Why don't people want e-liquid labels changed?

[caramel]

Risk of waterborne illness via drinking water in the United States. - PubMed - NCBI

Now let's hear the figures for vaping.

 

[skoony]

Risk of waterborne illness via drinking water in the United States. - PubMed - NCBI

Now let's hear the figures for vaping.

darn caramel,your turning me into a klepto'.
that ones going into the quiver.

mike

 

[AndriaD]

Risk of waterborne illness via drinking water in the United States. - PubMed - NCBI

Now let's hear the figures for vaping.

This is a big part of the reason we invested in a whole-house water treatment system; we've lived in 2 different localities whose tap water was so pathetic, you could see *things* floating in it! Now that is just GROSS! But we've learned not to place too much trust in municipal water treatment.

Also we wanted to help with not adding thousands of plastic bottles every year to the environment -- that plastic raft in the pacific isn't getting any smaller!

But nowadays when people compare vaping to tap water... I really think vaping is a LOT safer than most "tap water"!

Andria

 

[scrabble]

Like I said in a previous post if labels are regulated to include things like "this product may contain diacetyl" I fear it won't work to protect you any more than not including it on the label. Ejuice companies will put it on all labels whether it contains it or not to cover their assets from a legal standpoint. So you still will not know with 100% surety that any liquid does or does not in fact contain diacetyl. So why do we need the regulation?

From what I've read diacetyl is only in custard and cream flavorings. I found out about it while reading on the internet, not by labeling of products. On the bottle I have right now this is exactly what the label says:

THIS BOTTLE CONTAINS 1.8% NICOTINE BY VOLUME, A CHEMICAL KNOWN TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA TO CAUSE BIRTH DEFECTS OR OTHER REPRODUCTIVE HARM. KEEP AWAY FROM CHILDREN AND PETS. DO NOT USE IF TAMPER SEAL IS BROKEN. AVOID SKIN CONTACT. DO NOT INGEST. US Poison Control Hotline: 1-800-222-1222

INGREDIENTS: USP GRADE PROPYLENE GLYCOL, USP GRADE VEGETABLE GLYCERINE, NATURAL AND ARTIFICIAL FLAVORINGS, NICOTINE. STORE IN A DRY, COOL PLACE. MADE IN USA.

The natural and artificial flavorings in this liquid are not specified. The label identifies only nicotine (the harmful substance).

Popcorn lung sounds like a creepy clown nightmare of a disease. Since the majority of us are / were cigarette smokers, and we all know cigarette smoking can cause cancer and lead to death, I don't doubt that some people will still use liquids that have diacetyl. But there are people who would not want to take that risk, and they have the right to be properly informed. It shouldn't be left up to stumbling across that very important information on the internet. It should be stated on the label (if that chemical isn't outright banned).

 

[KattMamma]

I think the government should be doing its job. Some of the liquids are not safe (the ones that contain diacetyl). But just because some of the ingredients in some liquids are not safe does not mean that it all isn't safe. People should feel confident in acknowledging that there is good cause to use some regulation. And if somebody doesn't understand the way electricity works they can be harmed. See an example of a safety concern in this video (starts at 7:49):

First, diacetyl has only caused popcorn lung in a TINY percentage of industry workers. Diacetyl is in cig smoke too, but not a single case of popcorn lung has occurred in a smoker outside of the industries that use it to make popcorn or whatever.

Second -- the ejuice industry has already responded to vapers concerns about diacetyl and started creating diacetyl-free juices, or labeling those juices that contain diacetyl. Vapers who are concerned about diacetyl can choose to shop at one of the companies that voluntarily labels diacetyl products or does not use them. Find a company that is a member of AEMSA and only buy from them if you are concerned. (I am not - and the custards that contain diacetyl taste a LOT better than the ones that don't) Self-regulation is always preferable to gov't regulation.

Third -- ANY concessions we GIVE them is a BAD IDEA. If we say "We want you to regulate THIS, but don't regulate THAT" do you think they will listen? Any foothold they get just strengthens their position to regulate, tax, or outright ban vaping out of existence. I refuse to help them do that. I don't give an inch.

 

[NealBJr]

I think the government should be doing its job. Some of the liquids are not safe (the ones that contain diacetyl). But just because some of the ingredients in some liquids are not safe does not mean that it all isn't safe. People should feel confident in acknowledging that there is good cause to use some regulation. And if somebody doesn't understand the way electricity works they can be harmed. See an example of a safety concern in this video (starts at 7:49):

In the case of regulation, keep in mind that having a blanket regulation is not a good idea. If you want the mod itself regulated, it's not a good idea to have the FDA regulate it. It should be handled by the Underwriters Lab, not the FDA. Currently the FDA handles radiation and drug delivery devices. If it is classified as a drug delivery device, then that means that Ecigs are considered drug delivery devices and they are used to deliver drugs. That opens up a whole slew of problems within regulatory means. It would turn a $50 copper mod tube and a $50 atomizer into a $1000 medical device requiring permits.... Each mod and atomizer should go through extensive testing to make sure it delivers the exact amount as prescribed.

Ecigs are no more than flashlights with an atomizer. Flashlights that use Lithium Ion work on the same basic principals as ecigs. Atomizers use the same basic principals as hairdryers. A fog machine has been out for a while, and those are nothing more than a 300W+ ecig powered by an AC jack. All these are already covered by the UL.

As far as juice... You eat and drink products every day, and most of them have their ingredients listed. It's almost a mute point with EJuice, since ejuice contains propylene glycol, vegetable glycerine, nicotine, and food flavoring, and some can contain half of those. Sometimes distilled water is added. Propylene glycol, vegetable glycerine, nicotine, and distilled water is a main aspect in determining what you buy. You want %60/40 VG/PG juice, you're pretty much saying what you want the ingredients to be. The only question mark, is the flavoring, and that is what the FDA is touting they "do not know what's in an ecigarette". They have not done long term research on it, so their answer is to tax so high as to prevent children from buying it... all based on something they do not know.

How should we handle the juice? Until further research is done, a simple warning label is sufficient. The FDA is not in charge of our lives. They do not approve medical foods, dietary supplements, or compounded drugs. Even they themselves say they do not approve any additives to drugs that may affect potency, or safety of the drugs. They're trying to regulate something that they are not in charge of with Ecigarettes.

Think of an Ejuice... then look at THIS SITE. Think of what is in an Ejuice, and why it is in the ejuice.. the flavoring, the nicotine, and the PG/VG... what should be under the FDA's rules. Then read the FDA's proposal, and why they propose Ecigarettes be controlled by them. Under their proposal, every new item produced would have to go under the FDA's scrutiny.. including research done on each device. judging by the FDA's past experiences with medical devices, it takes up to three years to get the funding to study each device. Then think of what was out three years ago... that is what we'd be vaping now and paying a lot to get those devices. I wholly think that the FDA does NOT need to interfere with the Ecig industry.

 

[AndriaD]

From what I've read diacetyl is only in custard and cream flavorings. I found out about it while reading on the internet, not by labeling of products. On the bottle I have right now this is exactly what the label says:

THIS BOTTLE CONTAINS 1.8% NICOTINE BY VOLUME, A CHEMICAL KNOWN TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA TO CAUSE BIRTH DEFECTS OR OTHER REPRODUCTIVE HARM. KEEP AWAY FROM CHILDREN AND PETS. DO NOT USE IF TAMPER SEAL IS BROKEN. AVOID SKIN CONTACT. DO NOT INGEST. US Poison Control Hotline: 1-800-222-1222

INGREDIENTS: USP GRADE PROPYLENE GLYCOL, USP GRADE VEGETABLE GLYCERINE, NATURAL AND ARTIFICIAL FLAVORINGS, NICOTINE. STORE IN A DRY, COOL PLACE. MADE IN USA.

The natural and artificial flavorings in this liquid are not specified. The label identifies only nicotine (the harmful substance).

Popcorn lung sounds like a creepy clown nightmare of a disease. Since the majority of us are / were cigarette smokers, and we all know cigarette smoking can cause cancer and lead to death, I don't doubt that some people will still use liquids that have diacetyl. But there are people who would not want to take that risk, and they have the right to be properly informed. It shouldn't be left up to stumbling across that very important information on the internet. It should be stated on the label (if that chemical isn't outright banned).

Being one of those people who prefers to skip the diketone risk, I agree, the contents should be specified on the label -- but that's why I went to DIY, so I could keep those substances out. However, it's entirely possible to get "custard" flavor without diketones -- mix TFA Vanilla Swirl with TFA DX Bavarian Cream; custard flavor without diketones of any kind.

I really don't want gov't involved, even though I know that eventually they will be -- the gov't can screw up anything, and just because the gov't says something is safe, is no guarantee whatsoever that it is in fact safe: Chantix, anyone?

The FDA also allows anyone who wants to, to use sulfites in any edible thing they want to -- sulfites can kill an asthmatic, or at the very least, immediately bring on a serious asthma attack; they say that asthma rates are skyrocketing, and asthmatics are already 25% of the population -- so they FDA clearly doesn't give a rat's patootie if 25% of the population falls over dead.

So I personally don't care if 100% of the FDA falls over dead. They're useless overpaid drones.

Andria

 

[scrabble]

if you choked on it you were doing something wrong or you are allergic to something in the
juice,niether of which no regulations would help.
as an individual you are in a better position to find what takes care of your needs
as opposed to banning or regulating out of existence what most other people
are perfectly ok with.
mike

Excuse you, no, I wasn't doing anything wrong. Either the PG or the VG is a toxin. But my stating that wasn't about the matter of regulations. It was a matter of making it clear that vaping is actually NOT as safe as people want to believe that it is. You're getting defensive with me. Like I said, I'm all for vaping but I'm NOT all for saying that something is totally safe when it isn't. As for the choking I experienced, I never used that particular liquid again and haven't had that problem since. The way things work right now is that our feedback is the most valuable asset there is.

I choked. In my sleep. On bubbling mucus. I had a whole handful of it. It was extremely thick and bubbly. Not only was it gross, it was very very scary. I don't expect you to wipe my tears with Kleenex but I do expect you to not ignore or dismiss what I'm saying -- or accuse me of being an idiot ("doing something wrong"). It wasn't me or my fault. VG / PG can be toxic, as indicated by allergic reactions. I'm sorry if that scares you or makes you angry.

 

[scrabble]

Being one of those people who prefers to skip the diketone risk, I agree, the contents should be specified on the label -- but that's why I went to DIY, so I could keep those substances out. However, it's entirely possible to get "custard" flavor without diketones -- mix TFA Vanilla Swirl with TFA DX Bavarian Cream; custard flavor without diketones of any kind.

I really don't want gov't involved, even though I know that eventually they will be -- the gov't can screw up anything, and just because the gov't says something is safe, is no guarantee whatsoever that it is in fact safe: Chantix, anyone?

The FDA also allows anyone who wants to, to use sulfites in any edible thing they want to -- sulfites can kill an asthmatic, or at the very least, immediately bring on a serious asthma attack; they say that asthma rates are skyrocketing, and asthmatics are already 25% of the population -- so they FDA clearly doesn't give a rat's patootie if 25% of the population falls over dead.

So I personally don't care if 100% of the FDA falls over dead. They're useless overpaid drones.

Andria

I think that's where the government should draw the line. It should be no different from stated warnings about nicotine and cancer. They haven't banned cigarettes so I seriously doubt there will be a ban (in the United States) on e-cigs. But should appropriate warnings be on the labels of liquids? I think so, yes. Very much so.

 

[kaahn]

From what I've read diacetyl is only in custard and cream flavorings. I found out about it while reading on the internet, not by labeling of products. On the bottle I have right now this is exactly what the label says:

THIS BOTTLE CONTAINS 1.8% NICOTINE BY VOLUME, A CHEMICAL KNOWN TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA TO CAUSE BIRTH DEFECTS OR OTHER REPRODUCTIVE HARM. KEEP AWAY FROM CHILDREN AND PETS. DO NOT USE IF TAMPER SEAL IS BROKEN. AVOID SKIN CONTACT. DO NOT INGEST. US Poison Control Hotline: 1-800-222-1222

INGREDIENTS: USP GRADE PROPYLENE GLYCOL, USP GRADE VEGETABLE GLYCERINE, NATURAL AND ARTIFICIAL FLAVORINGS, NICOTINE. STORE IN A DRY, COOL PLACE. MADE IN USA.

The natural and artificial flavorings in this liquid are not specified. The label identifies only nicotine (the harmful substance).

Popcorn lung sounds like a creepy clown nightmare of a disease. Since the majority of us are / were cigarette smokers, and we all know cigarette smoking can cause cancer and lead to death, I don't doubt that some people will still use liquids that have diacetyl. But there are people who would not want to take that risk, and they have the right to be properly informed. It shouldn't be left up to stumbling across that very important information on the internet. It should be stated on the label (if that chemical isn't outright banned).

Diacetyl isn't the only harmful ingredient that may be in ejuice. Truth is diacetyl is in cigarettes in far greater quantities that e juice. But that is beside the point. If you already know that diacetyl is in most creams and custards then don't vape it. Why do you need a label to tell you that if you already know that? Also some creams and custards don't contain it. But I will be willing to bet the farm that ejuice companies will still add that blanket warning on all labels if such regulations are passed. If I was in that position I know I would. I understand your point...but I still stand by mine. A warning label won't mean squat if its a blanket statement and will not tell you without a doubt if the ejuice contains any harmful ingredients.

 

[mshinall]

Free market system. Vote with your wallet. If you don't like the way the company markets, use a different company. Don't add another reason for the government to make decisions for me, or my tax dollars. What ever happened to personal responsibility?

 

[scrabble]

In the case of regulation, keep in mind that having a blanket regulation is not a good idea. If you want the mod itself regulated, it's not a good idea to have the FDA regulate it. It should be handled by the Underwriters Lab, not the FDA. Currently the FDA handles radiation and drug delivery devices. If it is classified as a drug delivery device, then that means that Ecigs are considered drug delivery devices and they are used to deliver drugs. That opens up a whole slew of problems within regulatory means. It would turn a $50 copper mod tube and a $50 atomizer into a $1000 medical device requiring permits.... Each mod and atomizer should go through extensive testing to make sure it delivers the exact amount as prescribed.

Ecigs are no more than flashlights with an atomizer. Flashlights that use Lithium Ion work on the same basic principals as ecigs. Atomizers use the same basic principals as hairdryers. A fog machine has been out for a while, and those are nothing more than a 300W+ ecig powered by an AC jack. All these are already covered by the UL.

As far as juice... You eat and drink products every day, and most of them have their ingredients listed. It's almost a mute point with EJuice, since ejuice contains propylene glycol, vegetable glycerine, nicotine, and food flavoring, and some can contain half of those. Sometimes distilled water is added. Propylene glycol, vegetable glycerine, nicotine, and distilled water is a main aspect in determining what you buy. You want %60/40 VG/PG juice, you're pretty much saying what you want the ingredients to be. The only question mark, is the flavoring, and that is what the FDA is touting they "do not know what's in an ecigarette". They have not done long term research on it, so their answer is to tax so high as to prevent children from buying it... all based on something they do not know.

How should we handle the juice? Until further research is done, a simple warning label is sufficient. The FDA is not in charge of our lives. They do not approve medical foods, dietary supplements, or compounded drugs. Even they themselves say they do not approve any additives to drugs that may affect potency, or safety of the drugs. They're trying to regulate something that they are not in charge of with Ecigarettes.

Think of an Ejuice... then look at THIS SITE. Think of what is in an Ejuice, and why it is in the ejuice.. the flavoring, the nicotine, and the PG/VG... what should be under the FDA's rules. Then read the FDA's proposal, and why they propose Ecigarettes be controlled by them. Under their proposal, every new item produced would have to go under the FDA's scrutiny.. including research done on each device. judging by the FDA's past experiences with medical devices, it takes up to three years to get the funding to study each device. Then think of what was out three years ago... that is what we'd be vaping now and paying a lot to get those devices. I wholly think that the FDA does NOT need to interfere with the Ecig industry.

That's something that really concerns and scares me -- the potential of medicalizing e-cigs. It's a drug delivery device and that can't be denied but it isn't medical equipment.

I don't fear a right government. It's a corrupt government that I fear. If government agencies do good research and they establish reasonable regulations, I'm okay with that. It's sort of like, wanting to ban vaping in public places. Why do people get so upset over that? I agree that I shouldn't be vaping in the isles while I'm grocery shopping. I agree that I shouldn't be vaping while sitting in the lobby area of a doctor's office. I agree that I shouldn't be vaping while walking through the mall. That's just basic respect for other people. It's not a big deal, at all.

 

[NealBJr]

I agree that it's safer than smoking cigarettes but I don't agree that it's safer than drinking tap water. You might not have choked but I did. And it was scary. It isn't as safe as people want to believe that it is. People are afraid that vaping will be banned and they're also afraid for any health concerns to be proven. I'm not. I think it can only force improvements to be made. I don't think e-cigs will be banned because cigarettes aren't even banned. Well anyway, I think liquids that contain diacetyl should be labeled so the buyer is informed.

Ecigarettes have never been proven to be a safe product. they have all been labeled as a SAFER ALTERNATIVE. The FDA's regulation is simply putting warnings on it and taxing it to put it out of price range of the children. Their regulation does not improve safety.. if anything, it makes it worse. When the FDA took charge of cigarettes, they did not alter the ingredients of cigarettes.. They still contain the same ingredients as when they were first introduced. They have increased the tax, forcing cigarettes to be extremely expensive. The one thing that has been changed since regulation, is they have required an additive in cigarettes to hinder the burning of a cigarette to prevent fires.. this made the cigarettes even worse.

So, looking at past regulations, the FDA does not make it safer, it has not improved anything. The FDA won't ban ecigarettes, they highly tax it. one recent proposal to tax ejuice was in Washington, and I believe it was $.08 per Milligram of nicotine. A 15ml bottle of 18mg juice contains about 270 MG of nicotine. for that $.08 tax, it would add a $21 tax on a 15ml bottle. So if the juice cost $10, that would be $32 for a 15ml bottle.... THAT is how the FDA regulates to get it away from children. They do not make it safer, just more expensive.

 

[skoony]

Excuse you, no, I wasn't doing anything wrong. Either the PG or the VG is a toxin. But my stating that wasn't about the matter of regulations. It was a matter of making it clear that vaping is actually NOT as safe as people want to believe that it is. You're getting defensive with me. Like I said, I'm all for vaping but I'm NOT all for saying that something is totally safe when it isn't. As for the choking I experienced, I never used that particular liquid again and haven't had that problem since. The way things work right now is that our feedback is the most valuable asset there is.

I choked. In my sleep. On bubbling mucus. I had a whole handful of it. It was extremely thick and bubbly. Not only was it gross, it was very very scary. I don't expect you to wipe my tears with Kleenex but I do expect you to not ignore or dismiss what I'm saying -- or accuse me of being an idiot ("doing something wrong"). It wasn't me or my fault. VG / PG can be toxic, as indicated by allergic reactions. I'm sorry if that scares you or makes you angry.

neither PG or VG are considered toxic. i haven't a clue what woke you up but,
i am 99.9% sure it was not from vaping from what you have described.
i am not saying vaping is 100% safe.there is nothing on earth 100% safe.
not even so called clean air because clean air never existed,ever.
vaping is statistically as safe any any number of things we consider safe.
drinking water or breathing the air.
if your worried about risk switching to VG and nicotine is not
safer than using any or all of the ingredients found in e-juice.
if there is a difference in risk it would be statistically irrelevant.
you are still at risk.

regards
mike

 

[stevegmu]

The FDA has no power to tax...

 

[scrabble]

Diacetyl isn't the only harmful ingredient that may be in ejuice. Truth is diacetyl is in cigarettes in far greater quantities that e juice. But that is beside the point. If you already know that diacetyl is in most creams and custards then don't vape it. Why do you need a label to tell you that if you already know that? Also some creams and custards don't contain it. But I will be willing to bet the farm that ejuice companies will still add that blanket warning on all labels if such regulations are passed. If I was in that position I know I would. I understand your point...but I still stand by mine. A warning label won't mean squat if its a blanket statement and will not tell you without a doubt if the ejuice contains any harmful ingredients.

Because not everybody knows what diacetyl is or what it's claimed to do.

 

[AndriaD]

Excuse you, no, I wasn't doing anything wrong. Either the PG or the VG is a toxin. But my stating that wasn't about the matter of regulations. It was a matter of making it clear that vaping is actually NOT as safe as people want to believe that it is. You're getting defensive with me. Like I said, I'm all for vaping but I'm NOT all for saying that something is totally safe when it isn't. As for the choking I experienced, I never used that particular liquid again and haven't had that problem since. The way things work right now is that our feedback is the most valuable asset there is.

I choked. In my sleep. On bubbling mucus. I had a whole handful of it. It was extremely thick and bubbly. Not only was it gross, it was very very scary. I don't expect you to wipe my tears with Kleenex but I do expect you to not ignore or dismiss what I'm saying -- or accuse me of being an idiot ("doing something wrong"). It wasn't me or my fault. VG / PG can be toxic, as indicated by allergic reactions. I'm sorry if that scares you or makes you angry.

Neither is toxic, and a reaction may or may not be an "allergic" reaction. I can slather my whole body with VG, and get softer skin... but if I try to breathe it in ejuice that's more than 16% VG, after a few hours of it, I can't breathe at all. It's not allergy, but it's definitely a reaction -- that stuff is too thick for my lungs, so my lungs can't get rid of it fast enough to keep it from causing a problem in my breathing.

Andria

 

[scrabble]

neither PG or VG are considered toxic. i haven't a clue what woke you up but,
i am 99.9% sure it was not from vaping from what you have described.
i am not saying vaping is 100% safe.there is nothing on earth 100% safe.
not even so called clean air because clean air never existed,ever.
vaping is statistically as safe any any number of things we consider safe.
drinking water or breathing the air.
if your worried about risk switching to VG and nicotine is not
safer than using any or all of the ingredients found in e-juice.
if there is a difference in risk it would be statistically irrelevant.
you are still at risk.

regards
mike

Yes, it was from vaping. Mucus is a known adverse response to VG and PG. If it causes an allergic reaction that means it's toxic (for that person).

 

[NealBJr]

That's something that really concerns and scares me -- the potential of medicalizing e-cigs. It's a drug delivery device and that can't be denied but it isn't medical equipment.

I don't fear a right government. It's a corrupt government that I fear. If government agencies do good research and they establish reasonable regulations, I'm okay with that. It's sort of like, wanting to ban vaping in public places. Why do people get so upset over that? I agree that I shouldn't be vaping in the isles while I'm grocery shopping. I agree that I shouldn't be vaping while sitting in the lobby area of a doctor's office. I agree that I shouldn't be vaping while walking through the mall. That's just basic respect for other people. It's not a big deal, at all.

Lol.. I'll never get the yard mowed.. this'll have to be my last post for today.

I don't mind the no vaping in public places that much. I don't do that anyways. But it's their method of how to impose that rule. To impose that rule, they will lump ecigarettes in the same class of device as regular cigarettes. That will increase the tax. One reason I switched to ecigarettes was because it was cheaper. It was a motivation for me to switch. I believe Ecigarettes are much safer than regular cigarettes. I have even cut down on the nicotine to a great deal. If ecigarettes are lumped in and taxed like cigarettes, it will remove that motivation for people to switch over to a safer alternative. It will, in fact, dissuade people from quitting. I think FDA regulation will end up killing people.

Ecigarettes should be handled as their own devices.. and that's something the FDA is not willing to do. They are lumping it in as a tobacco product.. with all the regulations, taxes, and restrictions as regular cigarettes.

 

[stevegmu]

Because not everybody knows what diacetyl is or what it's claimed to do.

The activists don't care. The lead researcher in e-juice research says it should not be used in e-liquid, but the activists know better, because it must be ok, as long as it is not as bad as smoking...