Monthly Archives: May 2015

 

*An updated opinion has been posted here on 5th June 2015 due to developments in the industry

Customer demand resulting from the update means that we will now stock wire for them. It will be found here when in stock.

Stealthvape is always on the hunt to bring vapers the best quality product and the next best thing in vaping tech; in 2012 we thought titanium wire could be one such product. Samples were sent out to friends and colleagues but we decided to pull it from sale prior to launch.

It sounded awesome, but languishing in a room in Stealthvape Towers now lays 30,000 metres of never-to-be-used top grade titanium wire. Rob made the decision because, in his words, “it’s probably bordering on irresponsibility selling the stuff.”

The wire does produce a cleaner tasting vape than compared to something like Kanthal but when put up against Kanthal or tempered Ni200 it’s incredibly springy to work with.

And then there are the flames…

If it’s overheated either by dry burning or torching it will burst into flame in a cool chemical fire kind of way not dissimilar to magnesium ribbon. Titanium is a component of fireworks for the white sparks. Metal fires such as this require a Class D fire extinguisher, not something commonly found in most vapers homes.

Given this poses a huge safety aspect we could not be confident selling it. We are certain that our insurers (who already place a huge financial burden on suppliers to the vape market) would refuse to cover us selling something we considered potentially dangerous. Although the insurance is not a legal requirement and does not direct what we sell we feel it is a moral aspect that our customers deserve.

Rob adds: “I’m a big fan of the concept of Ti and was super stoked to stock it, sort of felt like I was breaking new ground as I’ve always been on a mission to discover new things. I just think it’s a Dragon that’s best left sleeping.”

The proliferation of high wattage devices or the prospect of a genny hotspot taking a wire to ignition temperature is just too much of a risk. The likelihood is that in the new Evolv temperature-protected mods the wire poses much less of a hazard as it will not oxidise as quickly or be pushed to ignition temperature.

Which brings us to the topic of coil oxidation and TiO2, titanium dioxide.

In 2014, the small amounts of TiO2 in a brand of eliquid caused the producer to operate a full recall following heated debate in online vaping forums. We mention this here not because we are experts in the vaping of liquids containing TiO2 but because newer vapers may be unaware of the discussions. Our primary concern was the safety of the wire in use, this is a secondary but related matter.

JustPoo, a respected member of the UKVapers forum, carried out a brief test to look at the oxidation rate of Ti wire: “I wrapped a standard coil, none of the wraps are touching and it came in at 0.12ohms. I then vaped pure VG on it for 20 minutes, taking 1-2 second drags, always keeping the wick wet and never getting a dry hit or letting it get too hot.”

“I put a fresh wick in for the picture so it was a fair comparison. The coil has changed colour and it looks very much like oxidisation. The resistance has also risen to 0.13ohms.”

“In this test I was careful to make sure the coils didn’t overheat. We’ve all had a dry hit or lean vape by accident, so during normal usage it’s possible the oxidisation would be worse. Titanium oxide is particularly toxic and seems to be produced at normal vaping temperatures, so I won’t be using titanium as a safer alternative to Kanthal.”

The material safety data sheet (MSDS) for Titanium dioxide states: “Mutagenic for mammalian somatic cells. The substance may be toxic to lungs, upper respiratory tract. Repeated or prolonged exposure to the substance can produce target organs damage.”

In relation to the withdrawn eliquid containing TiO2, Dr Farsalinos states: “First of all, titanium dioxide was probably used as a food colouring. It is really unfortunate that there are companies using food colourings in their products. These substances have NEVER been tested for inhalation, do not offer anything in terms of flavour or experience to the vaper and are only used for aesthetic purposes (if there is any real reason for making the liquid more colourful). Using something that has never been tested for inhalation purposes in order just to make the e-liquid ‘look better’ is AT LEAST an irresponsible behaviour. Using food colourings introduces an unknown, potentially dangerous factor, for absolutely no reason. It does not promote the experience and pleasure perceived by consumers. For titanium dioxide, it is officially classified as a probable carcinogen when inhaled.

You do not expect an e-cigarette vendor to be a scientist. No businessmen in other industries need to be scientists in order to own a business making a consumer product. However, in any other industry they are hiring experts (chemists etc.) to know what they are doing and what they are putting in the products. This has not been the case with e-cigarettes. So, instead of any vendor trying to be a scientist through the Internet and Wikipedia, it is far better to avoid any ‘experimentation’ trying to make a ‘novel’, ‘magic’ recipe. Just stick with what is essential in an e-liquid (flavouring, solvents, nicotine). There is NO JUSTIFICATION like “I didn’t know”. You do not know and you cannot acquire the knowledge unless you are an expert or you hire an expert. Until you do that, any experimentation with new substances introduced to an e-liquid is unnecessary and dangerous.

Vapers should avoid such products.”

Stealthvape are not saying ‘do not use titanium wire’, we just won’t sell you any. Vape safe 🙂

 

 

 

The entire framework of those opposed to vaping in its current form isn’t geared to discourse. With every press release, tweet and public speaking event they cloak themselves in the colours of attacking to seek victory, not discover a truth.

And when not holding a popular stance, they will strive to appear as though their opinion is the majority view and thereby demand all others accede to it. When Farsalinos and 52 others wrote to the World Health Organisation in 2014 it was sent with the intention of addressing a collective opinion of the flawed science behind the WHO’s stance. The key points from Stanton Glantz’s rebuttal were that he had 129 names on his letter and they came from 31 countries.

That was more or less it – a reductionist approach to scientific debate relying solely on ‘there are more of us than you’…ignoring the important fact that his bunch of names had contributed nothing by way of accepted peer-reviewed study. He may as well have threatened to get his Dad because he’s bigger than Farsalinos’.

The stories currently circulating about mice, formaldehyde and the gateway effect are nothing more than argumentum ad populum straw men. They aren’t beliefs, they aren’t grounded in science – they are fallacies trotted out with the hope they become popular urban myths with the public and that the received opinion will be trotted out in pubs and workplaces across nations.

Look at the reputations of Ghandi, Mother Teresa, the Dalai Llama (Penn & Teller’s debunking show) and Florence Nightingale (SN.com). Public perception, the will of the majority, is open to manipulation by those who would seek to gain from it – and public health officials in league with pharmaceutical companies are seeking big gains. On that note, I strongly recommend The Missionary Position by Peter Hitchens.

This isn’t a new situation, it’s how decisions that effect our daily actions have always been made – but I sense change. The idea of social media appealed to the vanities of those occupying lofty positions, they signed up to spew their thoughts to the masses without a thought to how the network of individuals operate.

The frustration being experienced by McKee, Chapman and Ashton (being inexperienced at dealing with criticism) has led to frequent ad hominem outbursts. Glantz was moved to scribe an entire letter personally attacking Farsalinos.

Some call for greater action from vapers to combat proposed legislation but, from my perspective, ecig-related networks are already buzzing. The political decision process is similar to that for consumer decision making – needs recognition, information, evaluation and then the decision. Twitter, forums and Facebook open this up to us, the great unwashed. Research is digested and spat out in easy to understand sound bites as fast as it appears in print. We have access to counter-comments and online feedback sections rapidly fill with pro-vaping comments.

In fact, I barely remember seeing a website poll where vapers hadn’t swamped to skew the result. This drip-feeds public opinion, this is the battleground. Glantz is never going to admit to his errors of judgement or the backhanders he takes – but politicians fear the voting masses.

The journal Cyberpsychology, Behavior, Social Networking (the go-to source in the field of cyberpsychology) details how a comment section influences audience perception of online articles. Regardless of the level of coherence or abuse, it’s the prevailing feeling from others towards a piece that influences other readers.

Will this see the end to the tyranny of the majority? Unlikely, but we may be about to see some compelling evidence to support Olsen’s conjectures in his The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups.

So continue to ridicule, deconstruct and refute, you mighty activists. It may seem as though many aren’t motivated to join in but maybe this shouldn’t be seen as a full-time thing? As long as those tweets, posts and replies keep racking up we changing opinion one syllable at a time. I may not be in the vanguard of campaigning – but I’m a very interested bystander who’ll chip in with comments now and then.

 

 

An odd opening for a blog post about the bullying tactics of a Big T company and an impending name change for the OCD range of products sold on the website but I’m certain all will become clear as the sentences roll by.

If you are reading this on the Stealthvape blog then you’ll already be familiar with the popular OCD washers and OCD connectors. Rob spent ages wrestling with the design concepts before getting them produced – an original product put together and sold by a British vaping company.

The name was highly appropriate given the shudders that accompany the sight of an atomiser perched above a mod with a large gap screaming “I’m sooooo wrong!” A name so apt Rob sought and obtained an official trademark from the Intellectual Property Office for it.

“So,” you’re asking “what’s all this OCD name change stuff?” Well you are asking that or busy removing some errant Kanthal from a bare toe. In order to answer that question you need to ponder a different one: where do bullies go to work when they grow up?

Lucy in the Charlie Brown comic strips – who on Earth would employ such a venal excuse for girlhood? Nelson from the Simpsons, that git from the Karate Kid and Biff from Back To The Future; no one in their right mind would hire these sociopaths.

The answer, dear friends, is that all of them go on to qualify as lawyers and make a fat living in the legal departments of tobacco companies. Even Draco Malfoy is a work experience lad in one. Honest. He is kept busy every day by Jabba the Hutt LLB.

It was probably Lord Sauron who dictated the letter send from Republic Technologies International complaining about the letters OCD. Apparently this company find the letters far too similar to their OCB brand. What do you mean you’ve never heard of OCB? Everyone must have heard of their fag papers. No? Oh, I’m not alone then.

The OCD trademark is for: “Class 34 Electronic cigarettes; components, parts and accessories for the aforesaid goods.”

The OCB trademark is for: “Class 14 Jewellery, fashion jewellery, timepieces.
Class 25 Clothing, footwear, headgear. Class 34 Tobacco, including smoking tobacco, cigarettes, smokers’ articles, including cigarette paper in booklets or in tubes, automatic boxes for rolling cigarettes, cigarette-rolling machines, tube-filling machines, filter tips, metal cases.”

So, the brands have different names, are aimed at different markets and are fundamentally totally different products. This matters little to RepTech and they demanded a removal of the OCD brand name. Given a pot of money to fight an expensive legal case it seems abundantly clear that Damien Thorn and his legal associates would be laughed out of court.

Politeness forbids me from using the exact words I’d commonly opt for to describe the company and their actions. But then nouns, as Homer Simpson illustrated, can be interchangeable. Which means that I can say, without fear of contradiction, that RepTech and their lawyers are a bunch of roses. Just my opinion as the author of this article and not that of Stealthvape, one which you might agree with or not.

A bunch of roses, crapweeds, stink blossoms and scumdrops.