# Another casualty



## Spyro (22/6/18)

I was told this was a local incident. SA.

Thought I'd share to raise awareness of the dangers of mech mods and how important it is to be fully educated before buying one. They are wonderful things but they demand the highest respect.

Be safe folks


----------



## Spyro (22/6/18)

Caught my attention because I own this device.

Also interested in what people think of the lawsuit and what may happen? The lad allegedly claims that he was given no warning or advice when he purchased the mod.


----------



## Raindance (22/6/18)

Left hand drive car, not local.

"Please donate" "pray for lawsuit" sounds like "McDonalds sold me the hot coffee I asked for without warning me..."

Enough said.

Regards

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 9


----------



## Spyro (22/6/18)

Looks like you're right! I didn't notice the car - just saw the cell c symbol although now I'm realising that it's because of a screenshot. Well done detective.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## clydern (22/6/18)

Spyro said:


> Caught my attention because I own this device.
> 
> Also interested in what people think of the lawsuit and what may happen? The lad allegedly claims that he was given no warning or advice when he purchased the mod.


I really feel like vape shops should maybe implement a quick written test or quiz before selling unregulated devices. That way they can cover themselves for situations like this. 

Sent from my LG-H990 using Tapatalk

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 3


----------



## SHiBBY (22/6/18)

"If he had been in the car with me and the baby it could have caused a wreck and killed us all"

If he had vaped with a baby in the car, he would have been a right totkop and liable to a fine and/or prison time depending on the country. The fact that that fear exists means that it's a common occurrence. I'll just leave that there for now.

There are a million things we use daily that could hurt or kill us if used carelessly. Vapes are just another item on that list in my opinion and far from the top of it. I wouldn't single it out over the rest. I've used mechs and regulated devices, loads of different brands and types of batteries and built coils from mtl single coils to fat super subohm cloud machines, and never had so much as a close call (that I'm aware of, touch wood), because I educate myself on the parameters of a safe experience and then keep an eye on them as I go.

Don't be dof. Be lekker.

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 4 | Winner 1


----------



## clydern (22/6/18)

Raindance said:


> Left hand drive car, not local.
> 
> "Please donate" "pray for lawsuit" sounds like "McDonalds sold me the hot coffee I asked for without warning me..."
> 
> ...


I was thinking the exact same thing 









Sent from my LG-H990 using Tapatalk


----------



## Raindance (22/6/18)

Stats seem to indicate that vaping is still safer than flying...

Regards

Reactions: Funny 2


----------



## clydern (22/6/18)

Raindance said:


> Stats seem to indicate that vaping is still safer than flying...
> 
> Regards


Excuse me while I take a puff from my mech mod 

Sent from my LG-H990 using Tapatalk

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 1 | Funny 3


----------



## RichJB (22/6/18)

A quick google reveals that St Francis Bartlett is in Tennessee.

Reactions: Like 4


----------



## Hooked (22/6/18)

clydern said:


> I really feel like vape shops should maybe implement a quick written test or quiz before selling unregulated devices. That way they can cover themselves for situations like this.
> 
> Sent from my LG-H990 using Tapatalk



Furthermore, the customer should sign that they understand the dangers involved. But who knows where he bought this? Perhaps not from a reputable vendor. We had a discussion on the forum a few months ago, where a new vaper (in South Africa) was sold a mech by some little corner-cafe type shop.

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 1


----------



## incredible_hullk (22/6/18)

I swear that 3rd picture looks like something else ... abit bunny looking

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## clydern (22/6/18)

Hooked said:


> Furthermore, the customer should sign that they understand the dangers involved. But who knows where he bought this? Perhaps not from a reputable vendor. We had a discussion on the forum a few months ago, where a new vaper (in South Africa) was sold a mech by some little corner-cafe type shop.


There is always going to be those people that thinks " oh let me get this tube one because it's cheaper ". I am curious to see if that mech mod was authentic. I am sure vgod includes warning cards 

Sent from my LG-H990 using Tapatalk

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Vape Hacker 808 (22/6/18)

Saint Francis Hospital-Bartlett
Address: 2986 Kate Bond Rd, Bartlett, TN 38133, USA

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## RichJB (22/6/18)

Spyro said:


> Also interested in what people think of the lawsuit and what may happen? The lad allegedly claims that he was given no warning or advice when he purchased the mod.



Should he need to be? Isn't it easier to pitch safety at a design/manufacturer level than either a retail or customer level? When you buy a microwave oven, the store doesn't need to give you a safety lesson. You don't need to know Ohm's Law to use it. The safety features are built in at the factory.

There is one manufacturer for a product, potentially thousands of stores, potentially millions of customers. Just by sheer logistics, getting the sole manufacturer to implement safety is a lot easier than relying on the thousands of stores or millions of customers.

Reactions: Like 1 | Winner 1


----------



## clydern (22/6/18)

RichJB said:


> Should he need to be? Isn't it easier to pitch safety at a design/manufacturer level than either a retail or customer level? When you buy a microwave oven, the store doesn't need to give you a safety lesson. You don't need to know Ohm's Law to use it. The safety features are built in at the factory.
> 
> There is one manufacturer for a product, potentially thousands of stores, potentially millions of customers. Just by sheer logistics, getting the sole manufacturer to implement safety is a lot easier than relying on the thousands of stores or millions of customers.


Agreed. 

Sent from my LG-H990 using Tapatalk


----------



## RichJB (22/6/18)

JUUL has just been valued at $10 billion. A big part of that is that it's an idiot-proof device. You can't blow your lips off with it. Even a kid who knows nothing can use it effectively. Now they are even adding dry-hit safety into pods. If the wicks aren't saturated, it won't fire. It's the way that all devices will go. There will still be a place for knowledgeable enthusiasts who want mechs. But for manufacturers who want mass-appeal market share, the device has to be as safe and simple as possible. That is how JUUL designed theirs and look at the result.

Reactions: Like 4 | Agree 1


----------



## Clouds4Days (23/6/18)

The thing that grates me around this whole FB post is this sentence.

"IF YOU VAPE PLEASE RECONSIDER"



RECONSIDER what? Rather turn to tobacco?
How's about they say- if you vape please make sure you understand how your device works.

For someone to put up a statement like that you can see clearly they have no idea about Mechs and safety.

Then the go on to say "a bit higher it would of taken his eye out or lower would have cut the jugular in his neck" really....really WTF! , the cut is hardly even reaching the bottom of his nose and not even catching hes bottom lip .

Just a little bit over exaggerated. Just a little...

Then they go on to say please donate money....
Ok now I'm sold, this must be legit.

If you ask me these folks are just looking for a pay day end of story.

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 8 | Winner 1


----------



## Dewald (23/6/18)

It may be an unpopular opinion, but I do not think any blame should ever be put on consumers when these things happen.
If a company produces something to be used by the public, with no requirements from the consumer's side except for age, these things should not happen. I understand the argument that we should know about battery safety and all that, but do we need to understand how the combustion engine works to operate a car? What do we do when Ford Kuga's burn down? Do we ask the owners why they did not check everything to make sure there are no shorts anywhere or whatever the cause may be?

Point is vaping is not as safe as we may think, and until it is we can expect more and more legislation which we so despise. And I honestly believe it would be a good thing. Many manufacturers are not taking steps to ensure their products are as safe as it can be and keep putting the blame on their customers. So if legislation will ensure that we get a good vape, along with a safe product, without having to learn physics it is nothing but good in my book.

I think the vape industry should stop asking "How could the user prevent this?" and start asking "How do we produce products to keep our users safe?".
Or we need to all attend a course on vape safety and get a license to vape...

Reactions: Like 4


----------



## Halfdaft (23/6/18)

Dewald said:


> It may be an unpopular opinion, but I do not think any blame should ever be put on consumers when these things happen.
> If a company produces something to be used by the public, with no requirements from the consumer's side except for age, these things should not happen. I understand the argument that we should know about battery safety and all that, but do we need to understand how the combustion engine works to operate a car? What do we do when Ford Kuga's burn down? Do we ask the owners why they did not check everything to make sure there are no shorts anywhere or whatever the cause may be?
> 
> Point is vaping is not as safe as we may think, and until it is we can expect more and more legislation which we so despise. And I honestly believe it would be a good thing. Many manufacturers are not taking steps to ensure their products are as safe as it can be and keep putting the blame on their customers. So if legislation will ensure that we get a good vape, along with a safe product, without having to learn physics it is nothing but good in my book.
> ...



The problem with this is that the majority of devices are safe, they are made with safety measures (VW boards/mosfet/fuse-able links) in place to stop you from hurting yourself. He was using a mechanical device, in which the user is the safety mechanism, and when buying a mechanical device there are usually warnings on the packaging that state the device is for advanced users. No amount of regulation will stop user error, all it will do is prevent us from vaping at all.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Halfdaft (23/6/18)

Ok so 1 of 3 things happened here: 

1: Either he built too low and took one too many puffs, sending the battery into thermal runaway; or

2: He had a torn battery wrap, inserted the battery positive down and fired; or

3: He was using an RTA/RDA with a non-protruding 510.

All three of these things are user error, but they still give a bad name to vaping. Its an uphill battle we're fighting here guys...

Reactions: Agree 2


----------



## Clouds4Days (23/6/18)

Dewald said:


> It may be an unpopular opinion, but I do not think any blame should ever be put on consumers when these things happen.
> If a company produces something to be used by the public, with no requirements from the consumer's side except for age, these things should not happen. I understand the argument that we should know about battery safety and all that, but do we need to understand how the combustion engine works to operate a car? What do we do when Ford Kuga's burn down? Do we ask the owners why they did not check everything to make sure there are no shorts anywhere or whatever the cause may be?
> 
> Point is vaping is not as safe as we may think, and until it is we can expect more and more legislation which we so despise. And I honestly believe it would be a good thing. Many manufacturers are not taking steps to ensure their products are as safe as it can be and keep putting the blame on their customers. So if legislation will ensure that we get a good vape, along with a safe product, without having to learn physics it is nothing but good in my book.
> ...



I hear exactly what you are saying and I am all for safety and products being as safe as possible.

But their is a flaw in your argument. All products one buys are built safe but they still don't prevent user error .

In the car example given,
The Ford Kuga incident were because of faulty causes so one cannot use it in this case.

But let's rather use this as a example:
We don't need to know how a combustible engine works to operate a car, but one does require to know how to operate a car in order to drive it. Same as a Mech.
If no one tells you that when you need to take a 90 degree corner you need to slow down before the corner and you take it at 120km/h who is at fault the Manufacturer or the user ?

Another example-
Appliances are made to be user safe but if you take a iron and burn yourself by accident because you forgot it was on who is at fault the Manufacturer or the user?

Unfortunately accidents happen in our everyday lives and sometimes they are user error, but manufacturers can't take all the blame for this as shown in my examples above.

End of day we need to know how to operate everything within their respective limits be it vaping or driving or operating a iron.

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 5


----------



## Cornelius (23/6/18)

That is a very unrealistic comparison. Having a car licence and being able to drive means 2 x diffrent things. Also having driven a front wheel drive Chev spark, and buying an BMW M5 thinking well it is a car should dish up some surprises. Who is at fault? BMW?
No mate if you buy a product and use it you should be able to take responsibility and accountability for it. 
I strongly belief the subject of Mech mods has been covered sufficiently accross all platforms. No pill or warning can help for common sense.

I have heard that this same post has made its rounds for some time now, and gets linked to scamming for money. But I cannot confirm.

Be safe and always use your common sense. Remember accidents happen.

Reactions: Agree 3


----------



## Raindance (24/6/18)

Clouds4Days said:


> I hear exactly what you are saying and I am all for safety and products being as safe as possible.
> 
> But their is a flaw in your argument. All products one buys are built safe but they still don't prevent user error .
> 
> ...


C4D, I am all for taking responsibility for ones own but we have a bit of a problem when it comes to vaping. In most cases the dangers associated with a device are obvious. The iron, toaster, kettle represent dangers any person of average intelligence can predict and safeguard against. The dangers associated with lithium batteries are however not that obvious and as ordinary consumer batteries are known to pose little if any risk, people assume the same is the case with the high powered cells we use.

The obvious solution would be for battery manufacturers to build safeguards into the cells themselves. Although it may be a case of manufacturers just being all to happy to have a market to dispose of their "second class" produce and not really being bothered to make protected cells for our specific needs.

Despite safety warnings being included in product packaging, accidents still happen. We all know the saying "When all else fails, read the manual." and even if read, consumers are so desensitized to warning messages that it seldom makes the impact it should. This leaves us with two options. As with the vehicle example you mentioned, testing and licencing users. The other is only allowing the sale of safe cells and/or systems. The latter being the obvious choice and, when considered from the correct perspective, a win win situation for all concerned.

And that's about all that comes to mind at this time.

Regards

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Faiyaz Cheulkar (24/6/18)

All this issues are because of the lithium batteries that are being used. I pray everyday that the technology in batteries improves and give us better safety but with the same or better power density. 
At the moment my vision for a idiot proof mech device is one with a zinc carbon battery.


----------



## Clouds4Days (24/6/18)

Raindance said:


> The dangers associated with lithium batteries are however not that obvious and as ordinary consumer batteries are known to pose little if any risk, people assume the same is the case with the high powered cells we use.
> 
> Despite safety warnings being included in product packaging, accidents still happen. We all know the saying "When all else fails, read the manual." and even if read, consumers are so desensitized to warning messages that it seldom makes the impact it should. This leaves us with two options. As with the vehicle example you mentioned, testing and licencing users. The other is only allowing the sale of safe cells and/or systems. The latter being the obvious choice and, when considered from the correct perspective, a win win situation for all concerned.
> 
> ...



Currently the only safeguard for batteries would be to have built in batteries but even if one did that on a Mech Mod you still run risks of someone using the incorrect build so then you would have to add some sort of chip inside for protection but now it is no longer a Mech Mod.

Ok now every Mech user is angry about this so let's keep Mech the way the way they are and now we have to turn to vendors who have to make sure a buyer complies with Mech Usage and only way will be a small Test they have to fill in when buying Mechs and have the same Test when buying online.

This will solve that problem but unfortunately the China Mall down the road sells vape products and don't care much about the buyer so any Tom can buy their Mech Mods there without any knowledge whatsoever.

It's unfortunately a vicious cycle but yes everyone needs to do their bit in order to make vaping as safe as possible.
From the consumer to the vendor and to the Manufacturer.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## antonherbst (24/6/18)

The only thing i am going to add to this whole thread is. In Afrikaans we have a wonderfull word for what happened here. 

Mensdom

As a safety consultant i see alot of accidents that was caused by human error and not following warning and safety signs. 

We have become a human society that totally disregards warnings and rules.

Reactions: Like 1 | Winner 2


----------



## SHiBBY (24/6/18)

They should just make all mods take parallel batts and then do away with the likes of 30Q's etc. Only VTC5As in parallel. Thats as safe as a mod gets IMO. You'd be hard pressed to build something that draws more than 60A, and the low mah issue also disappears

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## RichJB (24/6/18)

Halfdaft Customs said:


> 1: Either he built too low and took one too many puffs, sending the battery into thermal runaway; or
> 
> 2: He had a torn battery wrap, inserted the battery positive down and fired; or
> 
> ...



I doubt regulators would view it as user error. The first cause, they would accept that the user had some culpability by building too low. But that the industry also had some liability by allowing the user to build too low, and being reluctant to build in safeguards. Users cannot determine or change coil resistance in closed systems like JUULs, pods or cigalikes. It is the manufacturer, not the user, who determines the coil resistance of these devices. That is why regulators like closed systems, and why they are more likely to give them pre-market approval. 

As @Raindance notes, consumers can be expected to know that driving at high speeds or using sharp knives or boiling water is hazardous. They cannot be expected to know that 0.1 ohms is a more hazardous resistance than 0.5 ohms. It is not intuitive for the buying public. There is also the question of necessity. You can't have a car that doesn't go fast enough to injure the driver, a kettle that doesn't boil water, a knife that doesn't have a sharp blade, a stove that doesn't get hot - because then these items aren't fit for purpose. However, a vaping device doesn't need a hazardously low resistance coil. Vaping devices remain fit for purpose with coils of higher and thus safer resistance.

Regulators would apply the same arguments to cause 2, the battery wrap issue. If the manufacturers of JUULs, pods and cigalikes can provide batteries encased in thick rigid plastic or vinyl, making them impervious to tearing and thus to dead shorts, regulators would ask why vaping manufacturers aren't following suit. Especially when the battery manufacturers themselves have stated that their products are not safe/suitable for vaping. Again, it is not intuitive for the buying public that torn wraps are hazardous. And again, making the battery wraps sturdier does not render the device unfit for purpose.

I don't think regulators would attribute any user error to cause 3, the hybrid top cap and protruding positive pin issue. Again, it's not intuitive and again, it doesn't render the device unfit for purpose. So regulators would have a really easy solution: prohibit hybrid top caps and make everything 510. And/or enforce a standard in which every atty must ship with a positive pin that protrudes by X.Ymm minimum. Sorted. The industry has had ten years to sort this out internally and hasn't done a thing. In such cases, regulators will step in and do it themselves.

It is clearly unacceptable for an industry to offer two standalone but compatible products which are hazardous when paired together. If Dell offered a mouse that worked fine with most computers, but exploded if you plugged it into an HP notebook, one or probably both products would be taken off the market. Regulators wouldn't even need to take any action, Dell and HP would immediately recall and withdraw the products, resolve the safety issue and only then allow the products to be sold again. That is what a mature and responsible industry is expected to do. In the 21st century, blaming the customer for hazardous products is unacceptable.

Reactions: Like 3 | Winner 1


----------

