Top 3 PG. manufacturers bailing out of vaping
- Thread starter Gonloopy
- Start date
Colonelboom
Vendor
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2013
- Messages
- 3,609
That's interesting. I wonder though if that is DOW distancing themselves from association with the tobacco industry above other reasons.
Gonloopy
Veteran
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2013
- Messages
- 5,627
I suspect you are right, and sadly I think we are going to see a lot more of this type of thing too...
blademansw
Achiever
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2014
- Messages
- 4,233
They are probably under pressure from big pharma. I am sure there are plenty of big companies who will happily provide PG to the relevant standards that are based in China. They love fucking the western capitalist running dog companies!
Sent by Harbinger from the edge of the Apocalypse...
Sent by Harbinger from the edge of the Apocalypse...
EthelKing
Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2012
- Messages
- 5,448
Actually, I think its a lot less sinister. I remember reading some Dow data sheets about two years ago for PG and it explicitly stated that Dow did not recommend the use of PG vapour for inhalation. I'll see if I can find it.
At the end if the day, they are a huge company who probably doesn't give a fiddlers feck what people do with their chemicals, but understandably want to distance themselves from future law suits if we all start dropping dead when research discovers what we believe is a lot less harmful than smoking actually turns out to be hideously harmful.
Remember, smoking was never seen as harmful for decades, then lawsuits were brought successfully. I know if I were in their position, I wouldn't actively sell it as a "smoking" type thing, but as a non toxic antifreeze. If people then used it for anything else, the onus is in them.
Just my thoughts.
At the end if the day, they are a huge company who probably doesn't give a fiddlers feck what people do with their chemicals, but understandably want to distance themselves from future law suits if we all start dropping dead when research discovers what we believe is a lot less harmful than smoking actually turns out to be hideously harmful.
Remember, smoking was never seen as harmful for decades, then lawsuits were brought successfully. I know if I were in their position, I wouldn't actively sell it as a "smoking" type thing, but as a non toxic antifreeze. If people then used it for anything else, the onus is in them.
Just my thoughts.
EthelKing
Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2012
- Messages
- 5,448
Here's the information I was talking about:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/14546932/Dow PG.pdf
It was produced in 2003. Have a look at "Toxicological and Environmental Considerations" on page 35.
PG is used in so many different applications it would be absolutely impossible for Dow to have any control over the final use.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/14546932/Dow PG.pdf
It was produced in 2003. Have a look at "Toxicological and Environmental Considerations" on page 35.
PG is used in so many different applications it would be absolutely impossible for Dow to have any control over the final use.
jediknight129
Postman
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2014
- Messages
- 238
Would this mean they will stop providing it to pipe tobacco manufacturers then? Since a lot of otc stuff is treated with it.
Similar threads
