Trust, Reputation, and Proof

[Tangaroav]

I encourage you to keep this thread open. Your questionning is valid.

Be careful many reactionnaries live here and can not accept that anyone questions their truth . They are experts at closing threads by having threads closed by the forum police or by posting out of subject in a team/fanboy fashion and will not hesitate to ridicule and insult.

Having answers to those important if difficult questions helps all of us. Discussing those brings clarifications and often leads to un-expected venues.

edit: Often the 'reactionnaries' have an hidden vested interest and feel threatened by some valid discussions.

 

[Boletus]

I think what Some People are Commenting on is your Quasi X-Files Phrasing. And Thinly Veiled Suggestions that there is some sort of Conspiracy going on.

Seriously, I am not suggesting any conspiracy. If my wording comes across that way, I am sorry. I do not think the suppliers are lying about their products, I am simply asking why the names of the labs are not on their analytical reports. In my opinion, they are probably telling the truth, but are failing to present it in a way that garners much confidence for me. But as I have stated several times in this thread, that does not prevent me from vaping. I just would like to see them do a better job of presenting their claims, and would like to know if any of them that I have not found yet do offer what I consider solid proof.

If any of them hope to survive the inevitable Vapocalypse when the FDA does shove its ham-fisted hands into our lives, that will likely be a minimum requirement for doing business. Am I happy about that? Yes and no. I don't want to see my choices drastically reduced or have the price of vaping increase to the level of cigarettes, but there is little I can do but join CASAA and communicate with my elected representatives, which I do. On the other hand, I firmly believe that more information is better than less, and I don't want to see some fly-by-night outfit really screw things up by selling us garbage. I have no reason the believe any of the vendors I find mentioned here would do that, but I find no reason to be sure some new player couldn't jump into the game and do just that.

Regarding the X-Files reference, am I really being that cryptic or accusatory? Perhaps I am failing to properly represent my perspective. I do primarily technical writing and try to phrase my words as precisely as possible, which can put people off, I suppose. How's this:? There I used an emoticon, so now you have to believe me and like everything I say, right? (That's a joke).

 

[Asbestos4004]

You'd bet your bippy? I'd never bet my bippy.

 

[Boletus]

You'd bet your bippy? I'd never bet my bippy.

Are you a geezer like me that actually remembers Rowan and Martin?

 

[zoiDman]

Seriously, I am not suggesting any conspiracy. ...

Not Really Saying you Are. Hence the Winky after my Post.

I think what it gets do to for Me is there are Two Basic Ways that someone Could get ahold of some Bad/Tainted Nicotine Base.

1 - The Seller Receives a Tainted Batch and does Not Test it for Impurities. Either In House or via an Independent Laboratory. They just Merely Rebottle it into smaller Portions and send it Down the Line to their Customers.

2 - The Seller Receives a Tainted Batch and Does Test it for Impurities. Either In House or via an Independent Laboratory. But when the Results come back, they sell it to the Consumer Anyway.

I don't see the 2nd Scenario happening all that much. Because of the Way that Product Reviews are done on the Internet in near Real Time. And a Nicotine Vendor knows that for Most People, if they Read a Review about some Tainted Nicotine, that they are Never Going to Buy from that Vendor. Either Today. Or in the Future.

But Now the 1st Scenario? That is VERY Viable.

The Seller is Acting in Good Faith. And does Not Want to Sell anything Sub-Standard. But they do Not Know what they are Selling. They just "Trust" what there Supplier Tells/Shows them Quality-Wise. And since they Do Not Do any Verification of Purity, then it just gets down to "Trust, Reputation, and Proof". Only in this case, It is One Step Higher in the Supply Chain.

BTW - All this Applies to Flavored e-Liquid Retailers Also.

And I think Many People would be Surprised at How Few Flavored e-Liquid Retailers actually test their Nicotine Base before they Mix Up their Masterpieces using Untested PG, VG and Flavorings.

 

[zoiDman]

Are you a geezer like me that actually remembers Rowan and Martin?

I know it. But you Probably Dated 90% of the People who Read it.

And that 90% would have No Clue where this Picture Came From...

 

[Boletus]

I know it. But you Probably Dated 90% of the People who Read it.

And that 90% would have No Clue where this Picture Came From...

Is this the party to whom I am speaking?

 

[Boletus]

And I think Many People would be Surprised at How Few Flavored e-Liquid Retailers actually test their Nicotine Base before they Mix Up their Masterpieces using Untested PG, VG and Flavorings.

It is something we should all be aware of, if not concerned about. One tragic mishap, and the FDA will probably ban sales of e-liquid in a heartbeat. I do not want that any more than anyone else here. My greatest fears are that either I have to be an outlaw that hides in the bushes to vape or that it becomes as expensive as cigarettes.

 

[Shirtbloke]

Is this the sort of certificate you're looking for? Inawera provide certs for their bases, but as my Polish is non existent I can't really say how independent they might be.....
http://inawerashop.com/images/certyfikates/BVT/BVT_6.pdf

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Inawera.Dot.Com sp. z o.o. sp. komandytowa
ul. Kossaka 79
20-358 Lublin
ŚWIADECTWO JAKOŚCI / CERTIFICATE OF QUALITY
BVT Baza Tytoniowa VIRGINIA – Tobacco Base VIRGINIA - 6
Nr. partii: TBV/6/231013 Nr. próbki: 3590/10/13 Termin ważności – expiry: 10/2015
Glikol 1,2 propylenowy - Propylene glycol 1.2 ̴ 43 %
Gliceryna roślinna - Vegetable glycerin ̴ 43 %
Woda zdemineralizowana – demineralized water ̴ 10 %
Środki aromatyczne - Aromatic compounds ̴ 4 %
Nikotyna - Nicotine 5,40 mg/ml. – 0,54%
Glikol i gliceryna posiadają atesty koszerności.
Płyn nie zawiera środków konserwujących ani wzmacniających aromat.
Glycol and glycerine have certificates of cosher.
The liquid does not contain substances conservatives nor intensyfing of a flavor.
Składnik/zanieczyszczenie – Cd , Cu, Pb, Zn. Ingredients/impurity – Cd, Cu, Pb, Zn.
Kod próbki Parametr (µg/dm3
)
Cu Zn Pb Cd
3589/10/13 <LOQ=1 <LOQ=5 <LOQ=0,1 <LOQ=0,2
Warunki przechowywania: W suchym wentylowanym, zaciemnionym miejscu z dala od źródeł ciepła w
szczelnie zamkniętych, oryginalnych opakowaniach w temp 5-25
oC.
Produkt przeznaczony do inhalowania w elektronicznych papierosach.
Produkt nie nadaje się do bezpośredniego spożycia.
Chronić przed dziećmi.
Storage conditions: Dry, ventilated, dark area, away from heat sources in tightly closed original packaging at
temperature 5-25oC.
The product intended for inhalation in electronic cigarettes.
The product is not suitable for direct consumption.
Keep away from children.
The document was prepared on the basis of the available results of analyses.
.
PIERWSZA POMOC:
Wdychanie: W razie zagrożenia inhalacyjnego wyprowadzić poszkodowanego na świeże powietrze
Kontakt ze skórą: W przypadku kontaktu ze skórą zmyć obficie wodą,
Kontakt z oczami: W razie kontaktu z oczami natychmiast przemyć oczy dużą ilością wody przy
otwartych powiekach. Gdy podrażnienie nie ustępuje skorzystać z pomocy medycznej.
Spożycie: Nie dotyczy gdy produkt stosowany zgodnie z przeznaczeniem.
W przypadku zatrucia:
Telefon alarmowy: 998 z telefonów stacjonarnych, 112 z telefonów komórkowych, lub z najbliższą
terenową jednostką PSP.
Informacja toksykologiczna w Polsce: 426314724
FIRST AID MEASURES:
Inhalation: In case of accident by inhalation, move the exposed person to fresh air.
Skin contact: In case of skin contact, wash the exposed area thoroughly with water.
Eye contact: In case of eye contact, immediately flush eyes with plenty of water, keeping eyelids open.
Seek medical attention if irritation persists.
Ingestion: This does not apply when the product is used as intended.
Świadectwo jakości wykonano na podstawie raportów badań” nr 55/GC/10/13 oraz
nr. 26/ESA/10/13 jednostki badawczej.
Laboratorium posiada akredytację PCA nr. AB 1375 wydane przez Polskie Centrum Akredytacji.
Certyficat of Quality carried out on the grounds of research report nr. 55/GC/10/13 and 26/ESA/10/13 of
research unit.
mgr. Gabriela Gęca
inż. Aleksander Dutkowiak

 

[Boletus]

Is this the sort of certificate you're looking for? Inawera provide certs for their bases, but as my Polish is non existent I can't really say how independent they might be.....
http://inawerashop.com/images/certyfikates/BVT/BVT_6.pdf

That is a good start. As far as I can tell (I know few words of spoken polish, but that is all) it is not formal verification by an independent, certified lab, which would be best, but at least they print it on their own letterhead, so you know where it comes from. Why does that matter? Because they are putting their own butts on the line by providing it. I respect that.

But ultimately, formal verification by an independent, certified lab will be required at the least. The sooner vendors wrap their heads around that, the more likely they will be to survive the Vapocalypse.

 

[Skeebo]

I encourage you to keep this thread open. Your questionning is valid.

Be careful many reactionnaries live here and can not accept that anyone questions their truth . They are experts at closing threads by having threads closed by the forum police or by posting out of subject in a team/fanboy fashion and will not hesitate to ridicule and insult.

Having answers to those important if difficult questions helps all of us. Discussing those brings clarifications and often leads to un-expected venues.

edit: Often the 'reactionnaries' have an hidden vested interest and feel threatened by some valid discussions.

I don't know why, but you make me laugh.. sometimes very loudly with a shaking of the head motion (not up and down). It scares me.

 

[zoiDman]

Is this the sort of certificate you're looking for? Inawera provide certs for their bases...

Looks like they Tested it for Copper, Zinc, Lead and Cadmium.

 

[Shirtbloke]

Looks like they Tested it for Copper, Zinc, Lead and Cadmium.

Well that has to be a good thing surely?

 

[snork]

Investigating various sources of e-juice and nic base, I have seen several recommendations here on the forum, which I find quite helpful; if it hasn't killed you or made you sick, and it tastes OK, that is some assurance for me.

But every source I check out has the same basic level of assurance regarding the quality and purity of their products: "We use only USP, GRAS, and the highest quality ingredients." Some of them provide GC/MS analytical results for their nicotine, but none of those results provide the name and certifications for the labs that do the analyses.

It all sounds good, but should I stake my health on anonymous lab results and promises with no means of firm verification? So I am just curious at this point, has anyone found a source that provides verifiable proof of their purity and quality claims? Failing that, who do you believe, and why?

I am pretty sure that whatever I get from companies with good reputations in this forum is going to be far less harmful to me than burning tobacco (and the gunk they put in it), but being someone who reads lab results as part of my job, I sure would like to see a certified lab that is willing to offer proof of the vendors' claims.

I like your tenacity.
Consider something: Vendors could provide all the certification in the world, and in the end end you'd still be stuck with "I read it on the Internet, so it's gotta be TRUE".

Do what I did. Visit your favorite eliquid vendor, talk to them, see what they do, how they do it and what they use in person.

If that isn't satisfactory, the safest most iron-clad guarantee of safety is not to vape. Face it, we are guinea pigs.

 

[Boletus]

Well that has to be a good thing surely?

Certainly. Copper and zinc are important nutrients in small doses, but can be toxic in high enough doses. Cadmium and lead are seriously scary. I wonder if testing for those metals is a requirement in Poland, or if they just test for it out of an abundance of caution.

 

[Shirtbloke]

Certainly. Copper and zinc are important nutrients in small doses, but can be toxic in high enough doses. Cadmium and lead are seriously scary. I wonder if testing for those metals is a requirement in Poland, or if they just test for it out of an abundance of caution.

If you want clarification it might be worth asking Marcelina from Inawera.......
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...es-accessories-discount-codes-promotions.html

 

[k3vin]

I am going to go out on a limb here, as I am really not supposed to post in this area Since I am a registered supplier,so mods please forgive me,and move or delete as needed.

Boletus, to answer your question some what. When FDA regs do come down, and this is only my opinion, since you seem to be more versed in this than me, is that when it does, it will still NOT be A stipulation that I or others will have to show the general public anything of which you ask for.

If I consider as many of us do, ingredients to be part of a trade secret then I in fact would only have to show governmental agencies and not the general public. Paper work and proper testing is what they will be looking for. So i think that it will be up to each individual/company to decide for him or herself what they put out into public domain.

I hope this helps.

 

[Boletus]

I like your tenacity.
Consider something: Vendors could provide all the certification in the world, and in the end end you'd still be stuck with "I read it on the Internet, so it's gotta be TRUE".

Do what I did. Visit your favorite eliquid vendor, talk to them, see what they do, how they do it and what they use in person.

If that isn't satisfactory, the safest most iron-clad guarantee of safety is not to vape. Face it, we are guinea pigs.

I have knowingly volunteered to be a guinea pig in this experiment, but I will ask questions and evaluate the assurances I am provided. Honestly, I am not actually afraid of my e-juice. Burning tobacco was actually killing me, so I am willing to take the risks that come with vaping.

And if my e-juice came with a label that said, "We do not actually have any idea what the chemical composition of this substance is and you use it entirely at your own risk," I would be OK with that. If a vendor's website or packaging says nothing about the purity of their products, no one can fault them for allowing you to take your own risks. But if they say something like, "Our product has been analyzed for quality and purity to ensure your safety, and here is the documentation to prove it," I will examine the documentation and see if it really does prove their claims.

 

[zoiDman]

Well that has to be a good thing surely?

Absolutely.

I don't Want any of these Metals in my e-Liquids.

Especially Lead. Because Lead is Very Insidious. In that, the Body Doesn't have a Good Way to get rid of Lead. So whatever you take in just kinds Builds Up.

And Too Much Lead will make you Coo Coo for Cocoa Puffs.

 

[snork]

I have knowingly volunteered to be a guinea pig in this experiment, but I will ask questions and evaluate the assurances I am provided. Honestly, I am not actually afraid of my e-juice. Burning tobacco was actually killing me, so I am willing to take the risks that come with vaping.

And if my e-juice came with a label that said, "We do not actually have any idea what the chemical composition of this substance is and you use it entirely at your own risk," I would be OK with that. If a vendor's website or packaging says nothing about the purity of their products, no one can fault them for allowing you to take your own risks. But if they say something like, "Our product has been analyzed for quality and purity to ensure your safety, and here is the documentation to prove it," I will examine the documentation and see if it really does prove their claims.

True - and I think it would be a very foolhardy vendor to make any claim of safety, documented or not. We haven't been doing this long enough to make any such claim.