From CNN.com Today/Eissenberg study with feedback

[Mister]

I received my Nicalert kit today to test for cotinine in urine.

My ecig use has been a steady ~2.5 mL/day of 15 mg/mL with a 510 at 3.7 volts.

Result: Level 6 (max reading)
1000+ ng/mL

Very interesting!

Knowing how careful you are, this is one of the most useful bits of info so far.

Since a level 3 reading from that strip is considered to indicate a smoker, we now know that you are getting a pretty good nicotine fix from your e-cigs.

Since the highest indicator on that strip is level 6 (and is clearly not a very high bar, I expect that TropicalBob would make the strip wither up and disappear in a cloud of smoke since you measure at 6) your result will only allow us to work out a lower limit on your nicotine absorption. Still, a lower limit will be very interesting. (I imagine that's why you are now interested in blood vs. urine cotinine levels )

[teissenb]

For the record, VCU did issue a press release, that I approved, along with video clips. While this thread has made clear to me that I cannot repeat enough the very specific phrase "under the conditions in which we tested them", the VCU press release and video accurately portray my thoughts on the matter.

Study reveals a need to evaluate and regulate ?electronic cigarettes? – VCU News Center

Someone suggests that an interviewee should call up a media outlet and ask them to amend their story because they were misquoted or quotations were taken out of context. The interviewee can ask, but the media outlet won't (and I don't record my interviews, so what proof would I have? I can't even satisfy you; how could I satisfy the reporter who's story I am criticizing?). Nor will they present their copy to me before publishing it. I speak to them and hope for the best. Please be aware that if a statement is not surrounded by quotation marks in the original story, then the reporter is indicating as clearly as is possible that the statement is the reporter's interpretation of our conversation. I appreciate that some folks here do not accept my explanations regarding my interactions with the press and am very sorry if I am being perceived as anything less than honest.

DVap's results *are* interesting and I look forward to more reports.

[LLOTEK]

When I started looking into e-cigs a while back, I came across this website, Now I may be repeating what others already know of have seen, but this sight not only sells the equipment, but they have also compiled a few recent studies on e-cigs as well as an older study done on the effects of PG on the body ie. lungs,kidneys, liver etc. so maybe this will help a bit.

the site is zigcigs, but I cant put think cause I have reached my 15 post minimum yet. good luck all...


Further, up here in Canada(and I dont speak for my canuck brethren but..) we dont generally believe CNN or Fox... Damn, many of us thought that Obama would bring more security to the world, and he seems to be floundering at that as well. after spending alot of time analyzing CNN and Fox, I realized that not only do they often simply leave out the truth, but in fact lie. then once the damage has been done, will offer an apology and retraction down the road...welcome to Corporate "North America"

[Vocalek]

Dr. Eissenberg: Please take a look at my post #570
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/for...ml#post1057438 and address how you picture "regulation" working. Who would do the regulating and what actions would that group take?

The VCU article mentions protecting consumers. IMHO, regulation as a consumer product would be fine -- by an organization such as the Consumer Product Safety Commission.

But the FDA has already demonstrated to my satisfaction that they have no intention of allowing e-cigarettes to remain on the market.

Surveys and polls have shown that ~80% of e-cigarette users have completely replaced their tobacco cigarettes with the product. Polls on this forum have shown that more than half of us require a higher strength liquid (above 24 mg) to achieve smoke-freedom. More than 60% of users say that they would return to tobacco smoking to obtain adequate levels of nicotine if e-cigarettes are banned.

So while you are addressing your vision of regulation, please try to factor in the devastating effect FDA-style regulation will have on those of us who struggled for decades to quit and finally achieved that goal. Also factor in the remarkable success rate of this product and the effect that it could have in the next few years on smoking prevelance -- if it remains available, and is allowed to remain effective.

[teissenb]

Vocalek:

I am not a regulator, so I don't claim to know all the options or possibilities.

At the least, I would hope for strict standards on nicotine doses (you should be confident that the contents label is correct), clear labeling as a toxic substance, child proof caps, sales to adults only, etc.

From what I have learned here, regulation would also include instructions that allow new users to use the device correctly in order to achieve the stated claim. Many products come with user instructions and there is an expectation (well, *I* have the expectation) that following the these instructions correctly leads to safe and effective use.

And, I hope it goes without saying, the products should be demonstrably safe and effective when used as intended.

Too much to ask?

Tom E.

[curiousJan]

Vocalek:

I am not a regulator, so I don't claim to know all the options or possibilities.

At the least, I would hope for strict standards on nicotine doses (you should be confident that the contents label is correct), clear labeling as a toxic substance, child proof caps, sales to adults only, etc.

From what I have learned here, regulation would also include instructions that allow new users to use the device correctly in order to achieve the stated claim. Many products come with user instructions and there is an expectation (well, *I* have the expectation) that following the these instructions correctly leads to safe and effective use.

And, I hope it goes without saying, the products should be demonstrably safe and effective when used as intended.

Too much to ask?

Tom E.

With the caveat that "strict standards on nicotine doses" means only that confidence in the labeled mg concentration is absolutely correct ... NOT that the mg concentration available is reduced to the ineffective levels that the FDA allows in currently regulated cessation products ... no, that is not too much to ask. And it is something that would be most welcome by the vast majority of vapers.

Please clarify regarding "use the device correctly in order to achieve the stated claim". I use Joye 510 stock batteries, atomizers, and refillable carts. In my opinion I _am_ using the device correctly ... and, yet, because I drip nic-liquid on the atty (i.e. prime when it's become dry) when refilling the cart, I get the impression that you would classify me as a high-risk user who's not using the product as intended. I beg to differ ... and hope that I'm incorrect in my interpretation of your opinion.

Jan

[teissenb]

Jan:

To clarify, there is a big discrepancy between what I read at ECF about how these devices are to be used in order to achieve their stated claims and what I read on the the instructions that came with the two products that I tested (see below). Wouldn't the logical approach be to include instructions with the product that allow the novice user to achieve the stated claims by following those instructions?

Regardless of how I might classify your behavior, I am having a hard time imagining the regulation that prevents you from behaving as you describe...I would rather see a device that works so effectively and safely that you are not motivated to do as you describe.

Regarding instructions that came with NPRO and Hydro:

TB posted the NJOY instructions on this thread. I have since scanned the Crown 7 instructions but don't know how to post them. They say "Regular smokers take an average of 14-16 puffs to smoke a regular cigarette, we recommend that you stop inhaling after a similar amount of puffs."

[SmokeyJoe]

Regarding instructions that came with NPRO and Hydro:

TB posted the NJOY instructions on this thread. I have since scanned the Crown 7 instructions but don't know how to post them. They say "Regular smokers take an average of 14-16 puffs to smoke a regular cigarette, we recommend that you stop inhaling after a similar amount of puffs."

In all honesty, this is just an arbitrary number that has been inserted by company employees naive to the actual amount of nicotine that is being absorbed.

I suspect they've inserted it as a caveat to try to mitigate the fallout if someone were to overdose.

When you think about it, the new "proper use" is something that has only really been derived by the continued communication between users on this (and other) forums. In other words, from ongoing trials that individual companies could not possibly instate, where users experiment at their own risk. We now have a situation where the suppliers must still advocate usage that covers their behinds, and users must find out how to effectively use e-cig from various independent sources.

This is clearly not the best situation, to say the least, but the reason it has ended up this way is quite clear.

[Meat]

Jan:

To clarify, there is a big discrepancy between what I read at ECF about how these devices are to be used in order to achieve their stated claims and what I read on the the instructions that came with the two products that I tested (see below). Wouldn't the logical approach be to include instructions with the product that allow the novice user to achieve the stated claims by following those instructions?

Regardless of how I might classify your behavior, I am having a hard time imagining the regulation that prevents you from behaving as you describe...I would rather see a device that works so effectively and safely that you are not motivated to do as you describe.

Regarding instructions that came with NPRO and Hydro:

TB posted the NJOY instructions on this thread. I have since scanned the Crown 7 instructions but don't know how to post them. They say "Regular smokers take an average of 14-16 puffs to smoke a regular cigarette, we recommend that you stop inhaling after a similar amount of puffs."

I think you've proven that those products you tested do nothing for a smoker trying to use them as NRT, when used as the manufacturer instructs. It'd be nice if they could get the written documentation that ships with these e-cigs up to the same standard that I recieved with that 4mg nicotine gum that didn't work for me at all... it did come with good instructions though!

If you don't mind answering, do you have plans plans or hopes for doing future research on e-cigs? I'd like to see more research done on these devices, preferably using a better regarded e-cig model, and of course using a much higher strength e-juice if you need to stick with comparing puff for puff. Do you have to have manufacturer written guidelines to follow, or can you set your own methods for testing e-cigs, using some of the feedback written here?

[teissenb]

Meat:

I have hopes and plans and I very much intend to incorporate suggestions made by ECF members. There are certain things that I cannot do/test due to issues that I am fairly certain my IRB/ethics board would raise (e.g., dripping) and there are certain things that the results of the already completed study allow me to propose with more confidence (e.g., much less restricted use). At the moment I am working on funding, and these things rarely happen quickly.

Tom E.