. Established vendors hopefully will be pressurized from market forces to start offering e-liquids that are diketones free.

p.s. ; I am now in my tobacco flavor e-liquid phase of my DIY.... and heading to the http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-flavoring-manufacturers-open-discussion.html to learn more about it.

Fair enough

 

[Oliver]

Yeah, I'd say it's a little past expiration date.

As Upton Sinclair once said: "It's difficult to get a man to understand something if his salary depends on his not understanding it".

 

[Mr.Mann]

Yeah, I'd say it's a little past expiration date.

As Upton Sinclair once said: "It's difficult to get a man to understand something if his salary depends on his not understanding it".

Touché. . .

 

[Yohkos]

I would have voted #2, but since vaping is relatively new and big tobacco companies, fda and others are looking for anything they can to ban the sell of anything vaping, I had to go with #1. In a perfect world we would all love to have choices without the government making them for us, but I love to vape and if it means that eliminating any kind of toxin that may be dangerous to keep my right to buy vaping supplies, then I will be willing to make the compromise to exclude all toxins until proven that they are safe. We really don't know the long term affects and not all vapers read message boards or do any research. A lot of people just want to quit smoking and figure that this is the safest alternative and for that reason, I would like the toxins taken out. Heath care cost for tobacco users has cost society many many $$$$$, so I figure if we keep everything as safe as possible. Until real research has proven one way or another, in the long term it keeps cost down for everyone.

 

[caramel]

Where's the "Let the market decide" option?

 

[caramel]

Nicotine in the amount that smokers and vaper can inhale is not dangerous and can not be classified as a poison. I understand your point of view and your reasonning. It sure sounds logical. But to an outsider it also sounds like an addict justifying and defending his addiction. (I say this with all the respect you rightly earned and deserve on these forums). Let's face it WE are ALL addicts here. ( well, the great majority of us).

You started the argument very well but unfortunately ended using the word "addiction".

Addiction to "something" implies that the said "something" is harmful (in the quantities it's likely to be consumed).

We can speak of "addiction to cigarettes" but not "addiction to nicotine".

 

[Tangaroav]

Cigarettes, cigars, pipes and vaporizers are nicotine delivery systems. It is to nicotine that we are addicted to. All those delivery systems are harmful to some degree. Vapers choose the less harmful of those systems. Close to 85% of vapers on this thread want to remove/control known and removable dangerous components of e-liquids to lower the risks further.

Don't you agree ?

 

[2buildawall]

I voted number 2 but I think the consumer and industry should dictate what is mandatory not the government or FDA. The more the industry self regulates itself the less argument the government has to regulate the industry for the safety of the consumer.

The current free market lends itself to a lesson in economics at its very best. I am interested to see the outcome.

 

[caramel]

Cigarettes, cigars, pipes and vaporizers are nicotine delivery systems. It is to nicotine that we are addicted too. All those delivery systems are harmful to some degree. Vapers choose the less harmful of those systems. Close to 85% of vapers on this thread want to remove/control known and removable dangerous components of e-liquids to lower the risks further.

Don't you agree ?

No I don't agree. You can't speak of "addiction to nicotine" since it's not nicotine that is the harmful substance here.

It may help with creating "addiction to cigarettes" but it's not the harmful element in cigarette. Taken outside / separated from cigarettes it's not harmful.

In contrast, we can speak of "alcohol addiction" since it is exactly the alcohol that is the harmful element in alcoholic drinks.

 

[caramel]

This poll smells Manipulation. In reality there are just 2 simple options:

- let the market decide
- let the government decide

 

[Tangaroav]

No I don't agree. You can't speak of "addiction to nicotine" since it's not nicotine that is the harmful substance here.

It may help with creating "addiction to cigarettes" but it's not the harmful element in cigarette. Taken outside / separated from cigarettes it's not harmful.

In contrast, we can speak of "alcohol addiction" since it is exactly the alcohol that is the harmful element in alcoholic drinks.

Your disagreement has no effect on your addiction to nicotine. Denial is most common amongst addicts.

btw, there are many other nicotine delivery systems sold in pharmacies. Nicotine addiction has spawn a large industry to cure it.

 

[Tangaroav]

This poll smells Manipulation. In reality there are just 2 simple options:

- let the market decide
- let the government decide

That is exactly what the survey does

 

[caramel]

Your disagreement has no effect on your addiction to nicotine. Denial is most common amongst addicts.

btw, there are many other nicotine delivery systems sold in pharmacies. Nicotine addiction has spawn a large industry to cure it.

Are you trolling or something?

 

[Tangaroav]

Are you trolling or something?

Why would you say such a thing ??? I am sorry if you found anything offensive in what I wrote. I was only trying to explain the nicotine addiction that most of us here suffer from.

 

[caramel]

Why would you say such a thing ??? I am sorry if you found anything offensive in what I wrote. I was only trying to explain the nicotine addiction that most of us here suffer from.

Cause you replied with an ad hominem attack instead of addressing the debated subject.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem