Become a Patron!

Popcorn lung "popping" up in the Los Angeles area

FullyTorquedVapes

Unlisted Vendor
Yeah, diacetyl has been a common ingredient in cigarettes for over 50 years without a reported case.

Link removed, takes you to a vendor site
 
Last edited by a moderator:

BronzyIsland

Bronze Contributor
Member For 5 Years
listen....i cannot stress this any more.

there is no scientific evidence that diacetyl causes lung destruction(popcorn lung).
none.
there are no lab animal tests done which prove that diacetyl causes lung destruction.
none.

a bunch of doctors walking around a popcorn factory and GUESSING that the cause for some worker's lung destruction is butter flavoring is NOT repeat NOT science.

a doctor diagnosis =/= scientific fact.
if it did, i would have hypochondria instead of what i actually have which is hypothyroidism, hypogonadism, and hypoadrenalism.
since hypochondria is what those "brilliant" scientific minds known as doctors diagnosed me as having after 2+1/2 years of complaining to them about my near death health issues.
So as someone who has literally seen over 100 doctors in the past 13 years....trust in me when i say a doctor diagnosis is not science.
Science, is being able to prove in a lab a cause leading to an particular effect on a consistent basis.
hence, the scientific method which all scientific fact gathering is based on.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method
So..........until proven otherwise with lab tests in studies on lab animals,
diacetyl does NOT cause lung destruction.

can diacetyl containing flavorings commit lung harm? yes? All flavoring commit lung harm to some extent.
but to the point where you'll get "popcorn lung" uh......................

nope.

not until proven otherwise in lab tests using test animals.
until we see those lab results...its bullshit witch hunting/fear mongering.
 

HeadInClouds

Platinum Contributor
Member For 4 Years
ECF Refugee
Vape Media
Unlisted Vendor
there is no scientific evidence that diacetyl causes lung destruction(popcorn lung).
none.
there are no lab animal tests done which prove that diacetyl causes lung destruction.
none.
a bunch of doctors walking around a popcorn factory and GUESSING that the cause for some worker's lung destruction is butter flavoring is NOT repeat NOT science.

Please be very careful to avoid making unsubstantiated scientific/medical claims. When I change key words in your statements, listen to how it sounds:

"There is no scientific evidence that cigarettes cause lung destruction (cancer)."
"There are no lab animal tests done which prove that smoking causes cancer."
"A bunch of doctors GUESSING that the cause for some smoker's cancer is cigarettes is NOT science."

Human in-vitro cellular testing on vaporized flavoring has in fact been done & continues (http://www.clearstreamonward.com/the-project-clearstream-onward/). That's FlavourArt's testing program, the only vape-related cellular viability tests that I'm aware of. However FA intentionally avoid diacetyl & related diketones in their flavorings, so this research cannot be used to determine the effects of diacetyl inhalation. FA's Clearstream Onward gives reassuring results regarding harm reduction of vaping vs smoking with the components FA does use. (I do wish they'd include tests with diacetyl-laden flavors for comparison purposes!) Those concerned about diacetyl & related diketones CAN vape while avoiding those ingredients.

Medical scientists drawing conclusions from case studies are not "guessing". This is how medical science works. Bioscientists using scientific method study actual medical cases within the framework of current biochemical knowledge. More cases = more conclusive evidence. WE are the test subjects for long-term effects of vaping. We vape for different reasons, and as adults I know we all agree we're entitled to draw our own conclusions & make our own decisions. Let's just be very careful about making generalizations that might be interpreted as scientific/medical claims. I hope it doesn't sound as if I'm doing that myself; I chose my wording carefully. Vape on!
 

BronzyIsland

Bronze Contributor
Member For 5 Years
Please be very careful to avoid making unsubstantiated scientific/medical claims. When I change key words in your statements, listen to how it sounds:

"There is no scientific evidence that cigarettes cause lung destruction (cancer)."
"There are no lab animal tests done which prove that smoking causes cancer."
"A bunch of doctors GUESSING that the cause for some smoker's cancer is cigarettes is NOT science."

Human in-vitro cellular testing on vaporized flavoring has in fact been done & continues (http://www.clearstreamonward.com/the-project-clearstream-onward/). That's FlavourArt's testing program, the only vape-related cellular viability tests that I'm aware of. However FA intentionally avoid diacetyl & related diketones in their flavorings, so this research cannot be used to determine the effects of diacetyl inhalation. FA's Clearstream Onward gives reassuring results regarding harm reduction of vaping vs smoking with the components FA does use. (I do wish they'd include tests with diacetyl-laden flavors for comparison purposes!) Those concerned about diacetyl & related diketones CAN vape while avoiding those ingredients.

Medical scientists drawing conclusions from case studies are not "guessing". This is how medical science works. Bioscientists using scientific method study actual medical cases within the framework of current biochemical knowledge. More cases = more conclusive evidence. WE are the test subjects for long-term effects of vaping. We vape for different reasons, and as adults I know we all agree we're entitled to draw our own conclusions & make our own decisions. Let's just be very careful about making generalizations that might be interpreted as scientific/medical claims. I hope it doesn't sound as if I'm doing that myself; I chose my wording carefully. Vape on!
srTYyZ1BjBtGU.gif


uh, unless you wanna distort my point i dont really know why you'd want to "change" the wording of my scientifically backed statements.
i'm well aware that flavorings & flavoring concentrates affect lung cells.
its why i posted a video containing a section where a toxicologist runs tests on flavorings harming lung cells.
http://vapingunderground.com/threads/different-flavors-cause-varied-levels-of-harm.260526/


"Medical scientists drawing conclusions from case studies are not "guessing". This is how medical science works. Bioscientists using scientific method study actual medical cases within the framework of current biochemical knowledge."

right. which is exactly why the doctors walking around that one particular popcorn factory GUESSED that the culprit to the group of workers afflicted with lung harm was butter flavoring.
because they did not follow any scientific method.
since the scientific method involves actual laboratory studies using lab animals or petry dish analysis.
which they didnt perform.
there's no lab evidence that diacetyl=Bronchiolitis obliterans
none.

link me a study proving otherwise.
of course you cant.
no one can.
so what exactly is your point then?
you're making me think you're baiting a needless discussion here.
i dont get your point. other than to extend the obvious.

Edit:
i dont even blame those doctors for causing this scandal about diacetyl....simply because they were working for a court hearing, a law suit, and had limited time and resources and most importantly of all....HAD TO COME TO A CONCLUSION AND PRODUCE AN ANSWER FOR THE COURT AS TO WHAT CAUSED THE CLAIMANT'S LUNG HARM. and they guessed th butter flavoring powder/dust.
they could have said it was anything. as long as they declared it was something.
THE COURT DEMANDED AN ANSWER.
ANY
ANSWER.
the court was not going to accept shrugged shoulders and the "we dont know." for an answer.
so i dont even blame the quack doctors.
i blame the public that took it and ran with it and starting flaming the fires of fear mongering.
it turned into a witch hunt of diacetyl and its silly and its stupid.
 
Last edited:

VU Sponsors

Top