I just emailed Sutliff to get info on their growing process and to see if in fact they do use pesticides how many days before harvest are they last sprayed .Will let everyone know what they say 
Doubts over the safety of NET E-liquids
- Thread starter fabricator4
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
-
- Tags
- goodejuice halo myvapejuice
- Status
Organic, pesticide-free tobacco is available for purchase. So, it would make sense that at least some vendors, specifically those interested in selling a quality product advertised as organic, would use this option when buying tobacco. It's an assumption until validated or disproved, but I think it should be known that it does exist on the market, so it's feasible to buy pesticide-free tobacco liquids to vape.
Thanks
Yeah seen those already.Canadian shipping would cost a lot for me.I wanna try the kentucky organic but sold out everywhere.
ok there are a lot of bugs eating the backy http://www.toxicfreenc.org/informed/pdfs/Tobacco_chems.pdf
and this Potent Pesticides Used On Tobacco - CBS News and thats USA makes you wonder about Dekang
and this Potent Pesticides Used On Tobacco - CBS News and thats USA makes you wonder about Dekang
My take?
The fewer chemicals the better. If I could get pure nic reasonably priced (and cut with PG/VG to 100 mg) I would.
Any other "stuff" just reduces your odds. Sure you can probably say "better than smoking" but why switch to e-cigs and not get max benefit?
I understand that some want MAOI effects. But other than that...I don't understand NETs personally.
To each their own.
The fewer chemicals the better. If I could get pure nic reasonably priced (and cut with PG/VG to 100 mg) I would.
Any other "stuff" just reduces your odds. Sure you can probably say "better than smoking" but why switch to e-cigs and not get max benefit?
I understand that some want MAOI effects. But other than that...I don't understand NETs personally.
To each their own.
I get all my tobaccos from here
Its on backorder right now.Hopefully they will stock more soon .
I thing you're confusing WTA and NET. A NET is only a flavoring extract, with the single purpose of making a flavor. WTA are used for the effects and not for flavor.
NETs have WTAs, do they not?
However, you're right to point out the differences. And if NETs have no WTA...then I really don't understand them.
If NET fans are trying to convince me I should use an extra-cancerous flavoring (compared to, say, spearmint) in my e-juice for the "wow" flavor...I'll stick to spearmint, thanks.
Besides, why not just use chew instead of vaping? Less in your lungs.
Not that I debate your right to use it. But I don't understand it.
However, you're right to point out the differences. And if NETs have no WTA...then I really don't understand them.
If NET fans are trying to convince me I should use an extra-cancerous flavoring (compared to, say, spearmint) in my e-juice for the "wow" flavor...I'll stick to spearmint, thanks.
Besides, why not just use chew instead of vaping? Less in your lungs.
Not that I debate your right to use it. But I don't understand it.
Last edited:
The process to extract WTA is a lot more complex than the simple macerations used to make NET, and a lot more tobacco is used when making WTA. For example, the maceration of a single cigar is enough to flavor several hundred ml of liquid. I don't know how much tobacco is used to get the same amount of WTA containing juice, but a single cigar isn't going to provide much.
Extra cancerous flavoring... if you mean extracted tobacco flavoring has a much greater chance of producing cancer compared to artificial and other natural flavorings, that's completely unfounded. More testing needs to be done before we know the long term effects of ANY flavoring used in liquid. Your artificial or natural spearmint flavoring could turn out more dangerous long term than NET, we don't know yet.
I vape NETs based on my own assumption that the risks are extemely minimal. At the same level, possibly worse than others, but still minimal. I'm comfortable vaping NETs; but as a fan of them I've never tried to convince others they should use them, and I haven't seen other NET fans do so either.
Well, you have a right to take your best shot. However, that sounds like a rationalization to me since A) we KNOW chew (natural or otherwise) is carcinogenic and 2) artificial flavorings have been used in stuff for decades...I'll take my chances with the artificial flavor. Sure, 1 or 2 may turn out to be a problem, but over all, if I had to roll the dice I'm rolling for whatever artificial flavor. Fewer molecules = better.
It IS the topic of the thread. So I'm discussing.
I do know that burning tobacco is 1000 times worse though. For sure.
Last edited:
I agree, all of us who vape flavored liquid are rolling the dice. Whether the risks are greater with certain types of flavoring are mostly unknown, with some exceptions like diacetyl which is an artificial flavor known to be safe to eat but dangerous to inhale.
I think my view is close to most who prefer flavored liquid to just vaping unflavored PG nic.. I'm all for testing but I really think the risks are so low that I don't plan on waiting for the results to come in before indulging. My ratio of perceived risk to reward is just overwhelmingly on the side of reward. And for me that extends to NET.
The amount of tobacco needed to produce the amount of extract needed to keep me vaping NET is very low; I'm guessing less than a pack of cigs for a years worth. Now, someone who smokes a cig or two a month I would consider a very low risk activity, and I consider vaping NET probably much lower. So for me, based on the amount of tobacco I'm actually consuming, my worry level is nonexistant. I occasionally smoke a cig, a few a year, and I don't worry about that either. Someone definately has the right to worry about that, but those who worry that easily think very different than I do.
Just for clarification, Dr Farsalinos' test says absolutely nothing about the carcinogenic or mutagenic properties of NETs. It wasn't in the scope of the tests. Having said that I do have the same reservations about NETs; Is there much difference between a NET and chewing tobacco or snuff?
My other reservation is the possibility that they contain WTAs. I spent a really nasty month (or two) getting over my dependence on WTAs, I can't see the sense in re-introducing them into my vape at this time. Mind you, I've never seen any figures or tests on whether NETs contain WTAs, or percentages, but common sense seems to indicate that they are there in very small quantities.
Call it what you want NET, WTA, or Absolute.. tobacco/nicotine contains carcinogens (nitrosamines) regardless of being chewed, smoked or vaped.
Most argue that the levels in e-liquid are too small to cause any problems but I think vaping is not as safe as made out to be.
Most argue that the levels in e-liquid are too small to cause any problems but I think vaping is not as safe as made out to be.
Personally, I want all of my "carcinogens" contained in one liquid, so I am getting a WTA NET 
I think safety is a concern for most people, so I am watching this thread, but I think it's important to stress that there is still so much unknown and variables we don't understand.
I've only been here a few months, but I have not seen any NET users try to push their usage on others. I have offered WTA as a resort for people struggling to quit smoking, who find regular nicotine is not working for them. But, that is as far as the push goes. What I do know is watching people die from lung cancer from smoking for 20-30 years without the option on vaping.
Are there any SNUS studies out there yet?
I think safety is a concern for most people, so I am watching this thread, but I think it's important to stress that there is still so much unknown and variables we don't understand.
I've only been here a few months, but I have not seen any NET users try to push their usage on others. I have offered WTA as a resort for people struggling to quit smoking, who find regular nicotine is not working for them. But, that is as far as the push goes. What I do know is watching people die from lung cancer from smoking for 20-30 years without the option on vaping.
Are there any SNUS studies out there yet?
Nicotine is an alkaloid and is not carcinogenic. WTA (whole tobacco alkaloids) are also not carcinogenic. They both come from tobacco, which does contain nitrosamines, but that doesn't mean those specific compounds are nitrosamines. Do NETs contain tobacco specific nitrosamines? The ones that have been tested (Ahlusion and House of Liquid) contain no TSN.
Yeah. I agree, but to be fair we say safER not safe. IDK. That's why my comment about "If I could get pure nic at a reasonable cost I would..." was made.
Now I guess it's all in the "best I can do" department. Particularly since NRTs have many of the same chemicals as nic base. But NETs have more than all those. So..????
True on the clarification, however, I considered the thread title to be broader in scope than the 1 study. There have been studies on chew, for example, as you may have indirectly implied. So I wasn't trying to mischaracterize Dr Farsalinos' study, to be fair to him/her and to be clear.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
