A germ-killing vapor

[katink]

And, I can think of one more reason why the original research didn't go anywhere. Penicillin. It came on the market during WWII. Just like colloidal silver, sulfa drugs, and chlora- phenicol(?) (Chlora-something anyway), penicillin was superior, and knocked them out of the market.

Or these drugs weren't so much superior; but could be patented with a lot of money to be made out of those, other then out of using PG...
But whatever the reason: good find, this might indeed be a good part of the story why this PG-research went lost...

TB, again a great addendum to your first posts... this is becoming a truly fascinating story! Hehe, you feeling like the Indiana Jones of e-smoking now?

[TropicalBob]

Covenant of the Lost PG Research?

Actually, the wartime research was on the issue of sterilizing rooms and the battle became one between propylene glycol and ultraviolet light. UV won. And it's UV lights you see today in places that handle food. There are many reasons why this happened, but just know that PG-filled rooms were impractical then and remain impractical today.

As e-smokers, we alone have a method to make use of the PG findings.

Almost all science is based on the discoveries of others. Scientists stand on the tall shoulders of earlier researchers. I simply came across this old research and connected some dots that technology has given me. Now it's up to researchers like Dr. Loi and Dr. Laugesen to see if this old discovery finally has new practical application.

[phylo]

Im not sure if this article has been posted, but its pretty good and interesting..

http://theruyanmedia.com/uploads/REC...rim_Report.pdf

The last couple of pages have the results of the study on PG.

Phil

[dc2k08]

phew thats a long one, gonna have to make the time to digest all of this. he has been busy. thanks for the link phylo!

[TropicalBob]

That is a very old document, his first interim report. He has issued a second interim report since then, also linked from this forum, but now has information on PG that should dramatically change his final report.

[Nazareth]

Just out of curiosity I emailed Dr. Laugesen about potential virus adaption to PG after long or constant exposures, and basically got hte rply that 'not enough is known about it' and 'no studies have been performed to determine this to date'. Here is part of hte response "I guess it is theoretically possible for low levels of PG in air over a period of days to lead to bacteria or viruses becoming PG resistant. This has not been reported so far." Not trying ot belabour this point, just thought it might be noted, and added to the short list of 'unkowns' about PG.

Of interest htough, in his response, he said even small amounts of PG can kill Bacteria and viruses in seconds, and htat it is reported that there are small amounts present in the U.S air- not sure what he meant by that, as he went from talking abotu esmoking in a room to air in the U.S- not sure if he meant small levels of PG have been found after a room gets PG'd. Kinda hard to follow what he said. I wonder if he perhaps meant that there's small amounts in U.S air due to the by products being produced by large factories that release PG into air-

Can you imagien htough the implications if PG is found to cure or prevent certain diseases and perhaps prolong life lol? The nati-everythingers will be sunk if htey try to oppose Esmoking lol

[TropicalBob]

Well, we certainly got his attention.

You can tell he's a "public health" specialist by the way he's trying to see if PG exhaled into the air might kill germs. That never crossed my mind. My interest was and is oriented to the individual. Let's use an "I" example: If I attend a party and some in a crowded room are sick and cough out germs, which I inhale, will I be protected from illness by e-smoking PG at that party?

I think so, based on the 1942 research. But Dr. Laugesen immediately wants to know if exhalations from e-smokers will contain enough PG to protect others at the party. Heck, I say let 'em become e-smokers and inhale their own PG!

[TheEmperorOfIceCream]

That reminds me of my old retort to second hand smoke whiners:

"I paid for that, bitch! Hold your breath..."

[dc2k08]

http://www.healthnz.co.nz/2ndSafetyReport_9Apr08.pdf
for the sake of continuity i am linking to the second of DR. L's interim reports here also

[Nazareth]

Thanks for that link dc- it appears 13 years are added to our life expectancy if we switch completely to esmoking, Although I've not seen anythign yet in the report abotu those of us who only partially switch over while cutting down on reg smokin

In percentage terms. Similarly, for every 100 continuing smokers, 50 will die early from
their smoking (on average dying 13 years early)6 If, however, all 100 switch to
e-cigarettes (or otherwise stop smoking tobacco) before 35 years of age, we would expect
that 50 fewer will die early, a total of 650 life-years reclaimed, per 100 smokers. This is
based on the proven zero excess mortality effect from daily use for five years of nicotine
without tobacco.

it appears that those studies on nicotine show that we pretty significantly cut down our risk of cancer caused by nicotine making us more suceptible if we switch from regular smoking and go to gettign our nic through other means- even esmoking.

TB here's an interesting statement fro mthe report- soemthign you and I have wondered about:

Efficiency. No nicotine is wasted in the Ruyan® e-cigarette– over one to four days its
nicotine is eventually all inhaled, thus differing from the 12% uptake of nicotine from the
tobacco cigarette. In the tobacco cigarette, after combustion, most is lost in side-stream
smoke. Of the mainstream smoke some is entrapped in the cigarette filter, while only 1.5
mg (12%) of the cigarette’s original nicotine content of 13 mg is inhaled. (Table 1).

Looks liek hte nic does remain until dry- I wonder if htere is somethign in the carts that protects the nic from evaporation by air?