unfortunately a lot of companies do not disclose the risk associated with their products and that information can be hard to find for an untrained consumer. many people do not know where to find information on the chemicals used in our juices and many companies don't disclose whats in those juices. some companies do provide warnings about the equipment they sell but many do not.
I do not think it possible to account for every risk associated with a product. And as I said previously, accounting for any is up to the manufacturer, at their discretion. I am adamant about notion there ought not to be a requirement.
I'd be 'average consumer / untrained consumer' and I'm thinking everyone on this thread is for at least some product(s) out there. I still don't think I fully understand risks of batteries when it comes to vaping, and not sure if anyone truly does. They'd have to be able to account for every conceivable scenario and be 100% accurate to have full understanding. All potential future scenarios as well.
If untrained consumer doesn't wish to do the homework, but still wishes to use the product, then they will learn limitations / risks for using their product on their own. IMO, this is where it becomes very clear that it is user responsibility, even while for that user (could be me), it will be treading murky waters until the potential risk(s) manifest itself (or themselves).
the average consumer must be assumed to be of average intelligence with no special knowledge and if a company is selling equipment or material that requires special knowledge to be used safely that company has an obligation to provide that information.
Like the question before in this thread "who determines 'advanced user,' I would ask who determines 'special knowledge.' I'm on very simple, low level vaping device that was able to be purchased in 2011. I routinely have to show newbies how to use my device. It is very simple. I reckon if I left them alone for all of 10 seconds they would figure it out. If not, they'd ask or they'd just say "hey, I don't have time for this." But in context of what you just stated, it would definitely be "special knowledge" that I possess to use, simply use, the product. And so not special that if I explained it on a vaping forum, I would think every current vaper would say, "duh, yeah, that's how you use a simple device."
Whenever I visit the larger device threads, I'm routinely observing a "duh, that's how you use this device" type mentality. Whereas newbies are like, "I have no idea what any of this does."
And to me, at that moment is where things get interesting. Cause there are clearly people so advanced doing things with devices that are not intended (by M/V) but stand a very good chance of improving use of the product. While there are others who are attempting to do advanced things (also not intended by M/V), but are very likely leading to critical user error. Now, when a person asks for help, then who are they to ultimately trust for guidance? My answer is foremost themselves. To elaborate on this, rather simple point, would take more paragraphs I reckon, because then it would just be walking through a whole bunch of conceivable scenarios to show that ultimately trust is never something that leaves its source. I don't give my trust away to another. You (or I) might think you (I) do, but in reality, we don't.
So, guidance can come from others, but the trust placed in that guidance is so critical to understanding ultimate responsibility (and yet so easy/obvious) that I am often times amazed we've made it this far in civilization given how (often) we constantly try to a) downplay need for guidance at some point (as in dude, I get it, just let me try it now) and b) restrict and manage guides in how they *must* provide guidance (to remain 'credible' or 'reliable'). The latter one applies to these manuals or whatever M/V provides, that some believe are required at time of sale. Almost all of that reads like some legal liability, fine print, baloney that isn't really guidance but a big CYA document. Not guidance.
To which the average consumer is very very very likely to ignore and go with "just let me try it now!"
the average consumer can not buy many things that are considered dangerous but they can buy vaping equipment that pushes the limits of the components used and may be doing so without knowing this. this places them and others around them at risk. if the industry does not self regulate then the government will do it for us.
This, to me is how Big Whatever comes about. Right here. Demanded by the demanders. How corporations are born, and how greed for profit is fully borne out.
Vaping has clearly been operating in an under regulated market, and many of us (I like to think vast majority of us) recognize that as a wonderful thing. A great blessing. While the realists in all of us knew that wouldn't last. Not in today's world. People were obviously going to manifest problems in that type of market scenario, and like all other regulated markets before vaping, were going to try to skirt ultimately responsibility on user and demand more regulations. More and more. The other version of greed that is continuously downplayed in this ongoing philosophical/moral debate we as a human society are having. Can't really have enough regulations/restrictions once that ball starts rolling. The more the merrier. Sure, you as individual may wish to say "enough with the regulations" at some point that is convenient for you, now that you possess all the "special knowledge" that works for you, but because not every conceivable scenario has been worked out in civilization, then you need to realize that the call for more regulation is still in the early going (for all you know) given the entire history of this product.
To manage guidance, that accounts for all the currently known do's and don'ts, it takes a behemoth of a company that has the resources to try and effectively communicate that to all potential customers. When in reality, it is one very large version of CYA. Obviously, there will likely always be mid-level players that stay in the market, but if they get too big, then all anyone needs to do (for nefarious reasons, or perhaps genuine consumer concern) is to demand more regulations that would set mid-level players back a few notches and keep larger companies gaining in market share as they have the better resources to easily adapt to more and more regulations. And more after that.
The only ways I know to get around all this, and still have people using the product they demand, is for an underground market to be created where the need for guidance and responsible use clearly falls on the user. Cause even in the underground market, if there are M/V's around who are intentionally harming their consumer base, and this can be shown beyond a reasonable doubt, they will be held accountable for that. Short of that, and in the domain of user just found another way to misuse the product that no one thought of previously, then everyone else looking in at the "illegal market's latest mishap," will conclude with something alone lines of "sucks to be that user." While the more compassionate individuals amongst us are like, "would be very nice if guidance could be provided to that person in an honest, straightforward way, minus the desire for that to be a mandatory obligation."
Cause once that desire for mandatory obligation (or mandatory anything, beyond basic trade of goods) is accepted, all guidance really becomes a variation of CYA, and is not really guidance. Add in a few anti-types of the product who will likely express (via media) their own versions of FUD for all users to pay attention to, and it really is mostly about CYA and very little about guidance.
Welcome to the vaping market of 2016. You're going to learn to love the previous version. So much so that it will be legendary how very few incidents of harm there actually were given how under regulated that market (once) was.
