Dr. F. expounding on the "Dry Burn" comment he made on RY4 Radio May 22.

[Painter_]

Dry-burning metal coils: is it a good thing?

He is basically stating that dry burning the coil tempers the metal used in the coil thus changing the molecular structure and integrity of the metal. He feels that this is an unnecessary risk and until this is studied one that the average vapor should not take.

 

[drksideken]

What we really need is a safe coil substitute that is the coils equal. Until then, I'll still be using regular coils, but it doesn't hurt to hope someone figures one out someday.

 

[twgbonehead]

I was very surprised to see Dr. F. take this stance. In the past, he has always only spoken about things he had researched, and for which he had direct scientific evidence.

This latest info seems to me much more about conjecture? It seems very different from his previous publications and statements. As others have said, is a toaster a health threat? A toaster heats up a massive amount of nichrome, to the bright-orange temperature level, for an extended period of time.

Something just seems wrong here.......

 

[Kent C]

"First of all, I should say that the reactions from the vaping community are a bit exaggerated. I never said that by dry-burning the coil you are making vaping more harmful than smoking."

I'd be interested in who actually said that. If it was said by a lot people then yeah - exaggerated. By one person... meh.... you'll get that. lol.

"Vapers should realize that metals used in coils have not been made to be in continuous direct contact with liquid, to evaporate liquid on their surface and to have the consumer inhale the vapor directly from the coil."

While this is true with the context added, there are heating elements that are used in other appliances and heaters that may radiate some metal associated with the coils - hair dryers, toasters, stoves, oven - where other stuff and liquids could come in contact forming vapor/steam, etc. - which while not as direct, could be 'inhaled' by individuals. It's part of living life.

"Although we explained in our risk-assessment analysis that the levels found were not of significant health concern, this does not mean that we should accept unnecessary exposure."

Not sure what 'unnecessary exposure' would be. How can something that is not a significant health concern be 'unnecessarily exposed'? It would seem to me that doing a dry burn on a new coil to find 'hot spots' is necessary for not overheating - that's what 'hot spots' would be. There's no 'exposure' other than viewing to detect hot spots - no inhaling involved.

"If you want to remove residues from the manufacturing process of the wires, you can use alcohols and water to clean the wire before preparing the coil."

I tend to agree - certain alcohols - ethyl not isopropyl unless rinsed thoroughly and can be used to clean used coils as well - better, imo, than dry burn, but only that one can kill a coil or short out a batt by doing it wrongly.

 

[Kent C]

I was very surprised to see Dr. F. take this stance. In the past, he has always only spoken about things he had researched, and for which he had direct scientific evidence.

This latest info seems to me much more about conjecture? It seems very different from his previous publications and statements. As others have said, is a toaster a health threat? A toaster heats up a massive amount of nichrome, to the bright-orange temperature level, for an extended period of time.

Something just seems wrong here.......

Yep. Sounds more like a parent/nanny, than a doctor/scientist.

 

[WillyZee]

yeah, I'm lost on this one too.

 

[skoony]

i think the good Doctor is preaching to the choir.
he knows there will be trace amounts of substances
that in larger amounts would pose a health risk.
he also knows how the game is played. he's been
playing it for a long time. he knows the ANTZ have
a zero tolerance of any potentially dangerous substance
no mater if the risk is essentially zero in the real world.
statements such as this is an avoidable risk or should
be avoided until additional research are not for us.
the're to placate the ANTZ to keep them from using
their zero tolerance attitudes to trash the whole
study.
if you don't give em' any rocks,they can't throw em'
at you. worst case,you can make your escape while the're
searching for rocks.

regards
mike

 

[Kent C]

he knows the ANTZ have
a zero tolerance of any potentially dangerous substance
no mater if the risk is essentially zero in the real world.
statements such as this is an avoidable risk or should
be avoided until additional research are not for us.
the're to placate the ANTZ to keep them from using
their zero tolerance attitudes to trash the whole
study.

I don't know if this represents what Dr. F 'knows', but if it does, it makes no sense.

- "ANTZ have zero tolerance of any potentially dangerous substance"
- some potentially dangerous substance has been found
Therefore, this will "placate the ANTZ to keep them from using their zero tolerance attitude".

Nope.
IF ANTZ have zero tolerance of ANY potentially dangerous substance.
And if any potentially dangerous substance is a rock.
Then finding a dangerous substance gives them a rock.

 

[Endor]

Dr. F is merely saying that there could potentially be a risk, and we should consider that. I have no issue with that. Similar issues have been debated here on these forums before... hexavalent chromium (which Dr. F mentions as well) being formed from over-torching Genesis SS mesh wicks, inhalation of silica fibers, diacetyl... there are those in the community who would like to mitigate risk as much as possible, and that's okay. Others take a different approach, in that smoking is so bad a minor risk is still better, and that's okay too.

Me? I appreciate Dr. F at least having an open dialog about it.

 

[Kent C]

Dr. F is merely saying that there could potentially be a risk, and we should consider that. I have no issue with that. Similar issues have been debated here on these forums before... hexavalent chromium (which Dr. F mentions as well) being formed from over-torching Genesis SS mesh wicks, inhalation of silica fibers, diacetyl... there are those in the community who would like to mitigate risk as much as possible, and that's okay. Others take a different approach, in that smoking is so bad a minor risk is still better, and that's okay too.

Me? I appreciate Dr. F at least having an open dialog about it.

Hence the "I don't know if this represents what Dr. F 'knows'...." part (of skoony's quote).

Same goes for IF "Dr. F is merely saying..."

 

[caramel]

If a study uses the word "potentially" then it is potentially wrong too.

 

[nicnik]

Dr. Farsalinos mentioned his concern about dry burning at least as far back as 2013, when he was quoted as saying, "Dry burn helps in nothing but accelerating the thermal breakdown of the metal. Use acetone and water or ethanol to clean the wires before making the coils. It is really useless and probably harmful to dry-burn the coils."

I dry burn coils, and have had some concerns, since reading about what he said (here on ecf) back then. I'm glad to read his article going into a bit more detail, and am aware that it's just speculation at this point. His "probably harmful" statement isn' backed up by anything else I've seen him, or any one else say. He'll probably be the one to start advancing our knowledge in that area with research.

 

[AndriaD]

It seems to me that the man has never actually wrapped a coil himself. The first time I tried it, just to see if I could physically accomplish it, I didn't yet know about flaming the wire before wrapping; when I was done, slid the drill bit out, and let go of the coil.... it went from about 1/8th inch wide to about an inch wide -- it's too "sproingy" to keep its shape, if you don't flame the wire first, and that was 32ga I was using, so it would be even worse with thicker wire. I use a cigarette Bic lighter to do mine (29ga now), and yeah it does leave some black stuff behind -- so I rinse it in purified water and wipe it with a paper towel, after the flaming. But without the initial flaming, coils won't stay small enough to fit in the heads.

Andria

 

[skoony]

I don't know if this represents what Dr. F 'knows', but if it does, it makes no sense.

- "ANTZ have zero tolerance of any potentially dangerous substance"
- some potentially dangerous substance has been found
Therefore, this will "placate the ANTZ to keep them from using their zero tolerance attitude".

Nope.
IF ANTZ have zero tolerance of ANY potentially dangerous substance.
And if any potentially dangerous substance is a rock.
Then finding a dangerous substance gives them a rock.

i am just offering an opinion not asking
for a critique.
if you have an opinion lets hear it.
regards
mike

 

[Kent C]

i am just offering an opinion not asking
for a critique.
if you have an opinion lets hear it.
regards
mike

When you post your opinion, you open yourself up to critique whether you asked for it or not :- ) It's part of what forums are about. As far as my opinion, I pretty much said what I wanted in post #4.

 

[Lessifer]

It seems to me that the man has never actually wrapped a coil himself. The first time I tried it, just to see if I could physically accomplish it, I didn't yet know about flaming the wire before wrapping; when I was done, slid the drill bit out, and let go of the coil.... it went from about 1/8th inch wide to about an inch wide -- it's too "sproingy" to keep its shape, if you don't flame the wire first, and that was 32ga I was using, so it would be even worse with thicker wire. I use a cigarette Bic lighter to do mine (29ga now), and yeah it does leave some black stuff behind -- so I rinse it in purified water and wipe it with a paper towel, after the flaming. But without the initial flaming, coils won't stay small enough to fit in the heads.

Andria

Thicker wire actually holds it's shape better than thinner wire, without torching. I haven't pre-torched wire since I stopped using 30g. I will say though that every coil I've ever wrapped has had some issue with heating evenly that pulsing helped to alleviate. I've had coils that look perfect, but for some reason have a single hot wrap, and pulsing and brushing with the mandrel fix them right up. If I had just wicked and vaped with those coils, I'd be burning juice.

 

[AndriaD]

Thicker wire actually holds it's shape better than thinner wire, without torching. I haven't pre-torched wire since I stopped using 30g. I will say though that every coil I've ever wrapped has had some issue with heating evenly that pulsing helped to alleviate. I've had coils that look perfect, but for some reason have a single hot wrap, and pulsing and brushing with the mandrel fix them right up. If I had just wicked and vaped with those coils, I'd be burning juice.

When I re-wick, I always dry-burn to clean the coil, and sometimes there is a hot leg from black gunk on the leg; after one pulse, I scrape the black stuff off, pulse again, and rinse, pulse again and the hot leg is gone.

However I think the coil in my ADV Kayfun may be nearing the end of its life; it still vapes very well, good flavor, but now it's staying very dark even when perfectly clean. Probably oughta replace it soon, but I don't want to until the flavor actually drops off, because of that tedious breaking-in phase with new coils.

Andria

 

[EBates]

I build tensioned micro coils using 32ga kanthal as my normal build. I have a mini butane torch and a BIC lighter that I haven't used in months. I wrap on a 1.5mm mandrill and have yet to have a coil 'grow' in diameter. Yes I have and will continue to dry burn and adjust a new coil and routinely dry burn and adjust, as required, my coils after cleaning and before re-wicking. The issues from a 'Hot spot' or 'Hot leg' to me are much more troublesome.
I like most vapers was dismayed by what the good Dr said, but I've Seen Nothing In Any Report That Indicates I Need To Change Anything I've Been Doing. Until I see an analysis of vapors that say Hey Dummy You're Hurting Yourself, I'm OK. But, I could Be Wrong.

 

[skoony]

When you post your opinion, you open yourself up to critique whether you asked for it or not :- ) It's part of what forums are about. As far as my opinion, I pretty much said what I wanted in post #4.

fair enough.
i suggest if are going to critique me perhaps you should
actually read what i said.you seemed to be a bit off of
what i was trying to get at.
regards
mike

 

[Kent C]

fair enough.
i suggest if are going to critique me perhaps you should
actually read what i said.you seemed to be a bit off of
what i was trying to get at.
regards
mike

Not only did I read what you said, I quoted it:

You said:
"he knows the ANTZ have
a zero tolerance of any potentially dangerous substance
no mater if the risk is essentially zero in the real world.
statements such as this is an avoidable risk or should
be avoided until additional research are not for us.
the're to placate the ANTZ to keep them from using
their zero tolerance attitudes to trash the whole
study.

I said:
"ANTZ have zero tolerance of any potentially dangerous substance" (your quote)
- some potentially dangerous substance has been found (from dr. f's findings)
Therefore, this will "placate the ANTZ to keep them from using their zero tolerance attitude". (your quote).

Unless you meant something other than what you actually said, then I think I was pretty accurate in "what (you) were trying to get at" - that it was "not for us", but to "placate the ANTZ" (again, your quotes). And that:

if you don't give em' any rocks,they can't throw em'
at you. (your quote)

... it actually gives them some rocks.

I know it's a pretty common tactic in debate to say someone misquoted you or took your comments 'out of context' but I copy and pasted the quotes and got the context right in this instance.

The problem is, the ANTZ zero tolerance for potentially dangerous substances. In order to combat that, you have to either show that there are no potentially dangerous substances OR that the no-threshold standard is an unreasonable standard. Your explanation of "what Dr. F knows" does neither.