The Diketone Debate: Which Position Do you Take?

[Mr.Mann]

...


I'm not sure butyric acid is a diketone. I looked it up, and it does not seem to have the property of destroying lungs, merely irritating them -- irritation is something that could be adjusted for -- if one is more bothered, use less or none; if one is not bothered, then it's a non-issue.

...


Andria

Have you seen this?

Inhalation dosimetry of diacetyl and butyric acid, two components of butter flavoring vapors.

Abstract
Occupational exposure to butter flavoring vapors (BFV) is associated with significant pulmonary injury. The goal of the current study was to characterize inhalation dosimetric patterns of diacetyl and butyric acid, two components of BFV, and to develop a hybrid computational fluid dynamic-physiologically based pharmacokinetic model (CFD-PBPK) to describe these patterns. Uptake of diacetyl and butyric acid vapors, alone and in combination, was measured in the upper respiratory tract of anesthetized male Sprague-Dawley rats under constant velocity flow conditions and the uptake data were used to validate the CFD-PBPK model. Diacetyl vapor (100 or 300 ppm) was scrubbed from the airstream with 76-36% efficiency at flows of 100-400 ml/min. Butryic acid (30 ppm) was scrubbed with >90% efficiency. Concurrent exposure to butyric acid resulted in a small but significant reduction of diacetyl uptake (36 vs. 31%, p < 0.05). Diacetyl was metabolized in nasal tissues in vitro, likely by diacetyl reductase, an enzyme known to be inhibited by butyric acid. The CFD-PBPK model closely described diacetyl uptake; the reduction in diacetyl uptake by butyric acid could be explained by inhibition of diacetyl reductase. Extrapolation to the human via the model suggested that inspired diacetyl may penetrate to the intrapulmonary airways to a greater degree in the human than in the rat. Thus, based on dosimetric relationships, extrapulmonary airway injury in the rat may be predictive of intrapulmonary airway injury in humans. Butyric acid may modulate diacetyl toxicity by inhibiting its metabolism and/or altering its inhalation dosimetric patterns.

I only kinda understand it, but it is interesting.

Hmm... the only problem I see with that is that unless there was some serious editing, most people would be unable to interpret actual lab results -- they tend to be rather arcane. When I get my labwork back for blood tests, I have to go over them with my doctor, so I understand what's being reported, and what it means.

I'm fully on the side of disclosure -- but it needs to be disclosure in terms that the avg layman could understand.


Andria

Exactly!

 

[AndriaD]

My understanding of this issue is that flavor manufacturers are making their flavors for ingestion and diacetyl and AP are allowed to be reported as zero if they're below a certain amount. That amount is way higher than we want to inhale.

Exactly, which is why they should tell us if those ingredients are present -- and some manufacturers are apparently quite aware of the problem, and are releasing "v2" flavors which don't contain them (Capella), or reformulating flavors to remove them, or creating new versions without them of old flavors with them (TFA).

I see a real market for whole new lines of flavors made especially for vaping -- dependant on how insane the FDA decides to be about e-cigarettes and associated matters, of course.

Andria

 

[AndriaD]

Have you seen this?

Inhalation dosimetry of diacetyl and butyric acid, two components of butter flavoring vapors.

Abstract
Occupational exposure to butter flavoring vapors (BFV) is associated with significant pulmonary injury. The goal of the current study was to characterize inhalation dosimetric patterns of diacetyl and butyric acid, two components of BFV, and to develop a hybrid computational fluid dynamic-physiologically based pharmacokinetic model (CFD-PBPK) to describe these patterns. Uptake of diacetyl and butyric acid vapors, alone and in combination, was measured in the upper respiratory tract of anesthetized male Sprague-Dawley rats under constant velocity flow conditions and the uptake data were used to validate the CFD-PBPK model. Diacetyl vapor (100 or 300 ppm) was scrubbed from the airstream with 76-36% efficiency at flows of 100-400 ml/min. Butryic acid (30 ppm) was scrubbed with >90% efficiency. Concurrent exposure to butyric acid resulted in a small but significant reduction of diacetyl uptake (36 vs. 31%, p < 0.05). Diacetyl was metabolized in nasal tissues in vitro, likely by diacetyl reductase, an enzyme known to be inhibited by butyric acid. The CFD-PBPK model closely described diacetyl uptake; the reduction in diacetyl uptake by butyric acid could be explained by inhibition of diacetyl reductase. Extrapolation to the human via the model suggested that inspired diacetyl may penetrate to the intrapulmonary airways to a greater degree in the human than in the rat. Thus, based on dosimetric relationships, extrapulmonary airway injury in the rat may be predictive of intrapulmonary airway injury in humans. Butyric acid may modulate diacetyl toxicity by inhibiting its metabolism and/or altering its inhalation dosimetric patterns.

I only kinda understand it, but it is interesting.

Exactly!

Yes, that is *precisely* what I mean by "arcane". A biochemist would understand it, surely, and maybe even a regular ol chemist, but the vast majority of us are not *any* kind of chemist. I read at a post-college level, but I get only vague information from the above -- mainly, that butyric acid seems to mediate some/most of the effect of diacetyl -- and perhaps other diketones as well? It's not stated that that would be true, but it's a natural inference, since other diketones are chemically extremely similar to diacetyl -- and I only know that from reading those OSHA papers I linked previously -- I'm sure most people have no idea at all what any of this stuff is.

Andria

 

[Mazinny]

Hmm... the only problem I see with that is that unless there was some serious editing, most people would be unable to interpret actual lab results -- they tend to be rather arcane. When I get my labwork back for blood tests, I have to go over them with my doctor, so I understand what's being reported, and what it means.

I'm fully on the side of disclosure -- but it needs to be disclosure in terms that the avg layman could understand.


Andria

The way this vendor does it is pretty easy to understand :

http://www.mountainoakvapors.com/v/Certs/Heavenly 7.pdf

 

[Racehorse]

Maybe not good enough

Perhaps I have a different perception of the issue at hand.

The vaping industry is trying to establish credibility and acceptance.

Yet--- every time we have these discussions--- instead of aiming for the higher standard, aiming for excellence--- the majority seem content to consistently aim for the lower, lesser, least expensive, etc. solution, using an “excuse based” approach.

Mediocrity is part of a failure chain that lack of accountability sets in motion.

IMHO, this approach won't get vaping to where it wants to go.

The way this vendor does it is pretty easy to understand :

http://www.mountainoakvapors.com/v/Certs/Heavenly 7.pdf

Thankfully, there are a few who are unwilling to accept less than high standards.

That is why it is probably a good idea to start the list. I suspect that those in this category might also realize some well-deserved benefit from the "consumer".


Am still confused about the disclosure part. Without full test results, they can just disclose? Disclose what?

yet this is the very thing that suicide bunny was raked over the coals for......they disclosed, but didn't honestly disclose the "actual" levels, and when they did, they were trying to hide them because they were high? So excuse-based, fear-based model reigns? The less info the better?

So, what *exactly* does disclosure mean? Just saying "there's AP and DK in there" and call it a day?

Meaning, that could be 4x or 100x or 5000x the acceptable amounts? But the numbers don't matter, and then we can say we're not numbers people and can't interpret them anyway?

Sheesh.

 

[Racehorse]

added to above post instead

 

[AndriaD]

So, what *exactly* does disclosure mean? Just saying "there's AP and DK in there" and call it a day?

Meaning, that could be 4x or 100x or 5000x the acceptable amounts? But the numbers don't matter, and then we can say we're not numbers people and can't interpret them anyway?

Sheesh.

No. But it does mean describing the findings in plain English, rather than in twisted, esoteric, chemical terms that no one but a biochemist would understand.

What I'm having a hard time understanding is your apparent anger with the subject matter, and/or those of us here discussing it. I had thought we were having a civilized discussion of what the industry needs to do, to make it safer for a larger number of people, if not "everyone everywhere" -- why does this discussion require anger? I've enjoyed reading your posts, because they're so clear, so logical, so rational... so I'm not really sure what is causing such agitation.


Andria

 

[AndriaD]

The way this vendor does it is pretty easy to understand :

http://www.mountainoakvapors.com/v/Certs/Heavenly 7.pdf

Yes, I agree; it seems pretty clear. However, they're only testing for diacetyl and "2,3-Pentanedione" (acetyl propionyl), without any reference to acetoin, which is apparently just as big a culprit as diacetyl, and in fact, if acetoin is present, there may be *traces* of diacetyl. It states that there is no diacetyl present... but I don't think that necessarily means there is no acetoin present.

Andria

 

[Mazinny]

Yes, I agree; it seems pretty clear. However, they're only testing for diacetyl and "2,3-Pentanedione" (acetyl propionyl), without any reference to acetoin, which is apparently just as big a culprit as diacetyl, and in fact, if acetoin is present, there may be *traces* of diacetyl. It states that there is no diacetyl present... but I don't think that necessarily means there is no acetoin present.

Andria

My understanding is that acetoin itself is not nearly as troubling as diacetyl and A P. Acetoin does apparently under some circumstances lead to trace amounts of diacetyl but according to my understanding of what Dr. F said he isn't too concerned about that. Here's a link to Dr. F on a podcast where the issue was discussed. Also some caller questions answered.

https://soundcloud.com/vp-live/suic...itive?in=vp-live/sets/the-click-bang-archives

 

[bigdancehawk]

This is just one of the many reasons I'm moving toward DIYing *all* my ejuice
Andria

Ha! I came very close to Googling DIYing to find your favorite Chinese purveyor of e-juice ingredients.

 

[Mr.Mann]

Perhaps I have a different perception of the issue at hand.

The vaping industry is trying to establish credibility and acceptance.

Yet--- every time we have these discussions--- instead of aiming for the higher standard, aiming for excellence--- the majority seem content to consistently aim for the lower, lesser, least expensive, etc. solution, using an “excuse based” approach.

Mediocrity is part of a failure chain that lack of accountability sets in motion.

IMHO, this approach won't get vaping to where it wants to go.



Thankfully, there are a few who are unwilling to accept less than high standards.

That is why it is probably a good idea to start the list. I suspect that those in this category might also realize some well-deserved benefit from the "consumer".


Am still confused about the disclosure part. Without full test results, they can just disclose? Disclose what?

yet this is the very thing that suicide bunny was raked over the coals for......they disclosed, but didn't honestly disclose the "actual" levels, and when they did, they were trying to hide them because they were high? So excuse-based, fear-based model reigns? The less info the better?

So, what *exactly* does disclosure mean? Just saying "there's AP and DK in there" and call it a day?

Meaning, that could be 4x or 100x or 5000x the acceptable amounts? But the numbers don't matter, and then we can say we're not numbers people and can't interpret them anyway?

Sheesh.

RH,

What I am saying is simple, practical, and doable right this second, but hardly mediocre in my opinion. If a vendor has tested, then show it and the protocol -- not mediocre, but asking for what MOV has done. If they have not, then say so -- what all vendors should do that have not tested, but have prematurely put "DA free" on their site. CYA. If they know they have used flavorings with diketones, then say so -- like Nicoticket. If a person wants to avoid -- avoid meaning avoid, not moderate -- diketones in eliquid, then they would at least be able to know definitively which ones do have it, which ones may have it and which ones have proven to be free of it. I am not by any way shape or form saying that adequate testing isn't appropriate, awesome and needed, just that it isn't exactly practical in the short term for every vendor to do it for every single flavor. So what then do we do in the short term? What I suggested: disclose what is known and what is unknown regarding diketones in each liquid. That's not mediocre, that is doing what is automatically possible.

 

[Racehorse]

MM
Yeah, I know. and do understand all the diff perspectives. I do enjoy all the dialogue and see the assets in each opinion.

Michelangelo said: “The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and falling short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark.”

....and you know me......remember the earliest incarnation of that "what we want from eliquid vendors" over 2 years ago. There were all shades and strengths of wants and desires, based on what each thought was a necessary improvement.

I"m kinda a "raise the bar" person. I think when you are in the hot seat (and vaping IS in the hot seat), I picture sitting at a conference table, in a company where there is a true "culture of excellence"......how hollow some excuses would sound in that room.

I think we "get what we expect."

And, within the realm of "what is possible", there will be a few who will show they want to deliver beyond what would be merely a passable job....they will expect more from themselves, regardless of what their customers expect.

 

[Racehorse]

No. But it does mean describing the findings in plain English, rather than in twisted, esoteric, chemical terms that no one but a biochemist would understand.

What I'm having a hard time understanding is your apparent anger with the subject matter, and/or those of us here discussing it. I had thought we were having a civilized discussion of what the industry needs to do, to make it safer for a larger number of people, if not "everyone everywhere" -- why does this discussion require anger? I've enjoyed reading your posts, because they're so clear, so logical, so rational... so I'm not really sure what is causing such agitation.


Andria

So asking pertinent questions is "agitation"?

You joined in 2014.....you do realize that these conversations were happening in 2010, and we are still talking about "what the industry needs to do"? I know you read widely and thoroughly, so I know you already know this, and probably did 4 years of reading in 6 months.

I'm not aware of being angry at anyone or anything. Disappointment (and perhaps impatience) may be closer to the mark. I get dizzy when I have to go in circles.

At a time when the vaping industry wants so desperately to prove safety and go mainstream, they sure seem to be dragging their feet when they are asked to take steps to prove it.... that's all. Do ya feel me? It seems important to get the show on the road.

Agitation: well, this part, yeah: (I was certainly not *pleased* when I found out that several vendors who I had been giving money to, and said there were no diacetyls, lied to me. I have no problem telling you that. We are talking many hundreds of dollars, actually more. )

I have a lot of questions still.....I think many vapers do......but maybe I shouldn't ask them *here*.

 

[Mr.Mann]

MM
Yeah, I know. and do understand all the diff perspectives. I do enjoy all the dialogue and see the assets in each opinion.

Michelangelo said: “The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and falling short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark.”

....and you know me......remember the earliest incarnation of that "what we want from eliquid vendors" over 2 years ago. There were all shades and strengths of wants and desires, based on what each thought was a necessary improvement....

You already know! Man, there was so much said in that thread. So much good stuff too. Sadly, I actually think the liquid game was easier to navigate then. What a difference a couple years can make!

I"m kinda a "raise the bar" person. I think when you are in the hot seat (and vaping IS in the hot seat), I picture sitting at a conference table, in a company where there is a true "culture of excellence"......how hollow some excuses would sound in that room.

I think we "get what we expect."

And, within the realm of "what is possible", there will be a few who will show they want to deliver beyond what would be merely a passable job....they will expect more from themselves, regardless of what their customers expect.

Speaking about that "table" though, I imagine everyone at that table asking themselves, "what exactly can we all do right now?!" Short of mostly everyone deciding to shut down there doors until they can prove they are in fact what they previously claimed laugh, they should just admit to what is known and unknown an then let the chips fall where they will. The saddest part, and I guess the part that is so agitating, is that even with the type of disclosure I am talking about, or even full-on-out testing with the appropriate detection limits, that won't actually change the depth of our options, it may just illuminate how meager the pickings are for those that want what they originally thought they were buying.

 

[AndriaD]

So asking pertinent questions is "agitation"?

You joined in 2014.....you do realize that these conversations were happening in 2010, and we are still talking about "what the industry needs to do"? I know you read widely and thoroughly, so I know you already know this, and probably did 4 years of reading in 6 months.

I'm not aware of being angry at anyone or anything. Disappointment (and perhaps impatience) may be closer to the mark. I get dizzy when I have to go in circles.

At a time when the vaping industry wants so desperately to prove safety and go mainstream, they sure seem to be dragging their feet when they are asked to take steps to prove it.... that's all. Do ya feel me? It seems important to get the show on the road.

Agitation: well, this part, yeah: (I was certainly not *pleased* when I found out that several vendors who I had been giving money to, and said there were no diacetyls, lied to me. I have no problem telling you that. We are talking many hundreds of dollars, actually more. )

I have a lot of questions still.....I think many vapers do......but maybe I shouldn't ask them *here*.

Ok. I just wondered; it seemed so unlike your usual posts. Just wondered if you were having a really bad day today or something.

Since January, I've gone from cigalikes and "it must taste just like smoking a VA Slim!" all the way thru a bunch of different hardware issues to political issues to starting to get serious about DIY now that I seem to have figured out what kinds of flavors I like best, I'm tired of paying for pre-made juice and having no idea what I'm really getting, I have a pretty good handle on hardware, and the politics seems kinda up in the air at the moment. At first I was the usual newbie, figuring that since it was so much better than smoking, how could it be bad? But my own personal experiences with questionable ejuice led me to really looking into this 'suspect ingredients' issue, and really I was a bit appalled, considering how destructive these diketones are, but not really surprised, given that the flavors really are for dietary use rather than specifically for vaping, and now to wondering what might be done to "fix" it, or at least resolve it in a way that makes clear which flavors are definitely to be avoided, if I want to avoid lung destruction -- and I certainly do want to avoid that; asthma is bad enough, I sure don't want to make it worse.

The reason I mentioned that about the labwork needing to be understandable by laymen is really two-fold -- primarily, yes, it needs to be understandable by those who know nothing of chemistry, and also, presenting a bunch of arcane scientific gobbledygook would be a good way for some nefarious manufacturers and/or vendors to obfuscate the issue -- in effect, "ok, here's that labwork you wanted... do you understand anymore than you did before??" I get a vibe like that everytime I try to look any of this stuff up online, and it really peeves me -- obfuscation to the nth degree, and they can so innocently say, 'well we gave you the info you wanted.'

Andria

 

[Racehorse]

You already know! Man, there was so much said in that thread. So much good stuff too. Sadly, I actually think the liquid game was easier to navigate then. What a difference a couple years can make!





Speaking about that "table" though, I imagine everyone at that table asking themselves, "what exactly can we all do right now?!" Short of mostly everyone deciding to shut down there doors until they can prove they are in fact what they previously claimed laugh, they should just admit to what is known and unknown an then let the chips fall where they will. The saddest part, and I guess the part that is so agitating, is that even with the type of disclosure I am talking about, or even full-on-out testing with the appropriate detection limits, that won't actually change the depth of our options, it may just illuminate how meager the pickings are for those that want what they originally thought they were buying.

Yeah, it came up in that topic in 2012, we were talking about who would still be "alive" when push came to shove, and we talked about some vendors who were, even back then, "playing for keeps"....getting their ducks in a row.

I just noticed that MOV has expanded to 5 locations...these people and those like them are planning on being around, and they are an example of going beyond what they "have to do".

I've probably added a layer of complexity to a simple poll, 4 choices, and I apologize for that! I guess my problem is that when I compare businesses I can't use the lowest common denominator when framing my responses to questions.....even when that is actually required to have a starting point.

I won't clutter the topic further, just count me as one who doesn't understand "slow pokes" and feet draggers when the Titanic is sinking, at least, by reading the posts in the political topics, vaping appears to some to be under the gun right now.

 

[Stosh]

The diacetyl and "popcorn lung" studies and scares are at present incomplete and "regulate and save" science.

Consider.....Diacetyl - Toxipedia

In 2003, the EPA reported that it would complete a project on evaluating the compounds emitted through popping microwave popcorn. Ultimately, it has been shown that diacetyl is just one agent that can cause flavorings-related lung disease:

"The flavorings industry has estimated that over a thousand flavoring ingredients have the potential to be respiratory hazards due to possible volatility and irritant properties (alpha, beta-unsaturated aldehydes and ketones, aliphatic aldehydes, aliphatic carboxylic acids, aliphatic amines, and aliphatic aromatic thiols and sulfides)."

Also of interest, there's the study comparing smoking to the industrial study which raised the exposure danger of inhaled diacetyl in the first place.

Concentrations of Diacetyl and 2,3-Pentanedione in Mainstream Cigarette Smoke: A Comparison to Workplace Exposures
http://www.cardnochemrisk.com/~chem...OT_2014/Pierce_Diacetyl_SOT_2014_Abstract.pdf

We found that diacetyl and 2,3-pentanedione exposures from cigarette smoking far exceed occupational diacetyl exposures for most food/flavoring workers who smoke.

If you smoked...if you enjoyed the bouquet of a glass of wine...if you brew a pot of coffee, sniffed the aroma and vapor....you've been inhaling diacetyl regularly.

With smoking the greatest contributor by far, more than working in a popcorn factory.

 

[Zelphie]

Yes, and thats too bad that it takes many forms and is ever present. Seems all the more reason not to direct inhale it from yet another source.
Poor smokers and the unknowing guy who got popcorn lung by inhaling the fumes of his long time popcorn eating habit, seems you can get damage without being a smoker or in a factory.

ETA: And you right, the chemicals we are talking about are merely a pebble that sits upon the very tip of the iceberg.

 

[Stosh]

Yes, and thats too bad that it takes many forms and is ever present. Seems all the more reason not to direct inhale it from yet another source.
Poor smokers and the unknowing guy who got popcorn lung by inhaling the fumes of his long time popcorn eating habit, seems you can get damage without being a smoker or in a factory.

What's missing is the millions of smokers who directly inhaled levels 100 times the exposure, keeling over with popcorn lung. It seems they found an easy scapegoat to blame for the workers illness and stopped investigating. There has to be other contributing conditions or chemicals that are being ignored.

ETA: And you right, the chemicals we are talking about are merely a pebble that sits upon the very tip of the iceberg.

AMEN brother!! .

 

[AndriaD]

I guess it's just another manifestation of the fact that life on planet earth is hazardous to your health.

Andria