If it's $150 per chemical wouldn't it be $450 to test for all 3?

A few bullet points in response:

• As for samples from the same bottle producing different results, how do we know it isn't a problem with the distribution of the flavor molecules in the bottle itself? In other words inconsistent mixing? Remember NN's claim about "hot spots" in their VG nic? The NudeNicotine guy (sorry forget his name) reads this sub and is a chemist, so perhaps he could chime in here about what could possibly be going on with the differing results (malice or incompetence?).

• I would like to see Enthalpy's official response to the "differing" results claims. I would like to hear Gene Gillman himself (owner) chime in on what he thinks happened. Right now, I have only seen rumors from people like VaporChef making these claims with no real evidence that such an event occurred.

• VaporChef sent off his liquids to another lab (not affiliated with AEMSA) and claims he got differing results from them too. Are they also in on the conspiracy?

• If there was a conspiracy between AEMSA and Gillman to extort money from vendors (by threatening DA/AP witch hunts), why are some of the non-AEMSA vendors having their liquids test negative for DA/AP? Why are these vendors exempt from the extortion scheme?

• I admit that if it is true that Gillman is a board member of AEMSA, then it is a conflict of interest.

• Agree about nicotine testing. However, no one is saying that all DA/AP in liquids was added intentionally by unscrupulous vendors. I've heard interviews with Dr. Gillman and he believes some of the DA/AP is accidental (he goes into detail about the chain of custody and how flavor molecules are made. It's even possible that the flavoring manufacturers themselves aren't even aware of everything in their concentrates since they also source their raw materials from elsewhere).

• Also agree that aerosol studies are more revealing than liquid analysis (which is limited in its usefulness).

Ultimately and unfortunately, we are probably going to have to rely on the FDA and expensive million dollar studies from universities before we get to the bottom of this. Independent labs (whether accurate or not) will always be under a veil of suspicion and accused of ulterior motives.

That's an interesting thought. Do you happen to know if they changed up recipe's anytime recently? They could have tested theirs first, fixed them up, then did the big test knowing they would come out looking good.

They'd be incredibly stupid to tamper with their own results: All it would take would be one person testing even just one of their in-house juices independently and contradict them to kick up a major shitstorm.

I've always been skeptical of these studies. A couple of months ago a company opened called The Clean Vape, or something along those lines, touting lab tested juices. My first thought was that these people could have easily given VG with a fraction of the flavoring to the lab thus lowering the test results. Same deal here. The company doing the tests could easily "water down" their own juices to produce favorable results.

The bottom line is that there is less of these chemicals in the vape than in cigarettes. Good enough for me.

They probably all use the same flavorings we do. Yes, its suspicious.

yea this is scary. the amount of it in some of those juices is extremely high. it actually made me put my favorite flavor away which im pretty sure has some in it. only going to be vaping fruity flavors for a while sadly though im not sure all those are even safe. ill definitely be waiting for your results i feel like all flavors should have already been tested and we should have specifics at this point in the industry. vaping has been huge for few years now

That's why I only smoked Winstons, it's the brand more doctor's recommend!

There are seriously so many chemicals in our flavors. If one of them is the magic cancer bullet it is just as likely to be one we're not even considering right now. How many different molecules go into Strawberry (Ripe) alone? If we're fucked, my money is on that one. I try to personally use DX and V2 versions when they are available, but I stopped worrying too much after it was pointed out that there is 100x more diacety in cigarette smoke.

The difference is we know DA/AP are bad, and in some rare cases, requires a lung transplant. And this is true even for people exposed just for a few months. So, we aren't talking about a lifetime of exposure here. We are talking about people in their 20's and 30's coming down with this disease. It's scary shit.

Am I saying that vaping a custard will give you popcorn lung in a few months time? No. There's no evidence of that. But we do know flavoring/popcorn/coffee/bakery workers have contracted it after a few months of exposure (some of whom were non-smokers).

There's still a lot of questions. Is the exposure from vaping the same as it is in a factory setting with airborne DA? Does powdered or liquid form make a difference? Does the heating of our atomizers make a difference or somehow break down the DA? (I haven't seen any aerosol studies that looked for DA/AP, most of them have only looked at aldehydes and metals, etc.). There's a lot of unknowns.

My only point is we should eliminate the known harmful chemicals before we start talking about the unknowns. PG/VG have been around a long, long time and used for all sorts of purposes. There have even been numerous inhalation studies on both of them showing no harmful effects (at least at acute doses -- chronic exposure might be different).

> My only fear of death is comin' back to this bitch reincarnated.

-- Abraham Lincoln

While this is a sensible, and very likely solution, may I take the worst case scenario, as ask you about it? What happens if we choose number one, and it turns out there is DA/AP in worrying amounts?

Number two seems like the least likely to have this drawback, but also, less likely to be the best idea.

Number three is the idea that is so focused it might work, because people could very well have a stake in it.