Testing: What else is needed and how much will it cost?

[riddle80]

Hi everyone,

From what I gather, there are still tests that are yet to be performed on e-smoking. I read in one thread on here that we need these tests to prove our case if government/FDA/big corps tries to shut it down. Also, to have accurate information for the media and new vapors to obtain as well. We still need studies on "2nd hand vapor" and the effects of the vapor to the person inhaling it correct?. What else needs to be tested? How much would these studies cost?

It looks like it's been a rough go trying to find funding for these tests as it's not regulated by anyone. What about suppliers getting together and giving a percentage of profits and have someone perform non bias testing? Maybe having a Paypal donation for the same tests here on the site? I don't know if this would fly, but it's worth a mention. If everyone gets there heads together I bet we could come up with some great ideas to get the info we need. I'd dish out money if it could help save these from getting banned in the future!

I don't have a clue who would be best to actually perform such testing or how much it would cost. I'm just trying to figure out if there's a solution to this issue. I'd love to tell people this is safe and have facts to back it up .

I'm not really worried about the tests (if and when they are performed). Nothing could be worse than those horrible analogs I was constantly puffing on before. My aunt passed away this year after lung cancer and COPD and I only wish I would of known about these sooner as they could of gave her a few more years. I just hope e-cigs continue to be affordable and available so I don't end up where she did. As much as I hate cigarettes, I'm terribly addicted and have struggled for a long time to quit. This could improve and save lives, and I think it's something that deserves some decent unbias testing.

Thoughts and comments appreciated!

[dc2k08]

PA-07-174: Testing Tobacco Products Promoted to Reduce Harm (R01)

Check that out. It is the opportunity to apply for a grant put out by the NIH as part of a plan "to stimulate multidisciplinary research on potential reduced-exposure tobacco products, both smoked and smokeless, through the interplay of basic, biological, and behavioral research, surveillance, and epidemiology"

Basically, they are accepting applications for a grant that will fund a study proposed by an eligible candidate that will test whether tobacco products that are being marketed as being safer, are in fact safer. It was deleted before, but was put back up at another URL.

You might think that they would never fund a study on electronic cigarettes on the grounds that they do not contain tobacco. but it is my opinion that they would. electronic cigarettes after all been described by a South Korean health official as "falling under the category of tobacco prescribed in the Tobacco Business Act", while a Bahrain health minister has also said of them "As far as we are concerned, these are cigarettes and should be treated as such"

We might be able to use these qualifications to our advantage, but what we need to do is find an organisation, whether it is a college or something similar that is willing to do the tests and help in filling out the application. The NIH are accepting proposals from any country, in other words, the organisation where the tests are proposed to be carried out does not have to be located in America.

[TropicalBob]

DC and I have a friendly disagreement on whether e-smoking would fall under this grant. Given all of the publicity about smokeless products, this study is aimed at snuff, snus and chew -- all tobacco products said to be "harm reduction".

Doesn't hurt to apply. Just don't expect anyone to know what you're talking about or approve a non-tobacco harm reduction, any more than they would a study of hypnosis, candy cigs or thumb-sucking.

[dc2k08]

there is the chance of course that a grant would be denied on the grounds that electronic cigarettes cannot be defined as a tobacco product but this has not stopped the two fore mentioned countries from classing them as such.

maybe if an application came from one of these countries, it would increase the success of it winning the grant, that is to say unless this has only been set up to fund a witch hunt against smokeless tobacco products like the ones you mentioned.

I should really write to them and put the question to them in brief before I go finding an organisation that would be willing to do the study though.

[TropicalBob]

Good idea. Nothing really to lose. It would be great if a grant could finance such a study of e-smoking.

[jackie_UK]

riddle_80, I thoroughly agree with your post.
Like you, I am (or was) totally addicted to cigarette smoking. Truth to tell, I still smoke about 10 analogue cigs a day - but that's nothing compared to what I HAVE been smoking for umpteen years. My last 5 weeks, since discovering e-cigs, have been amazing.

There must be some university department in the world that's looking for funding projects where there might even be funding available. But even without that, we need all the tests we can get, starting with e-liquid (obviously).

It makes me mad when I read media coverage of e-smoking and they so obviously haven't got a clue what they're talking about. You would think they'd do a bit of research before they condemn e-cigs out of hand. They need to know that many, many of us e-smokers are VERY concerned about the Health and Safety aspects, but more than willing to support any testing that can be done. The suppliers seem to be in favour of testing (if this forum is anything to go by) and that's SURELY a good sign, as they are the ones with a lot to lose. They are to be applauded.

I don't like to think of e-cigs as being dangerous, but I guess anything that gets you to inhale ANY vapour that isn't just water must have inherent dangers - although less problematic than analogue cigarettes.

I for one would be willing to make a donation to proper testing as I want to continue e-smoking safely. Is it too fanciful to suggest that we might pay a nominal extra amount of money to our suppliers each time we make a purchase ? If suppliers could organise the 'donations' and then pass them on to a central 'Testing Fund', would that work ? Mind, I am talking here without an understanding of how much it would actually cost to test a) e-liquid and b) the wider issues of e-smoking (e.g. second-hand vapour, nicotine levels etc.)

Just a thought. It's brilliant that so many on this forum are sensible and appreciate that the future of e-smoking could well be tied up in the testing that needs to take place just as soon as it possibly can.

[TropicalBob]

Please put aside any idea of funding a test. These tests simply must be done by manufacturers; the legality of their products hangs in the balance. Testing is complicated, time-consuming and expensive.

At present, a 12-month clinical trial (very big deal TEST) is being completed in New Zealand. It was done by Health New Zealand and funded by Ruyan, the originator of e-smoking devices. The results apply exclusively to Ruyan products. It's not enough to say "we do the same." The results are for Ruyan's use.

Dr. Jim Loi in Malaysia has been testing e-smoking for more than six months, on more than 300 of his clinic's patients. The government tried once to quash him -- and pretty well stymied his testing. But he soldiers on. He will let us know if any red alarms go off. So far, so good. In both New Zealand and Malaysia.

Liquid makers have submitted liquids for independent lab tests and some have published results. No contamination has been found. Some changes in liquid composition have been suggested.

Understand that e-smoking is so new that long-term tests haven't been done. Long-term means longer than we've been e-smoking. WE ARE THE GUINEA PIGS. There's no other way to say it. But read the "germ-killing vapor" thread and rest assured that what we're doing might actually be healthy.

What we must worry about is some cost-cutter in China putting junk in our liquid (Big Lots in the U.S. today recalled chocolate made in China because it contained melamine -- after all the horrors of dog food and baby formula!). Greed is God, I guess. And as the economy staggers, he's getting more appealing and powerful.

[mothakaf]

riddle_80, I thoroughly agree with your post.
Like you, I am (or was) totally addicted to cigarette smoking. Truth to tell, I still smoke about 10 analogue cigs a day - but that's nothing compared to what I HAVE been smoking for umpteen years. My last 5 weeks, since discovering e-cigs, have been amazing.

There must be some university department in the world that's looking for funding projects where there might even be funding available. But even without that, we need all the tests we can get, starting with e-liquid (obviously).

It makes me mad when I read media coverage of e-smoking and they so obviously haven't got a clue what they're talking about. You would think they'd do a bit of research before they condemn e-cigs out of hand. They need to know that many, many of us e-smokers are VERY concerned about the Health and Safety aspects, but more than willing to support any testing that can be done. The suppliers seem to be in favour of testing (if this forum is anything to go by) and that's SURELY a good sign, as they are the ones with a lot to lose. They are to be applauded.

I don't like to think of e-cigs as being dangerous, but I guess anything that gets you to inhale ANY vapour that isn't just water must have inherent dangers - although less problematic than analogue cigarettes.

I for one would be willing to make a donation to proper testing as I want to continue e-smoking safely. Is it too fanciful to suggest that we might pay a nominal extra amount of money to our suppliers each time we make a purchase ? If suppliers could organise the 'donations' and then pass them on to a central 'Testing Fund', would that work ? Mind, I am talking here without an understanding of how much it would actually cost to test a) e-liquid and b) the wider issues of e-smoking (e.g. second-hand vapour, nicotine levels etc.)

Just a thought. It's brilliant that so many on this forum are sensible and appreciate that the future of e-smoking could well be tied up in the testing that needs to take place just as soon as it possibly can.

How much mini electronic cigarette does cost?

[robw]

HOLD ON!!!

Right now there is no regulation on these things, so why open a can of worms for everyone.

The FDA can not do a thing if no one complains.

If you ask for an investigation you can come out on the wrong end if you do it wrong.

[jackie_UK]

How much mini electronic cigarette does cost?

mothakaf - I'm sorry, I have no idea how much electronic cigarettes cost in Egypt. I don't even know if they are for sale in your country.
Can I suggest that you might 'Google' 'e-cigarettes' and see what you come up with ?
I paid £26 (26 British pounds) for my starter kit and then I have added on juices and extra bits and pieces. It is working out MUCH cheaper than cigarettes over time, as ordinary cigarettes cost a lot in the UK.
Hope you have some luck !