Antifreeze in liquid?

[whatagem]

My husband, the news junkie, had told me that he heard on 2 different programs the e-liquid coming from China has antifreeze in it. Forgive me if I am behind on this bit of news.
I of course dismiss mostly any bad news he brings me because The News tends to bash e-cigs left & right.

Where can I find information on this? Is it one major company, literally everythig coming from China, or just liquids made everywhere? (I see some US companies claiming, "We make our own liquid right here!" and not sure if I always believe that.) Sigh. Or is it simply an ugly rumor?

Silly question: Is there somewhere I could take samples to be tested? (Albeit, e-cigs have cut my cig useage in half but I am still awfully paranoid)

 

[Phayah]

Check out Fda news release. They found less than 1% of diethylene glycol, an ingredient found in antifreeze, in one of the 19 cartridges. It is a carcinogen. It was made by SE.

They also found nitrosamines in over half the cartridges, which are also carcinogenic.

You can find the Final Report on FDA Analyses here.

Regardless of the bad news, it doesn't prove that e-cigs are as bad or worse than cigarettes. Remember, there are over 40 carcinogens in a cigarette. It still appears to be a safer alternative, but could be much better with some quality control/regulation.

 

[westcoast2]

My husband, the news junkie, had told me that he heard on 2 different programs the e-liquid coming from China has antifreeze in it

Orange juice contains water.
Water is in anti-freeze.
My Orange juice has anti-freeze in it.

Read around the forum lots of info about this.
Look for scary acronyms - DEG and scary names- Diethylene Glycol.

Is there somewhere I could take samples to be tested?

Yellow pages? Many companies have tested the e-liquid, again look around the forum.

 

[Serenna]

I think anything found in ecig juice is a million times safer then what is in cigarettes...

 

[TropicalBob]

Not good to poke fun at carcinogens and contaminants found in e-liquid. I understand the temptation to be sarcastic, but others are taking on rebuttal of the claims with facts, not emotion. You want to turn off the pubic? Get cute and catty about the FDA. That'll put support on their side in a hurry.

I attended a funeral yesterday and everyone who knew me there had the same remarks: "You still using that fake cigarette?" "You hear that there's antifreeze in that stuff you're inhaling?"

The FDA remarks impacted everyone I met. We have a lot of work ahead of us if we expect to either correct the remarks or, most importantly, convince that agency to let e-cigs and liquid remain on the market until controls are firmly in place.

This ain't fun 'n' games with a parlor toy. And it certainly isn't about taxes. It's about a drug product that has to meet the same standards met by every other similar product on the market. If that had been done, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Until it is done, we'll continue to scream and knash our teeth about "freedoms" and "conspiracies" and "corruption" and "payoffs", with zero positive effect and at the expense of whatever public support we might now have.

 

[AVITWeb]

And there's mercury in fish too!
I think just breating we expose ourselves to all kindsa crap..we probably breath more than what they found every day just by being...

Its all scare tactics!

 

[westcoast2]

They found less than 1% of diethylene glycol, an ingredient found in antifreeze, in one of the 19 cartridges. It is a carcinogen

Do you have a link that shows diethylene glycol is a carcinogen? As far as I can tell it is not carcinogenic. International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has not evaluated carcinogenicity. Neither has American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists. The US National Toxicology Program (NTP) has no listing.

 

[Phayah]

Do you have a link that shows diethylene glycol is a carcinogen? As far as I can tell it is not carcinogenic. International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has not evaluated carcinogenicity. Neither has American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists. The US National Toxicology Program (NTP) has no listing.

The only link I have that says it's carcinogenic is the one that leads to the FDA report. If it has not been evaluated that does not mean it isn't a carcinogen. We would need more definitive proof to call the FDA liars.

 

[TheIllustratedMan]

Diethylene glycol is not a carcinogen. Tobacco specific nitrosamines are. Please see this thread for more information:

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-regarding-fda-press-release-7-22-repost.html

This should put your mind at ease and give you the tools to carry on those discussions in an intelligent manner.

-Nate

 

[Phayah]

Diethylene glycol is not a carcinogen. Tobacco specific nitrosamines are. Please see this thread for more information:

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-regarding-fda-press-release-7-22-repost.html

This should put your mind at ease and give you the tools to carry on those discussions in an intelligent manner.

-Nate

Very nice. Thanks.

 

[westcoast2]

Not good to poke fun at carcinogens and contaminants found in e-liquid.

Certainly agree. The orange juice example given was to highight the fallacy. A lot of people do not make a distinction between 'found in' and 'is' and it is difficult to counter without suggesting the person making the error has been mislead esecially as they believe the 'authority' giving the information. People against the e-cig make use of this to their advantage. It borders on unethical to lead people on in this way.

The other problem with carcinogens is known or suspected human. In regular cigs there are about 60 carcinogens (numbers vary) yet only (I can't find the link) 7 are known human carcinogens.

By throwing the word around DEG seems to have been included as a carcinogen which it does not appear to be.

Thanks for the link and confirmation TheIllustratedMan

 

[Phayah]

Certainly agree. The orange juice example given was to highight the fallacy. A lot of people do not make a distinction between 'found in' and 'is' and it is difficult to counter without suggesting the person making the error has been mislead esecially as they believe the 'authority' giving the information. People against the e-cig make use of this to their advantage. It borders on unethical to lead people on in this way.

The other problem with carcinogens is known or suspected human. In regular cigs there are about 60 carcinogens (numbers vary) yet only (I can't find the link) 7 are known human carcinogens.

By throwing the word around DEG seems to have been included as a carcinogen which it does not appear to be.

Thanks for the link and confirmation TheIllustratedMan

This link says there are 8 chemicals known to be human carcinogens, but the other chemicals are known to be possibly/probably harmful to humans as well. I definitely wouldn't rule that tidbit out. We have to keep in mind, scientists don't experiment on humans so that information is extremely limited.

 

[warp1900]

The main problem here is that everyone takes what the FDA has to say about anything as true, when the fact is that we all know (and should always keep in mind), that the FDA is, was, and will always be a way to control the markets by disclosing or holding information at the convenience of who "supports" them (corporations), there is always a story behind what they have to say, and most of the time it is so convoluted, it is hard to see what their real agenda is.
If anyone still believes that politicians and administrative entities are looking for our "well being", you have a lot to learn.
Just to make things clear, no one out there is planning to cause you harm, but what i know for a fact is no one is looking after you either.

Unfortunately, the FDA rules and we are screwed no matter what the rules are. The only thing that "stops" them form going even further is the lawsuits. Just think about how many prescription drug commercials you see on TV and the amazingly long, ridiculous and absurd disclaimers they show on them. Yes the FDA forced the farma companies to do that but not because they are looking after us, but because there were so many lawsuits they were not being able to handle them anymore.

Take what i say as you please, i just ask you all to please think twice about anything you hear or read. Trust me, there is ALWAYS an agenda behind it and in most cases we might never find out what it is. Remember the failing banks, car companies, insurance "giants" and mortgage defaults?

As far as I'm concerned i don't believe anyone until I can prove it myself. We have become so busy and lazy at the same time and we don't stop and reflect anymore, it is too much information so we choose to just think that there are "leaders" that takes care of us so why worry about it?

I chose to vape instead of smoking and even if i have no way of being certain of what vaping will do to my health, i decided that i am better off, maybe i am wrong, only time will tell. I DO know that i feel much better now than i did when i was smoking 1.5 packs of cigarettes a day for 35 years, and that is what i do CARE about. The FDA will never make me change my mind, because my body speaks and what it has to say is much better now.

 

[westcoast2]

Phayah thanks for the link and the correction.

The point I was making was by associating things together, the problems can be made to look worse than they really are. The art of spin.

 

[grimmer255]

Phayah thanks for the link and the correction.

The point I was making was by associating things together, the problems can be made to look worse than they really are. The art of spin.

exactly and put that in place of the media there might as well been an epidemic on our hands.

 

[grimmer255]

1 percent is so low....theres more crap in our water and air than what was in those carts...ppb is very low....if you ask me they did a good job making the nicotine juice...b/c there is more of that crap in NRT products that are aproved by the FDA.

 

[nash076]

Remember the whole "There's formaldehyde in diet coke!" nonsense from a few years back?

Or, you older folks . . . remember the Cranberry scare, back in 1959?

People is dumb. Dumb as a box of rocks, dumb as a bag of hammers, dumb as a sack of bowling balls. They will hear something they're told is a "fact," without actually finding out the how's or why's of what they're saying.

Do I believe that some companies are cutting corners on this stuff? Of course they are. There's no regulation, no one's looking over their shoulder and there's not even an industry standard in place (as of yet) on what the contents of this liquid should and shouldn't be. If you really want to scare yourself stupid, google "aqua dots" for a great example of what happens when there's no kind of oversight.

That having been said, I can't exactly trust the FDA on this one, either. Way before there were concerns about the contents, way before the FDA even began testing, they were quick to jump up and try the de facto ban on these devices. There are politics involved in this, unfortunately. That alone tells me the FDA is less concerned about our best interests, and more concerned about making the people with influence happy.

I feel confident enough to continue using this product for the time being. I'll be very happy when/if Johnson Creek gets their proverbial **** together and makes a homegrown formula that doesn't taste horrible to vape, or if another US company steps up to the plate . . . mainly because any US company would have to be directly concerned with lawsuits due to negligence, which seems to be the only thing that honestly motivates any company to behave themselves.

Not that this will silence the dumb. The dumb are the dumb, no matter what. So, if you want a quick and easy response that will shut the dumb up, point out that the FDA are the folks who were so negligent in their inspection duties as to allow peanuts to be contaminated with salmonella, and that those same peanuts ended up in school lunches.

Is it relevant, or even entirely factual? No, but it's something that the dumb can process quickly and easily, which brings us back to where we came in . . .

 

[whatagem]

I'm not suggesting that I would quit using the e-cig because there might be something bad in it. It has afterall, reduced my smoking habit & will soon help me to quit cigarettes altogether.
My concern is that after continuously hear bad things, it will be the end of the e-cig. I know this debate has gone on for quite some time and I am sure this entire thread is merely a rerun like that episode of Seinfeld you've seen 36 times.

It is still a bit disapointing to constantly hear downers about the e-cig though. To say there are over 40 carcinogins and what is it now--1,486,926 chenicals in cigarettes and they are still legal to have & use, but that e-cigs may not be in the near future....

well, this isn't really the point is it? It's really odd how it bothers me that I might be inhaling anti-freeze but that I can light up a cigarette without any thought to it. I am also afraid we may be repeating history. Suppose e-cigs really aren't that bad, but because of different companies adding a dash of this and a dash of that...Or on the other hand were kinda bad--just over 40 years of useage. Well, it would be the 1950's all over again.

60 years later we finally find something that helps so many quit smoking so easily and the threat of having it taken away hangs over like a dark cloud.

But why anti-freeze? Are there not a thousand things out there that taste sweet? As far as I know, good 'ol cane sugar may be OK to eat, but how is it for inhaling? Would there be any real difference?

 

[harmony gardens]

I agree. The FDA is the emporer with no clothes on. There is a real story here somewhere, because it proves that the FDA isn't interested in protecting public health. If they are doing the bidding of a vested interest, we have a corruption scandle of epic purportions. Vapers being forced back to smoking because the anti tobacco lobby is manipulating the FDA into not allowing a safer product to come to the market, is like a hollocaust of smokers, isn't it? It seems like a big deal to me, anyway.

I don't know,,, they are the ones who have been telling me that cigarettes were killing me, and that NRT's are safer. I would be a lot more encouraged if the FDA would say something like,,, the electronic cigarette is a promising technology and we at the FDA will work with the industry to develope a set of production, packaging and marketing protocols so we can lower the danger of nicotine addiction and ensure that these products are safer for the user. I'd feel less disenfranchised if the FDA would listen to our pleas for getting this done, instead of parroting the anti smoking lobby's smoker maginalization rhetoric.

 

[Flitzanu]

people...please stop associating DEG with antifreeze.

you can't go buy DEG and pour it in your car to cool your engine. there are other chemicals involved and other components. they found a small amount of A CHEMICAL that is/may be used in antifreeze. as pointed out, that same chemical is used in treating tobacco that you can go buy and smoke right now. no different.