The only proven way to successfully fight FDA is in court.
Writing Senators about your support for age limits and assorted "think of the children" measures does no good at all. On the contrary.
Why don't people want e-liquid labels changed?
- Thread starter mod
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
The only proven way to successfully fight FDA is in court.
Writing Senators about your support for age limits and assorted "think of the children" measures does no good at all. On the contrary.
sure why not? fight it all.tooth and nail
to the bitter end.
i agree with you in that it will do no good.
so what? we have to let them know that we
know they are full of it and we will take no part
in what they have already planned to do with
no real participation nor negotiations with us.
its all a sham to get and or keep the money.
it may be of no help to fight but,i do not
see any potential down side. they are going
to drop the cartoon like anvil on our heads.
i hope i am wrong but,when the regs come out
there is going to be a giant collective Scooby
Doo like "rah-roe" on the forum.
regards
mike
I haven't seen VG in tractor supply but their PG is USP, never been in a feed or farm store that didn't sell USP PG.
USP is USP. no different than what you get from any other source.
Again, not true. OSHA and ACGIH come out with revisions to TLV's all the time. ACGIH being more guidelines and stringent than OSHA. And you CANNOT say that there is no serious health risk to anyone from any type of vaping. That is a broad, unproven statement. Remember, lead paint was thought to be perfectly safe, as was Mercury in the hat making business. The fact is, only time will tell.
well when they issue the revision that says the amount of anything in vapor is unsafe to inhale
at the levels we use let me know.
your concern for any health risk associated with vaping is a broad unproven statement.
it is already known what is in e-juice. no mystery at all. the relative toxicity
of the all the ingredient's are known and the amount necessary to
be harmful are easily ascertainable.
i never claimed that all types of vaping are completely safe.
for the 90% of us using non-modified high wattage devices
in their normal operating range need have no fear of
the long term study boogie man. if they long term
studies do indicate anything i highly doubt it would
be anything serious nor not easily correctable.
regards
mike
No studies have been conducted about long term inhalation hazards of the flavorings, or PG for that matter. We already know that Diacteyl was found to be the cause for "popcorn lung", and it was used in all sorts of flavors. The same with AP. Time is the only factor that unveiled these hazards. Don't let your thoughts of "until X happens, I will continue to do Y because it is completely safe until proven otherwise" shadow good judgement and common sense. History doesn't favor that line of thinking.
Give us one example where humanity studied something for safety in the lab for >100 years before engaging into actually using it.
Prescription drugs are tested in a controlled enviornment before they are available for purchase, try again.
They're not studied for nearly as long as you might think, and look how well they turn out. Chantix anyone?
I never said that it was perfect, but they are studied. You never hear about the ones that don't make it through, do you?
Not for "long term". They're brought to market as fast as possible. Then various side effects start to crop up and re-evaluations are made. Try again. Give me a real long term example. I'll cut the target from 100 years to 50. Find me one drug that was tested 50 years before being released.
There aren't any, but why shouldn't we as a community lead the way? If these drugs were "rushed" into the market, what makes you think its ok to just vape all you want with very minimal testing?
Actually you do, they usually get repurposed. While it's true that a drug that kills many people, quickly, will probably not make it through. It would have to be more than probably 5% of the people taking it. Drugs don't get rejected for safety reasons, that's what side effect lists and black box warning labels are for, they get rejected because they don't adequately do what they're supposed to do. Usually though, after a few years and millions of dollars of research, the drugs don't just get thrown away, they find something else that it might do. Like maybe that anti depressant that doesn't work so well, makes people want to smoke less... Of course, since smoking correlates with depression, perhaps giving depressed people an anti depressant makes them want to smoke less... The pharmaceutical industry is less safe and certain than most people want to believe.
After 8 years, there are some aspects of vaping that have been studied longer than many pharmaceuticals on the market.
Diactetyl is found in tobacco smoke in greater amounts than
then in vapor yet there are not any cases of popcorn lung
ever being attributed to smoking.
PG has been studied since the 40s and is known
to be safe to inhale.
so your going to tell me with over 100 year's of
commercial food processing we do not know what the safe
inhalation levels would be?
we know vaping has no known health risks now.
ergo,your idea would be to regulate it out existence
as we know it.
what's the big rush?
mike
Well,
All the people who don't really care might want to check this out.
Cause NOW the fda does care.
Vape Free Youth | E-Cigarette Forum
So much for my rainbow fartin unicorns
All the people who don't really care might want to check this out.
Cause NOW the fda does care.
Vape Free Youth | E-Cigarette Forum
So much for my rainbow fartin unicorns
Well,
All the people who don't really care might want to check this out.
Cause NOW the fda does care.
Vape Free Youth | E-Cigarette Forum
So much for my rainbow fartin unicorns
I don't think the FDA ever didn't care.
I hear ya, but now they are talking, and that's usually where the fan starts winding up before something hits it
No, we do not KNOW that -- we know that it was a FACTOR in the very few cases in which it has arisen -- but that others in the same plant did not develop that disease -- we KNOW that there is a great deal more diacetyl in cigarette smoke than in any of these flavors... but we don't see lots of smokers developing popcorn lung, do we? No, we see them getting lung cancer and COPD.
I personally abstain from any diketones in my flavors, because I already have asthma, I know what "breathless" feels like, and it's HORRIBLE, so I don't want ANY risk that not only could it get worse, it could actually destroy my lungs. But I also recognize that my fears verge on paranoia -- with asthma, any risk like that WARRANTS paranoia.
But to say that we "KNOW diacetyl causes thus-and-such"... that is not accurate at all. We suspect. We believe there MAY be a correlation... but we do not KNOW FOR SURE anything about it.
Andria
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
