# The End of Unregulated E-juice



## Mike Card (18/11/15)

why do I feel like after reading this article that ejuice vendors are going to be the downfall of Vaping .. I've tried Five Pawns and it's amazing.. Now I know why.

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/la...y-lied-about-the-chemicals-it-puts-in-e-juice

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## Kuhlkatz (18/11/15)

Many of the e-juice manufacturers use flavorings from companies that 'certifies' their products as not containing these chemicals.
Based on that, the e-juice manufacturers also certify that their products are safe to use. In my opinion, they should have all their products tested to ensure that what they "say they sell" and what they "actually sell" is one and the same thing.

If I remember correctly, an e-cig distributor had some lab tests done on some of the well-known brand e-juices they sell, and the 5P tests were not well received on a few of their flagship flavors. What made matters worse, is that 5P did not refute or deny the claims. They also didn't come clean and confirm that some flavorings might be dodgy and they are actively looking to fix that or that they intend dropping the specific line - they just kept quiet and played dodgems till the stuff hit the fan.
They did not act like a responsible company that actually cared about their customer base imo.

Funny thing is that the same people filing the class action have likely been smoking for years on some very well-known carcinogenic substances without taking the tobacco companies to task, so why the sudden change of heart ? 
Because they 'thought' vaping is safer and 5P failed to use safe flavoring ? 
Because there are no tests available proving possible future problems by vaping these substances above specific levels ?
Or was it simply because 5P refused to change their stance and own up, and now people want to try and make an example of them to ensure other e-liquid manufacturers also keep a clean house ?

Should we ask the million dollar q about local is lekker ? Just gimme a sec while I go get my torch and pitchfork ...

Reactions: Like 4 | Agree 1 | Winner 1


----------



## GlacieredPyro (18/11/15)

Kuhlkatz said:


> Funny thing is that the same people filing the class action have likely been smoking for years on some very well-known carcinogenic substances without taking the tobacco companies to task, so why the sudden change of heart ?
> Because they 'thought' vaping is safer and 5P failed to use safe flavoring ?
> Because there are no tests available proving possible future problems by vaping these substances above specific levels ?
> Or was it simply because 5P refused to change their stance and own up, and now people want to try and make an example of them to ensure other e-liquid manufacturers also keep a clean house ?
> ...



Because 5P states in no uncertain terms and on various platforms, that their product is free of the ingredients/additives in question.
They are being sued for lying about it. It's that simple.

Reactions: Agree 2


----------



## Mike Card (18/11/15)

Thanks @Kuhlkatz and @GlacieredPyro , i'm a newbie and find myself constantly defending vaping to smokers and non-smokers and just want to get my facts straight.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Kuhlkatz (18/11/15)

My opinion : Even though the class action makes this a simple 'cut and dry' case of they lied or left out information on advertising, packaging and the web site, 5P's actions, or rather failure to act timeously, allowed this to escalate way beyond where it should have.
By not immediately stating their position, whether they f'ed up or not, they just left it for more than a month without any feedback to the party / parties in question. This is after many repeat enquiries and many promises from 5P to get back to people ... 
This action tends to piss people off beyond the norm, and turns normal frustration into vengeful and vindictive actions.

In their own results released later, the AP figures were not 25 fold the allowed maximums, but 5 of the 11 juices still came in at above the allowed max recommendations of 100µg/ml, in which case they are required to stop selling it. For 45 - 100µg/ml public disclosure is still required, which was another 3 of the 11 juices. This left 3 of the 11 juices as regarded 'safe' for use.

So, the big question is - how do we in SA stack up in terms of legislature around these products and what should / could we expect from vendors without going on a witch hunt or crapping on our own doorsteps. Could we even touch this subject without shooting ourselves in the foot ?

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 2


----------



## GlacieredPyro (18/11/15)

Kuhlkatz said:


> My opinion : Even though the class action makes this a simple 'cut and dry' case of they lied or left out information on advertising, packaging and the web site, 5P's actions, or rather failure to act timeously, allowed this to escalate way beyond where it should have.
> By not immediately stating their position, whether they f'ed up or not, they just left it for more than a month without any feedback to the party / parties in question. This is after many repeat enquiries and many promises from 5P to get back to people ...
> This action tends to piss people off beyond the norm, and turns normal frustration into vengeful and vindictive actions.
> 
> ...



Well stated and good question.

Starting the conversation without it becoming ugly is going to be hard but key.
I think it is one that should happen sooner rather than later.

Legislation aside, we as consumer need to understand the topics at hand and know what we want. We can then communicate this in the correct fashion to local producers and importers. This way we don't step on toes and we can transform the local industry, hopefully before legislation forces change.

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 1


----------



## element0709 (18/11/15)

selling all my 5P juices

Reactions: Funny 3


----------



## Mike Card (18/11/15)

@element0709 I'll take a bottle..haha


----------



## Mike Card (18/11/15)

I just went looking around at overseas e-juices and this is what i've found

*ANML - LOOPER*

Ingredients: Vegetable glycerin (VG), propylene glycol (PG), flavoring, nicotine. Warning: This product contains chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm.

Interesting...

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## rogue zombie (18/11/15)

Miketruant said:


> I just went looking around at overseas e-juices and this is what i've found
> 
> *ANML - LOOPER*
> 
> ...



I for one have for long thought some regulation is needed.

I mean I reckon all sorts of flavour manufacturers will jump on the eliquid Bandwagon. So we could start getting all sorts of crap in future juices.

Whereas the leaders like Capella, TFA etc. are actively taking questionable stuff out, and producing specifically for ejuice. Which is a very good thing. And some regulation is needed.

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## MJ INC (18/11/15)

Kuhlkatz said:


> My opinion : Even though the class action makes this a simple 'cut and dry' case of they lied or left out information on advertising, packaging and the web site, 5P's actions, or rather failure to act timeously, allowed this to escalate way beyond where it should have.
> By not immediately stating their position, whether they f'ed up or not, they just left it for more than a month without any feedback to the party / parties in question. This is after many repeat enquiries and many promises from 5P to get back to people ...
> This action tends to piss people off beyond the norm, and turns normal frustration into vengeful and vindictive actions.
> 
> ...


Really good question about local juices. In the US instead if testing many smaller juice companies simply ask the supplier of their ingredients. If they inform them it's safe the liquid maker states that it's safe without doing any testing. I would guess the same happens here

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## Kuhlkatz (18/11/15)

r0gue z0mbie said:


> I for one have for long thought some regulation is needed.
> 
> I mean I reckon all sorts of flavour manufacturers will jump on the eliquid Bandwagon. So we could start getting all sorts of crap in future juices.
> 
> Whereas the leaders like Capella, TFA etc. are actively taking questionable stuff out, and producing specifically for ejuice. Which is a very good thing. And some regulation is needed.



Another quick ramble..
On one hand we have people like Dr. Farsalinos and another handful of specialists that attempts to create a positive picture of vaping with active methodical research, and then you have the other 99% jumping on the opposite bandwagon of preaching tight restriction and control, and sowing disinformation.
What the FDA is doing with the newly proposed bill is preposterous, as it is bordering on the insane. It is way over the top and will only benefit big tobacco / big pharma in the end. It will definitely outlaw any device that I currently use, and I'll likely have to get my e-juice on a prescription filled out in triplicate in the future, especially if the local nincompoops follow their example.

I don't think that any of the vapers that I have met locally, opposes any form of reasonable regulation. This includes 

The ever-so-touchy topic of where we 'should' be allowed to vape vs. where smokers may smoke ( own logical discretion also needed )
Sales to underaged persons
Child-proof packaging - boils down to how and where you store your liquids, just like other normal household chemicals
Tamper-proof seals to ensure you get exactly what was bottled
Bottling dates and controllable batch numbering with possible expiry dates
Controlled, fully disclosed contents (not publicly) ?
Can or should we insist on some lab tests to ensure we are not slowly poisoned ?

Compare the number of local juices available now vs. a year ago. There's a new kid on the block virtually every month and we are spoilt for choice. I'm not complaining here, as it will take me a month of sundays (and a bigger bank balance) to go through all the exceptional juices out there. 
We take it for granted that e-liquid manufacturers would use safe products free of substances like diacetyl and acetyl propionyl, but they all rely heavily on the manufacturers of the flavorings to certify them as safe and free. The funny thing is that a big percentage of these flavors are mostly chemical compositions, not extracts. So what happens if a safe flavor A and safe flavor B is mixed? Do they remain inactive as flavor A and B, or do they in fact create reagent C that could potentially contain some of the harmful substances? 
The manufacturers may be able to supply some answers, but what if you mix a flavor from supplier A with a flavor from supplier B? Is it still safe as houses? Who would provide this answer except going to a lab to have the end result tested...

Reactions: Like 2 | Agree 1


----------



## rogue zombie (18/11/15)

Great points @Khulkats!

And I'm pretty shocked at the extreme direction that the FDA wants to go in.

I honestly thought it was largely them wanting regulations in place, which is understandable. And of coarse the government wanting proper taxing in place, which is understandable...

But, my word, do they want to go all out.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Reactions: Agree 1


----------

