Why shouldn't the FDA interfere?

[DisMan]

Hi DisMan,
Although I don't have a box of Cornflakes handy I'm pretty confident in stating that more than corn is listed under its ingredients. There are probably such items as perservatives, artificial agents, colouring, ect... Which have required government testing.
There have been no long term studies that I am aware of that show the long term health affects of inhaling Proplyne Glycol, e-liquids primary ingredient. Until professional studies are conducted we are all in the dark.

Mark

The effects of Propylene Glycol have been evaluated back in the 1950's and it is listed as GRAS (Generally Recognized as Safe) by the FDA.

That's the whole reason it was selected for use in E-Liquid.

Yes, the manufacturers did *not* drop the ball.

We are not in the dark, as you say. *You* may be in the dark, but I am well aware that PG is GRAS by the FDA.

It's used in fog machines at night clubs...which generate far more vapor than an e-cig at high levels of inhalation.

[markab]

Hi Kate,
I commend you on your stand on animal testing. It's a contentious issue and I'm glad that it's not used as frivolously as it once was used by such groups like the cosmetic industry. Unfortunatly, it's my understanding, that certain medical analisys cannot be determined without it. Prehaps e-cigs could be properly tested and evaluated without it. Ultimately I think it needs to be before being released to the public.

Mark

Originally Posted by Kate

Well I suppose I think somebody has to test it and I'd rather do that than some poor lab animal that hasn't got any decent quality of life. This is my choice and I take responsibility for my vices. I'd like to be as educated about it as possible and make informed decisions but I don't want someone else to do this stage of the testing for me, I'm enjoying it too much.

I hate the way we use other animals and cause suffering for our own vices and vanity, it's not right. Medical treatments might have a different argument but I don't see that a non essential habit has the same justifications.

[Kate]

I hear what you're saying Mark and do agree that if something new is being released there should be a reasonable amount of caution and testing. I don't want to go back to smoking while we wait for someone to take the initiative to test and evaluate all the risks of vaping. If I'm not told lies I can make up my own mind about doing it or not.

You could be saying what the FDA will say however and we might not be allowed to carry on.

[DisMan]

Every chemical has been tested....the manufacturers did not drop the ball...the only ball the MFG's dropped was labeling of product.

[markab]

Hi DisMan,

Please provide the link to your source? The only studies I've read so far do not include long term exposure. Perhaps I missed this one. Thanks.

Mark

Originally Posted by DisMan

The effects of Propylene Glycol have been evaluated back in the 1950's and it is listed as GRAS (Generally Recognized as Safe) by the FDA.

That's the whole reason it was selected for use in E-Liquid.

Yes, the manufacturers did *not* drop the ball.

We are not in the dark, as you say. *You* may be in the dark, but I am well aware that PG is GRAS by the FDA.

[Kate]

Only nicotine and propylene glycol have testing results for inhaling as far as I know.

The flavourings could be a big worry, not everything suitable to eat is safe for lungs - Inhaling Flavouring Chemicals
Some flavourings cause lung disease when inhaled.

Glycerine isn't tested nor is the new ingredient PEG400 as far as I know.

[DisMan]

Originally Posted by markab

Hi DisMan,

Please provide the link to your source? The only studies I've read so far do not include long term exposure. Perhaps I missed this one. Thanks.

Mark

I will provide my link to long term exposure studies of PG when you provide your link to a study of long term exposure to corn flakes.

Seriously, that's a reach.

Now, if you would like to have such studies, talk to people who work night clubs for a living and their use of fog machines. Link fog machine usage to cancer in night club DJ's. Now you have an argument. Until then, this is a moot point that is irrelevant.

Don't get me wrong...there are people with allergies out there. But long term exposure studies on every product to be marketed? Come on now...

Fog machines have been used in theatrics for enough time to show a trend for threat.

I'm sure TB can show the link to the study that showed PG has some potential virucidal effects and no ill effects on a group of like 300 children.

[markab]

Hi Kate,
I agree. I'm currently in a transition phase between tradional cigs and e-smoking and I would hate to loose the use of my e-cig. Having said that I recognize the importance of the FDA, Health Canada, ect... in ensuring that products released to the general public are indeed safe. In all fairness traditional cigarettes should have been band many moons ago. Hopefully if politics don't get in the way e-cigs will have an opportunity of proving itself as a safe alternative.

Mark

Originally Posted by Kate

I hear what you're saying Mark and do agree that if something new is being released there should be a reasonable amount of caution and testing. I don't want to go back to smoking while we wait for someone to take the initiative to test and evaluate all the risks of vaping. If I'm not told lies I can make up my own mind about doing it or not.

You could be saying what the FDA will say however and we might not be allowed to carry on.

[Sun Vaporer]

Prolonged PG contact is essentially non-irritating to the skin. Undiluted PG is minimally irritating to the eye, and can produce slight transient conjunctivitis (the eye recovers after the exposure is removed). Exposure to mists may cause eye irritation, as well as upper respiratory tract irritation.18

Inhalation of the PG vapors appears to present no significant hazard in ordinary applications. However, limited human experience indicates that inhalation of PG mists may be irritating to some individuals. Therefore inhalation exposure to mists of these materials should be avoided. In general, Dow does not support or recommend the use of PG in applications where inhalation exposure or human eye contact with the spray mists of these materials is likely, such as fogs for theatrical productions or antifreeze solutions for emergency eye wash stations.19-- Sun

See 19 A Guide to Glycols (File Not Found), page 36.

[Kate]

Just to try to get this thread back to the point a little.

Forgetting the pros and cons and rights and wrongs, what are the possibilities of eliquid becoming a controlled substance?

If it does come under FDA definitions of controlled substance what restrictions would that mean?

Anyone know?