Page 1 of 15 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 147
Like Tree200Likes

Thread: Should we agree on a "standard" concentration?

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    3,064

    Should we agree on a "standard" concentration?

    I was thinking maybe we should decide on a "standard" nicotine concentration.

    The reason I call for this is because I think that by renaming higher concentrations as "4x" or "8x" nicotine, we can drive home the message that we don't vape DIY nicotine concentrations ( with the exception being the 45mg/mL used in low powered cigalikes).

    A possibility would be to mark 12mg/ml as the "standard". While 12mg/mL may seem low to many here, it's not meant to act as a regulation cut-off point, merely a new way to describe nicotine concentrations in laymens terms. This would also make labelling more easier to understand and may make future regulative descriptions more convenient. Most importantly, it will drive home the message that we dont vape certain nicotine strength levels, we only mix with them, diluting them down to lower strengths.

    12mg/mL, whilst low to many, provides a nice convenient strength table:

    The 6mg/mL ejuices can be considered half Strength
    The 18mg/mL ejuices can be considered Mid Strength
    The 24mg/mL ejuices can be considered will be "double strength".
    The 36mg/mL will be "triple strength".
    The 48mg/mL will be 4x Strength
    The 72mg/mL will be 6x Strength
    The 96-100mg/mL will be 8x Strength

    These numbers are much less threatening and intimidating than "48mg/mL" and "100mg/ml", especially when nicotine "mg" are often confused with tobacco cigarette "mg" (which arent even mg of nicotine, but of tar!).

    Debates will be more easier to understand for regulators.

    For example, it's easier for me to express my opinion that "Triple strength" should be the highest nicotine level sold with flavour, with the exception of 4x strength ejuice that are sometimes used in low powered pre-filled cigalikes such as NJOY. And that I think all nicotine concentrations 4x and over should come in plain coloured bottles no less than 250mL volume.

    What are your opinions?

    Do you think another concentration should be marked as the "standard"?
    Last edited by mavinry4; 15-02-14 at 08:45 AM.
    MrGruffy likes this.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    407
    Cause saying I vape triple strength wouldn't raise eyebrows? Saying I drink over proof rum gets a reaction. I think doing this makes it easier to put the kibosh on anything over 12mg/ml
    mavinry4 likes this.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    3,064
    Quote Originally Posted by Monk EyBoy View Post
    Cause saying I vape triple strength wouldn't raise eyebrows? Saying I drink over proof rum gets a reaction. I think doing this makes it easier to put the kibosh on anything over 12mg/ml
    That's true.

    We could always raise the standard to counteract this.

    Perhaps make 18mg/mL the standard.

    9mg/ml can be half strength.
    24mg/mL can be mid strength.
    36mg/mL can be double strength.

    36mg/mL is fairly high. I've tried it, and it does give the throat a bit of a kick. Calling it Double strength isnt that much of a over-statement.
    maggie likes this.

  4. #4
    AussieVapers approved Vendor
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Townsville QLD
    Posts
    950
    why not use %.
    no alarms seem to happen when one says 1.2% or 3.6%

    My wife always forgives me when she is wrong.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    3,064
    Quote Originally Posted by Ozzie View Post
    why not use %.
    no alarms seem to happen when one says 1.2% or 3.6%
    Using percentages does help break away from the tobacco cigarette mg, and does sound less intimidating than using two digit numbers.

    However, when a smoker comes across these percentages, they may still be overwhelmed.

    In terms of discussing concentration regulation with the Government in the future, percentages should be used. In fact percentages should be used all the time.

    But setting a standard concentration mark for those percentages, I think, will make a lot of difference for smokers.

    I'm leaning towards making "1.8%" and "standard" nicotine, synonymous.
    Jessamine likes this.

  6. #6
    AVF Regular
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    3,690
    like extra high, high, medium and low ? many chinese suppliers already do this.

    I think we need to be careful we don't place an artificial ceiling on nic strength with terms like standard.... it could give the wrong impression to govt.

    % is a good idea. the difference between 1.8% and 3.6% doesn't sound as stigmatised as the Mg/ml
    mavinry4, Jessamine and maggie like this.




    Gaffer Tape is like The Force - it has a light side, a dark side, and it holds the universe together

    Without specific approval, No one has permission to quote me outside of AVF

  7. #7
    AVF Regular
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    NE Victoria
    Posts
    2,255
    Good luck getting everyone to agree on something

    I generally try to use percentages. Its clear to vapers and non vapers and it sounds great when i say there is less than 1% nicotine in my juice.

    $3642 Spent on Vaping

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    3,064
    Quote Originally Posted by Altered1 View Post
    like extra high, high, medium and low ? many chinese suppliers already do this.

    I think we need to be careful we don't place an artificial ceiling on nic strength with terms like standard.... it could give the wrong impression to govt.

    % is a good idea. the difference between 1.8% and 3.6% doesn't sound as stigmatised as the Mg/ml
    You're right, The word standard might be misinterpreted and act as an artificial cut-off point.

    I like the idea of 1.8% being "medium", 0.9% being Low, 2.4% being high, and 3.6% being extra high.

    When we branch into the DIY concentrations however, there needs to be a clear distinction that these are concentrations that are not vaped as is.

    In fact, I'm going to continue to advocate that DIY nicotine be regulated differently to premixed nicotine, particularly in terms of minimal volume limits (250mL or above), no flavours and plain packaging/colour of the bottles.

    Perhaps;

    The Flavoured Premixes
    0.9% Low
    1.8% Medium
    2.4% High
    3.6% Extra High
    -----------------------------------

    Unflavoured DIY
    5.4% 3X Strength
    7.2% 4X Strength
    10% 5X Strength

    Using different naming terms would indicate that these strengths should be regulated differently.

    I would like to use a different term than #X strength, as not to imply that 1.8% is considered the standard.

    Any ideas for how to name DIY strengths and distinguishig them from premix strengths would be great.
    Last edited by mavinry4; 15-02-14 at 11:11 AM.

  9. #9
    AVF Regular
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    3,690
    I wouldn't use anything like a multiplier for DIY - only the %.

    The "think of the children" brigade would seize on that with glee
    billyboy689 and mavinry4 like this.




    Gaffer Tape is like The Force - it has a light side, a dark side, and it holds the universe together

    Without specific approval, No one has permission to quote me outside of AVF

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Melbourne Sth East
    Posts
    1,686
    Quote Originally Posted by mavinry4 View Post
    You're right, The word standard might be misinterpreted and act as an artificial cut-off point.

    I like the idea of 1.8% being "medium", 0.9% being Low, 2.4% being high, and 3.6% being extra high.

    When we branch into the DIY concentrations however, there needs to be a clear distinction that these are concentrations that are not vaped as is.

    In fact, I'm going to continue to advocate that DIY nicotine be regulated differently to premixed nicotine, particularly in terms of minimal volume limits (250mL or above), no flavours and plain packaging/colour of the bottles.

    Perhaps;

    The Flavoured Premixes
    0.9% Low
    1.8% Medium
    2.4% High
    3.6% Extra High
    -----------------------------------

    Unflavoured DIY
    5.4% 3X Strength
    7.2% 4X Strength
    10% 5X Strength

    Using different naming terms would indicate that these strengths should be regulated differently.

    I would like to use a different term than #X strength, as not to imply that 1.8% is considered the standard.

    Any ideas for how to name DIY strengths and distinguishig them from premix strengths would be great.
    Good discussion Mav, I like your premix names/numbers. Don't forget Zero Nic though!

 

 
Page 1 of 15 12311 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.4
Copyright © 2019 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0
All times are GMT +11. The time now is 03:03 AM.