Propylene glycol inhaling? - Page 9 - e-cigarette-forum.com • The place for electronic cigarette reviews, news and chat

Fumador · 07-25-2008, 08:14 AM

I agree. That's why I think the only way to be somehow certain of the safety of e-smoking is to inhale very little or not at all.
Luckily there is one good product for that, the ruyan vegas. I just bought my second cigar and I am liking it just like the first one. The only thing spoiling the fun a little is the thought of spending another $50 when this one is over.(it's too much for me).
That's why I'm thinking of alternatives. The problem is that for this type of smoking , it's got to have good taste. Because you're mostly not inhaling, you are savoring it, like I guess smoking a good pipe is.
So far the best I've tried is flue cured from ecig ,but it's impossible to get right now so I'll keep looking.
By the way I do smoke three or four real cigarettes a day, so I guess that makes it a bit easier to e-smoke cigar style. But my point is that it's possible for anyone who's a little concern about inhaling PG, to balance it inhaling only one every few puffs.Everything in moderation.(Easier said than done but ...)
Anyway, that's just my two cents.Cheers.

TropicalBob · 07-25-2008, 12:58 PM

I think I, too, could get used to puffing a Ruyan Vegas, or the soon-to-come GreenCig G100 disposable cigar. The problem, as you wrote, is price. If the Vegas lasted me a week, which it might not, that would be a $45-a-week habit. I can't afford that. E-smoking any e-cig is far less expensive.

But we tend to inhale cigarettes, don't we, while we do not inhale cigars or pipes (in tobacco forms, at least). So I'd like a truly affordable, disposable e-cigar. Affordable would have to be less than half the $45 Ruyan price. It cannot exceed the price of a carton of cigarettes, or it gets out of reach.

And the taste must be superb.

Dark Justice · 07-25-2008, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TropicalBob

That provides no reassurance. We are the guinea pigs for inhaling propylene glycol. Other tests for transdermal application, ingestion, etc., do not necessarily assure the safety of sucking these vapors into human lungs 200 to 300 times a day, every day.

Ok for one if you are in need of an E-cig you smoke. There is a little fact of over 200 chemicals in cigarettes. Including 4 toxins and numerous carcinogens and co-carcinogens. Even if there was a slight side effect to inhaling it I highly doubt it would compare to the risk of smoking actual tobacco! It has been deemed safe for consumption in multiple sutdies. There is a study that relates to inhaling, it is not recommended becuase in rare cases it caused minor irritation but no physical damage. If you look at almost anything in your house I am sure you will find half of it contains propolene glycol.

leaford · 07-25-2008, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TropicalBob

I think I, too, could get used to puffing a Ruyan Vegas, or the soon-to-come GreenCig G100 disposable cigar. The problem, as you wrote, is price. If the Vegas lasted me a week, which it might not, that would be a $45-a-week habit. I can't afford that. E-smoking any e-cig is far less expensive.

But we tend to inhale cigarettes, don't we, while we do not inhale cigars or pipes (in tobacco forms, at least). So I'd like a truly affordable, disposable e-cigar. Affordable would have to be less than half the $45 Ruyan price. It cannot exceed the price of a carton of cigarettes, or it gets out of reach.

And the taste must be superb.

Bob, check E-bay. Heaven Gifts has them for 5 for $120. That's $24 each.

TropicalBob · 07-25-2008, 01:34 PM

Apples and oranges comparison. We're not using cigarettes. Cigarettes we understand. E-cigarettes we do not. The studies on our practice are not complete.

Do more research on propylene glycol. As you do, you'll not find any study where humans were exposed to vapors in the way we are. The danger, if any, is unknown. There is no assurance that our practice is safe.

I e-smoke. I don't worry all that much when I do. But I won't tell anyone that it's safe. Fact is, we don't know.

20ADAY · 07-25-2008, 07:51 PM

Im hedging my bets that it is no where near as bad as taking in the reak of death that comes from tobacco, but I dont think taking anything into your lungs consistantly can be good for them and any long term effects would need an appropriate amount of time to develop!

IowaGirl · 09-07-2008, 02:27 AM

If any of you go out to a quit smoking site, it tells you that when you quit smoking you go through a period of increased couching, hacking, extra mucus, etc. This is the crap getting out of your lungs from years of smoking. However, anything more than that may mean you are allergic to PG, im not a nurse so cannot say. This is day 2 for me and man am I coughing up stuff but I knew already this was going to happen. I feel pretty safe to say that we are losing the hundreds of nasty chemicals we have been inhaling in our bodies for years and now your body is getting rid of them.

Just my thoughts....thanks

IowaGirl · 09-07-2008, 02:28 AM

Spell check? I must have missed it...increased couching...LOL sorry

Frankie · 11-15-2008, 04:28 PM

I apologise if repeating somebody else´s argument, but both PG and VG are present in most cigarette and pipe tobaccoes. We have all been inhaling the stuff for years.

...Philip Morris recommended to submit propylene glycol plasticized cigarettes for consumer tests since these cigarettes have been shown to deliver fewer tars and recommended tests to be done with propylene glycol as an emollient (soother anti-irritant) in the filter and in the filler at varying levels. In 1975 Philip Morris examined alternative methods of casing to reduce PG loses or eliminate PG and recommended to eliminate PG from ES casing. In 1978 Philip Morris conducted test designed to determine if the propylene glycol could be removed from the casing with no adverse effects on the quality of the expanded tobacco and thus realize a cost savings. They concluded to reduce propylene glycol 50 to 33% in the final product. Philip Morris conducted comparison test in 1986 for the replacement of a mix of the humectants PG and glycerine versus the humectant TEG in RCB and comparing the physical performance of RL and RCB with new humectants (propylene glycol and glycerine) replacing the old humectant TEG. They concluded the test cigarettes with a mix of PG (3%) and glycerin (4%) was rated subjectively equivalent to the control with 4.5% TEG. The industry examined in 1989 the specific levels of aldehydes and ketones that were determined in mainstream smoke with varying levels of propylene glycol and glycerine. According to RJR memo dated 1990 propylene glycol had been approved by Scientific Affairs for use in cigarette products. A 1991 RJR study concluded relocating propylene glycol from the casing for cutting to the top dressing did not affect overall perception.

TropicalBob · 11-15-2008, 07:56 PM

This a very old thread, and many of our health concerns have been put to rest with completion of the cartridge tests in New Zealand. I am no longer concerned at all about inhaling PG. Note also that it's been used for ages in pipe tobacco, which I puff daily. It's a humectant, as is glycerine. Keeps tobacco from drying out horribly. But, of course, it's not used in tobacco in amounts similar to how we use it.

09-07-2008, 02:27 AM	#87
IowaGirl Full Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Des Moines Iowa Posts: 12	increased coughing and mucus If any of you go out to a quit smoking site, it tells you that when you quit smoking you go through a period of increased couching, hacking, extra mucus, etc. This is the crap getting out of your lungs from years of smoking. However, anything more than that may mean you are allergic to PG, im not a nurse so cannot say. This is day 2 for me and man am I coughing up stuff but I knew already this was going to happen. I feel pretty safe to say that we are losing the hundreds of nasty chemicals we have been inhaling in our bodies for years and now your body is getting rid of them. Just my thoughts....thanks

11-15-2008, 04:28 PM	#89
Frankie Full Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Slovakia Posts: 22	Every smoker inhales PG I apologise if repeating somebody else´s argument, but both PG and VG are present in most cigarette and pipe tobaccoes. We have all been inhaling the stuff for years. ...Philip Morris recommended to submit propylene glycol plasticized cigarettes for consumer tests since these cigarettes have been shown to deliver fewer tars and recommended tests to be done with propylene glycol as an emollient (soother anti-irritant) in the filter and in the filler at varying levels. In 1975 Philip Morris examined alternative methods of casing to reduce PG loses or eliminate PG and recommended to eliminate PG from ES casing. In 1978 Philip Morris conducted test designed to determine if the propylene glycol could be removed from the casing with no adverse effects on the quality of the expanded tobacco and thus realize a cost savings. They concluded to reduce propylene glycol 50 to 33% in the final product. Philip Morris conducted comparison test in 1986 for the replacement of a mix of the humectants PG and glycerine versus the humectant TEG in RCB and comparing the physical performance of RL and RCB with new humectants (propylene glycol and glycerine) replacing the old humectant TEG. They concluded the test cigarettes with a mix of PG (3%) and glycerin (4%) was rated subjectively equivalent to the control with 4.5% TEG. The industry examined in 1989 the specific levels of aldehydes and ketones that were determined in mainstream smoke with varying levels of propylene glycol and glycerine. According to RJR memo dated 1990 propylene glycol had been approved by Scientific Affairs for use in cigarette products. A 1991 RJR study concluded relocating propylene glycol from the casing for cutting to the top dressing did not affect overall perception.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

07-25-2008, 08:14 AM	#81
Fumador Full Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 45	I agree. That's why I think the only way to be somehow certain of the safety of e-smoking is to inhale very little or not at all. Luckily there is one good product for that, the ruyan vegas. I just bought my second cigar and I am liking it just like the first one. The only thing spoiling the fun a little is the thought of spending another $50 when this one is over.(it's too much for me). That's why I'm thinking of alternatives. The problem is that for this type of smoking , it's got to have good taste. Because you're mostly not inhaling, you are savoring it, like I guess smoking a good pipe is. So far the best I've tried is flue cured from ecig ,but it's impossible to get right now so I'll keep looking. By the way I do smoke three or four real cigarettes a day, so I guess that makes it a bit easier to e-smoke cigar style. But my point is that it's possible for anyone who's a little concern about inhaling PG, to balance it inhaling only one every few puffs.Everything in moderation.(Easier said than done but ...) Anyway, that's just my two cents.Cheers.

07-25-2008, 12:58 PM	#82
TropicalBob Super Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Port Charlotte, FL USA Posts: 2,410	I think I, too, could get used to puffing a Ruyan Vegas, or the soon-to-come GreenCig G100 disposable cigar. The problem, as you wrote, is price. If the Vegas lasted me a week, which it might not, that would be a $45-a-week habit. I can't afford that. E-smoking any e-cig is far less expensive. But we tend to inhale cigarettes, don't we, while we do not inhale cigars or pipes (in tobacco forms, at least). So I'd like a truly affordable, disposable e-cigar. Affordable would have to be less than half the $45 Ruyan price. It cannot exceed the price of a carton of cigarettes, or it gets out of reach. And the taste must be superb.

07-25-2008, 01:34 PM	#85
TropicalBob Super Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Port Charlotte, FL USA Posts: 2,410	Apples and oranges comparison. We're not using cigarettes. Cigarettes we understand. E-cigarettes we do not. The studies on our practice are not complete. Do more research on propylene glycol. As you do, you'll not find any study where humans were exposed to vapors in the way we are. The danger, if any, is unknown. There is no assurance that our practice is safe. I e-smoke. I don't worry all that much when I do. But I won't tell anyone that it's safe. Fact is, we don't know.

07-25-2008, 07:51 PM	#86
20ADAY Full Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Scotland Posts: 94	Im hedging my bets that it is no where near as bad as taking in the reak of death that comes from tobacco, but I dont think taking anything into your lungs consistantly can be good for them and any long term effects would need an appropriate amount of time to develop!

09-07-2008, 02:28 AM	#88
IowaGirl Full Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Des Moines Iowa Posts: 12	Spell check? I must have missed it...increased couching...LOL sorry

11-15-2008, 07:56 PM	#90
TropicalBob Super Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Port Charlotte, FL USA Posts: 2,410	This a very old thread, and many of our health concerns have been put to rest with completion of the cartridge tests in New Zealand. I am no longer concerned at all about inhaling PG. Note also that it's been used for ages in pipe tobacco, which I puff daily. It's a humectant, as is glycerine. Keeps tobacco from drying out horribly. But, of course, it's not used in tobacco in amounts similar to how we use it.