Is Brass Safe?

[lwien]

Ok, gotta come back to say a few more things and then I'm out. According to that link that I posted up, there is only one brass that is lead free and that is alloy 464, not alloy 260. In my particular arguments, I was never addressing what would be considered a safe exposure and what would not be considered a safe exposure. In Ricks post#94, he continually referred to the brass that he was using as "NO LEAD" (he put it in caps), and that statement, apparently, is totally false, unless of course, there are different chemical makeups of alloy 260 and that it depends totally on your supplier, which I highly doubt. So...........if we can agree that there IS in fact lead in alloy 260 that is used in the Zaps tubing, then THAT part of the argument is indeed, moot. If however, Rick continues to state that it is totally lead free, than I would want to see further documentation to support that fact and not just take a salesmans word on it.

Which leaves us with two other issues which are stated in the previous posts. One, is, what is the acceptable level of lead exposure that each of us can deal with, and two, what I originally brought up regarding the heat exchanger, being that it comes from a different manufacturer and that besides the internal tubing of the heat port, my not be composed of the low lead content that alloy 260 is composed of.

So to repeat Rick last statement in his post of "Wonder if this is an example of "be careful what you ask for"?", all I gotta say is............back at ya.

 

[DevoTheStrange]

If you look up the alloy you will find it is made of a 70/30 mix of copper and zinc.... but it can also have a small amount of lead it, or not depending on who makes it.
So one supplier does not make the exact same brass as the next. C260 is allowed to have up to .07% lead in it. So depending on the manufacturer there may or may not be lead in it.
So yes there is a standard for c260 brass, a standard that allows for a minute amount of lead at times. So just because one person will supply you with unleaded brass, does not mean the next company will.

 

[lwien]

If you look up the alloy you will find it is made of a 70/30 mix of copper and zinc.... but it can also have a small amount of lead it, or not depending on who makes it.
So one supplier does not make the exact same brass as the next. C260 is allowed to have up to .07% lead in it. So depending on the manufacturer there may or may not be lead in it.
So yes there is a standard for c260 brass, a standard that allows for a minute amount of lead at times. So just because one person will supply you with unleaded brass, does not mean the next company will.

Lead is added to brass for basically one reason and that is to make it pliable and easier to mold. I would just find it odd that a particular alloy would have different chemical makeups depending upon the supplier, for that would really complicate matters when a manufacturer is making a purchasing decision as to where to purchase his supplies. I would think that all stated alloys have the exact same makeup. It's not like brass originally comes with lead content. It has to be added.

 

[DevoTheStrange]

But you cannot discount the fact that some manufacturers may choose not to use lead. It may be harder to mold, but that is a choice a manufacturers may make. So there is also the possibility you can run into c260 without lead. I would say it would be false to assume all C260 has lead in it. A good majority of it probably does, but the chance of no lead is still there.
I would say the end product is where the alloy composition counts most, not the starting product. And as you said, it is an additive. So I think the end product would vary from company to company.

all the info I pull up say the same thing... it can contain up to .07% lead... does not say that it has to contain this much, just up to.
http://www.speedymetals.com/information/Material79.html
http://www.alcobrametals.com/guide.php?metal=16
http://www.copper.org/applications/industrial/DesignGuide/designations.html

I also wonder if companies disclose the lead content considering how little it is, as long as they don't go over that percentage. If they do disclose it, it should be really easy to put this particular brass issue to rest....

 

[reece]

The following pdf is from the UK's rohs website. It is a list of rohs exemptions for lead content.

http://www.rohs.gov.uk/content.aspx?id=15


http://www.rohs.gov.uk/Docs/Exemptions without link backs/RoHS Exemptions - Lead (2).pdf

Lead as an alloying element in steel containing up to 0.35% lead by weight, aluminium containing up to 0.4 % lead by weight and as a copper alloy containing up to 4% lead by weight.

Can we all agree there isn't 4% lead in C260 brass? And according to RoHS standards, a max of 4% lead in copper alloys (such as C260 brass), is compliant.

So does this ends the discussion? There is still lead in the brass. Even though we now know the amount is acceptable under RoHS standards as well as U.S. (California) standards, I can't imagine that mattering to those of you that want no risk. 7 hundredths of a percent is still more than 0.

 

[lwien]

But you cannot discount the fact that some manufacturers may choose not to use lead. It may be harder to mold, but that is a choice a manufacturers may make. So there is also the possibility you can run into c260 without lead. I would say it would be false to assume all C260 has lead in it. A good majority of it probably does, but the chance of no lead is still there.
I would say the end product is where the alloy composition counts most, not the starting product. And as you said, it is an additive. So I think the end product would vary from company to company.

Ok, then if that's the case, than I'd like to see some documentation from K&S that shows what indeed, IS the chemical breakdown of their alloy 260, for it seems that this information would be required by many users of their product and should be available for download. It's not that I don't trust Rick. It's more that I don't trust the answers from a salesmen, regardless if he is a national sales manager or not. This kind of documentation will put this issue to bed and it should be very easy to get if one asks for it.

 

[reece]

Which leaves us with two other issues which are stated in the previous posts. One, is, what is the acceptable level of lead exposure that each of us can deal with, and two, what I originally brought up regarding the heat exchanger, being that it comes from a different manufacturer and that besides the internal tubing of the heat port, my not be composed of the low lead content that alloy 260 is composed of.

Hasn't Rick already stated the heat port is the same alloy?

 

[DevoTheStrange]

yeah but if you look at metal toxicity and how it works, minute amounts become larger amounts in your blood over time.
All the small amount will mean, in terms of toxicity, is it will take longer for the problem to arise.

Which leaves us with two other issues which are stated in the previous posts. One, is, what is the acceptable level of lead exposure that each of us can deal with, and two, what I originally brought up regarding the heat exchanger, being that it comes from a different manufacturer and that besides the internal tubing of the heat port, my not be composed of the low lead content that alloy 260 is composed of.

Hasn't Rick already stated the heat port is the same alloy?

yes he has, but he also stated it is from a different supplier. So that different supplier may use lead in their product.

The issue is not with rick but rather are both suppliers of his brass not using lead in the manufacturing of their product.

 

[obelisk]

I'm confused Devo. If a particular alloy is made up of a specific percentage of materials why would it matter who supplies it? 304 stainless steel is 304 stainless steel no matter who you buy it from, isn't it? And as Obelisk points out, Rick already stated all brass is the same alloy. This could just be my ignorance of metal but
why give it a name (alloy C260) if there wasn't some sort of standardization? It seems as though you are suggesting that alloy C260 from one supplier could have a higher lead content than alloy C260 from another. If this is the case, the name seems to mean nothing.

the way i understand it, ca260 brass is a 70/30 brass, 70 percent copper 30 zinc. i am not sure if the alloy name alludes to, or tried to standardize, the amount of lead used. different manufacturers will/may have different lead compositions in the alloy they make. however, as i said before, i am yet to see a single instance where the lead component in ca260 brass is higher than what is considered legally safe in brass.

also, in the interest of keeping this conversation at least a little bit intelligent, the question of 'legally safe in what applications' has to be answered. also, it has to be understood that lead percentage in brass may or may not be indicative at all of the toxicity it represents. percentage is too relative a concept to rely on it for this. instead, you gotta see the whole thing about micrograms or whatever the measuring term is or parts per million or something definitive like that. at least this is my understanding of how this works. i may be wrong. perhaps debating this or that based on percentages is moot. i only posted all that stuff earlier was because an argument was being made regarding the presence of lead in the brass used by Rick. this is NOT evidence of toxicity.

i did make an argument of 0.06 percent being safe in paint so why is 0.07 percent not safe in brass-- well, on hindsight, this may not be a sound argument. oops. to my layman's mind it kinda makes sense, but since percentage is so relative a term, and since lead toxicity can be defined only in specific quantitative terms not relative qualitative terms, my previous argument is probably bullshit. i dunno.

(i am sure there are some lurkers laughing at me right now )

i don't see how any of this conversation can satisfactorily be concluded without spending money for lab tests. and the lab test would not necessarily concentrate on lead in brass but if there is lead being leached into the vapor you inhale. all this talk of brass this or brass that is really of no use until this can be done.

is the fact that some members on FC question the MZ's toxicity justification enough for the mom and pop shop that manufactures the MZ to spend money for lab tests? well, that is Rick's call, but as far as I am concerned: fuck no.

(just noticed i take a long time to post and many posts have been made since reece's post)
Devo, have you found a manufacturer of c260 brass that does not have lead in it whatsoever? or any manufacturer that has lead in percentages more than legally safe limits?

Ok, then if that's the case, than I'd like to see some documentation from K&S that shows what indeed, IS the chemical breakdown of their alloy 260, for it seems that this information would be required by many users of their product and should be available for download. It's not that I don't trust Rick. It's more that I don't trust the answers from a salesmen, regardless if he is a national sales manager or not. This kind of documentation will put this issue to bed and it should be very easy to get if one asks for it.

^^ I am sorry but the manufacturer is not obliged to show you documentation of squat. you are the one making accusations or, to be politically correct, are concerned about the safety of pothead vaporists. The onus of proving toxicity is on you I'd say, no?

or, even better, you could choose not to purchase an MZ, like you've already done, and then leave everybody else to make their minds on their own.

 

[lwien]

GREAT info and great links from both Reece and Devo. That's what this thread is about.

It sure is hell is NOT about accusing anyone of intentionally trying to poison anyone., but rather an attempt to get down to the nitty gritty of it all.

My intent is not to prove anyone right or wrong here, including myself, but rather to bring up these issues for discussion and debate. It's nice to see the direction that this thread is taking. Good stuff.

 

[DevoTheStrange]

(just noticed i take a long time to post and many posts have been made since reece's post)
Devo, have you found a manufacturer of c260 brass that does not have lead in it whatsoever? or any manufacturer that has lead in percentages more than legally safe limits?

No i have not... all i have found is that it may contain up to .07%... other than that I just find the 70/30 mixture... no mention of lead... but like i said before I don't think that companies have to disclose the amount of lead in it because of the miniscule levels.

 

[Hippie Dickie]

it seems to me all the regulations about % of lead permitted, or deemed "safe", depends on statistical studies about who gets toxic effects from a certain quantity - an "unsafe" amount. But everybody is different -- we're all anecdotes, medically -- so some people will be overly sensitive to nanoquantities of lead, while others, perhaps, can eat lead to no ill effect.

so, as Socrates said, "Know thyself".

 

[lwien]

^^ I am sorry but the manufacturer is not obliged to show you documentation of squat. you are the one making accusations or, to be politically correct, are concerned about the safety of pothead vaporists. The onus of proving toxicity is on you I'd say, no?

or, even better, you could choose not to purchase an MZ, like you've already done, and then leave everybody else to make their minds on their own.

And here I was stating that I really liked the direction that this thread was going. Oh well.......

The chemical makeup of a specific alloy by a manufacture should be available to ANYONE who is considering the purchase of their product, be it a vaporizer manufacturer, or NASA.

 

[DevoTheStrange]

I do agree with Obelisk in that just short of shelling out money and getting a lab test... this debate will more than likely never end.

 

[reece]

GREAT info and great links from both Reece and Devo. That's what this thread is about.

It sure is hell is NOT about accusing anyone of intentionally trying to poison anyone., but rather an attempt to get down to the nitty gritty of it all.

My intent is not to prove anyone right or wrong here, including myself, but rather to bring up these issues for discussion and debate. It's nice to see the direction that this thread is taking. Good stuff.

You may roll your eyes but I think Rick has a right to be a bit defensive. It was not long ago that you and Clear Dome were in the Zap thread and your discussion included the implication that Rick's concern was more about saving money than safety. That sentiment came from Clear Dome but you seemed to agree. I don't know that that was your intent. From previous posts I would think not but it came off that way.

 

[lwien]

It was not long ago that you and Clear Dome were in the Zap thread and your discussion included the implication that Rick's concern was more about saving money than safety. That sentiment came from Clear Dome but you seemed to agree. I don't know that that was your intent. From previous posts I would think not but it came off that way.

I did? Man, if I gave off that impression, than I totally apologize.

 

[obelisk]

^^ I am sorry but the manufacturer is not obliged to show you documentation of squat. you are the one making accusations or, to be politically correct, are concerned about the safety of pothead vaporists. The onus of proving toxicity is on you I'd say, no?

or, even better, you could choose not to purchase an MZ, like you've already done, and then leave everybody else to make their minds on their own.

And here I was stating that I really liked the direction that this thread was going. Oh well.......

The chemical makeup of a specific alloy by a manufacture should be available to ANYONE who is considering the purchase of their product, be it a vaporizer manufacturer, or NASA.

yes, it should be available. so then go to the K&S website and find that information out and post it here. it seems to me that you are the most vocal guy here but found just one link and posted it here without trying to understand what 'lead-free' means realistically.

my issue is not that questions are being asked. that is rick's concern. i don't make money off the MZ and nor will i lose money if the MZ dies. but i do find it odd that you are willing to be so vocal and raise questions and yet demand for proof of safety rather than prove a lack of safety yourself. do you see where i am coming from? the onus of proof right now lies on you. you are the one making raising questions that, if correct, can potentially ruin a family's business.

the united states government deems certain types of brass as lead free even though they have lead. the brass used in the MZ is legally lead free. this is a fact.

again, i realize my tone may sound a bit accusatory or unfriendly, but it is not how i feel. honest. think about it yourself though: you make a product. somebody comes and says you are producing toxic shit. whose responsibility it is to make their case?

all this while the argument was ok because, hey, there is lead in this brass and we don't know if it is safe. that ambiguity has been removed now. it is proven that the brass used in the MZ is legally lead free. if there any more doubts in your head, please feel free to raise them but atleast do the corresponding research yourself instead of demanding that the manufacturer do that work for you. i'm sorry if that is not your intention, but it sure reads that way to me.

 

[wthanna]

I have only a minute to post so sorry for the short one.. I hope it is informative. Do a google search for:

msds brass 260

MSDS stands for Material Safety Data Sheet. People that make this stuff are required to have one. If we know the manufacturer of the brass in question we can narrow it down a bit.

 

[Rick]

We will not be spending any money for tests to prove the negative some are asking for.
As always, if you have any safety concerns about AZ/MZ, just do not buy one. Petty simple really. I do believe the periodic attempts on FC to convince others of the same(brass is unsafe) are done for a reason related to sales of these type vapes.
That is it for me on this thread. I will address specific questions about the vapor path in the AZ/MZ on my thread if anyone has more questions specifically about our unit.

 

[lwien]

I do believe the periodic attempts on FC to convince others of the same(brass is unsafe) are done for a reason related to sales of these type vapes.

I guess it's all a matter of perspective. I don't see that anyone here is trying to convince others that brass is unsafe, but rather, raising the question of, is it safe. BIG difference.

 

[obelisk]

I have only a minute to post so sorry for the short one.. I hope it is informative. Do a google search for:

msds brass 260

MSDS stands for Material Safety Data Sheet. People that make this stuff are required to have one. If we know the manufacturer of the brass in question we can narrow it down a bit.

thanks for that info. i found a couple of datasheets, I dont think I am qualified enough to make inferences from the hazardous ingredient details given, but here are links:

http://www.sequoia-brass-copper.com/MSDS-2bl.htm (shows pb percentage as 0.07%)

http://www.cambridgelee.com/msds/MSDS-CDA260.pdf

http://www.ipmx.com/library/pdf/brass alloys c210 c280.pdf

i am not sure if K&S metals is a manufacturer or a reseller.

from this amazon link though: http://www.amazon.com/Brass-Sheet-Type-ASTM-B36-Thick/dp/B000FN1GPU

it seems to me that brass sheet, alloy 260, adheres to ASTM-B36 specification.

the astm website shows:

http://www.astm.org/Standards/B36.htm -- you gotta pay for this information. and i have no idea if this specification talks about allowed lead content but it seems worth investigating. i believe the exact specification for this is astm-b36-66 for 70/30 cartridge brass c26000. wtf that means or whether this standardization is based on composition of the alloy or simply by application or even sizes/cuts (rod,sheet,etc.) in which the alloy is available in , who knows. based on the name of the organization though, American Society for Testing and Materials, it seems they would pay attention to composition. i have not been able to find more details about this specification yet though.

wikipedia states: The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the World Health Organization state that a blood lead level of 10 ?g/dL or above is a cause for concern; however, lead may impair development and have harmful health effects even at lower levels, and there is no known safe exposure level.[5][6] Authorities such as the American Academy of Pediatrics define lead poisoning as blood lead levels higher than 10 ?g/dL.[7]

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead_poisoning)

the first datasheet i linked to showed the presence of lead in c26000 brass alloy to be .05 milligrams in 1 cubic meter. how this can be correlated to that 10 micrograms (?) in a decalitre stuff i dunno.

anyway, i am totally out of my depth here but hopefully some of those links above will help somebody else.

 

[wthanna]

We will not be spending any money for tests to prove the negative some are asking for.
As always, if you have any safety concerns about AZ/MZ, just do not buy one. Petty simple really. I do believe the periodic attempts on FC to convince others of the same(brass is unsafe) are done for a reason related to sales of these type vapes.
That is it for me on this thread. I will address specific questions about the vapor path in the AZ/MZ on my thread if anyone has more questions specifically about our unit.

I think all of us in this thread learned something about the particular brass used in your product. I think many will decide that it is such an insignificant amount that they have nothing to worry about.. then again many may not, but they now have some numbers (facts) rather than accusations, assumptions and hearsay. I for one had seen no "numbers" before today, and personally had no idea. Now people know the type of brass you use and it's maximum lead content allowed. I think you yourself learned this today ( I could be wrong ). I think this is a win for everybody. We have also pointed people to MSDS sheets which could be handy when other products containing different types of brass and even other metals, etc than what you use come into the market. MSDS sheets are very useful, and we can probably find some interesting information on ceramics, glass, various hose types etc. used in all of these products we are trying to educate vapor enthusiasts about that come to this site. I personally think it would be nice to have threads on these as well, just to get as many "facts" on this site as possible (MSDS on ceramics, hoses, etc.) I would love to dig up some facts and participate in those conversations as well.

 

[vtac]

Thanks for obtaining and sharing that information, Rick. As you can see, even your customers appreciate knowing what's in the vaporizer they're using. I understand why you might feel annoyed at this discussion but there's really no hidden agenda. This is a discussion on the safety of brass in a vaporizer and your vaporizer uses brass. That's all. I am a bit confused when you say you knew it was safe all long. How would you know it wasn't 20% lead or something if you hadn't even checked until the other day?

Anyway, so we now have some numbers to work with. 260 "cartridge" brass, commonly used in ammunition casing. Apparently with a maximum of 0.07% lead.

I will readily admit that I have very little knowledge on brass or lead. Common sense would indicate that less lead is better and 0.07% is seemingly a pretty small amount so I suppose that's 'good'. The wiki article on lead poisoning is quite interesting, give it a read if you haven't already. This quote is probably the most worrying in our case:

No safe threshold for lead exposure has been discoveredthat is, there is no known amount of lead that is too small to cause the body harm.

Here's a quote from an ammunition supplier's website:

WARNING: ...handling ammunition may result in exposure to lead and other substances known cause birth defects, reproductive harm and other serious physical injury. Have adequate ventilation at all times. Wash hands thoroughly after exposure.

Here's the quote, from wiki again, regarding "lead free":

By January 1, 2010 in California, lead-free brass (brass containing less than 0.25% lead) must be used for "each component that comes into contact with the wetted surface of pipes and pipe fittings, plumbing fittings and fixtures."

That is reassuring, however, I'm told water piping may be a different beast.

I don't think we can declare case closed yet, but I'm glad we've got the ball rolling.

Regarding the ingestion of lead paint chips, here's a relevant quote from wiki:

One myth related to lead-based paint is that the most common cause of poisoning was eating leaded paint chips. In fact, the most common pathway of childhood lead exposure is through ingestion of lead dust through normal hand-to-mouth contact during which children swallow lead dust dislodged from deteriorated paint or leaded dust generated during remodeling or painting. Lead dust from remodeling or deteriorated paint lands on the floor near where children play and can be ingested.

 

[SkeletonLips]

Here's a quote from an ammunition supplier's website:

WARNING: ...handling ammunition may result in exposure to lead and other substances known cause birth defects, reproductive harm and other serious physical injury. Have adequate ventilation at all times. Wash hands thoroughly after exposure.

I wouldn't use that as an example, because the lead danger is from the actual lead bullet, which may or may not be under a copper jacket, not because of the brass casing. At least that is my understanding.

 

[obelisk]

Regarding the ingestion of lead paint chips, here's a relevant quote from wiki:

One myth related to lead-based paint is that the most common cause of poisoning was eating leaded paint chips. In fact, the most common pathway of childhood lead exposure is through ingestion of lead dust through normal hand-to-mouth contact during which children swallow lead dust dislodged from deteriorated paint or leaded dust generated during remodeling or painting. Lead dust from remodeling or deteriorated paint lands on the floor near where children play and can be ingested.

well the point was 0.06% in paint was a minute enough quantity to be considered safe for infantile ingestion. when compared to 0.07% in c26000, the difference does not seem alarming (of course this is just a layman's baseless logic). lead dust or leaded paint chips, does it make a difference because the end result is still ingestion. i dunno. probably does. thanks for clearing up that myth thing though cuz that is what i honestly thought the lead paint baby problem was. i always picture a baby eating blue paint when someone talks of lead poisoning. blue for poison i guess.