New study finds vaping >99% safer using FDA's own rules
- Thread starter DrMA
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Some noted improvements in this study....
"Smoking machine parameters for the measurement of cigarette smoke constituents have been the subject of much debate."
"At present, there are no standardized e-cigarette puffing parameters for analytical measurements. Studies have reported the use of a wide range of puffing parameters by e-cigarette consumers, and various values have been used in machine-based aerosol chemistry measurements."
"Whether a single puffing regime is appropriate for all e-cigarettes remains to be demonstrated; nevertheless, urgent standardization is required to enable comparisons to be made between studies. With this in mind, the Cooperation Centre for Scientific Research Relative to tobacco (CORESTA) has published Recommended Method 81 for machine puffing e-cigarettes and uses a regime with rectangular flow profile puffs,..."
Here the authors seem to be well aware of mistakes and corrupting methods that have been used in the past, that we've all seen, and have made necessary adjustments to give better factual data for their study.
"The data show that it is essential to conduct laboratory air/method measurements when measuring e-cigarette emissions, owing to the combination of low emissions and the associated impact of laboratory background that can lead to false-positive results and overestimates. Of the 150 measurands examined in the e-cigarette aerosol, 104 were not detected and 21 were present due to laboratory background. Of the 25 detected aerosol constituents, 9 were present at levels too low to be quantified and 16 were generated in whole or in part by the e-cigarette. These comprised major eliquid constituents (nicotine, propylene glycol, and glycerol), recognized impurities in Pharmacopoeia-quality nicotine, and eight thermal decomposition products of propylene glycol or glycerol. By contrast, approximately 100 measurands were detected in mainstream cigarette smoke."
This in red above.... as many here know, some of the first 'formaldehyde' found in ecigs were found later to be a result of this "laboratory background' air - this being pointed out by our own scientists Burnstyn, Polosa, Hajek, et al, when reviewing the ANTZ studies.
"Diacetyl was detected but not quantifiable in the e-cigarette emissions (Table 2) and was not detected in the air/method blank, but it was quantified at substantially higher levels in Ky3R4F MSS. The levels of diacetyl were 99.9% lower on a per-puff basis in the e-cigarette emissions than in Ky3R4F MSS." [the Ky3R4F MSS being the cigarette used].
"Smoking machine parameters for the measurement of cigarette smoke constituents have been the subject of much debate."
"At present, there are no standardized e-cigarette puffing parameters for analytical measurements. Studies have reported the use of a wide range of puffing parameters by e-cigarette consumers, and various values have been used in machine-based aerosol chemistry measurements."
"Whether a single puffing regime is appropriate for all e-cigarettes remains to be demonstrated; nevertheless, urgent standardization is required to enable comparisons to be made between studies. With this in mind, the Cooperation Centre for Scientific Research Relative to tobacco (CORESTA) has published Recommended Method 81 for machine puffing e-cigarettes and uses a regime with rectangular flow profile puffs,..."
Here the authors seem to be well aware of mistakes and corrupting methods that have been used in the past, that we've all seen, and have made necessary adjustments to give better factual data for their study.
"The data show that it is essential to conduct laboratory air/method measurements when measuring e-cigarette emissions, owing to the combination of low emissions and the associated impact of laboratory background that can lead to false-positive results and overestimates. Of the 150 measurands examined in the e-cigarette aerosol, 104 were not detected and 21 were present due to laboratory background. Of the 25 detected aerosol constituents, 9 were present at levels too low to be quantified and 16 were generated in whole or in part by the e-cigarette. These comprised major eliquid constituents (nicotine, propylene glycol, and glycerol), recognized impurities in Pharmacopoeia-quality nicotine, and eight thermal decomposition products of propylene glycol or glycerol. By contrast, approximately 100 measurands were detected in mainstream cigarette smoke."
This in red above.... as many here know, some of the first 'formaldehyde' found in ecigs were found later to be a result of this "laboratory background' air - this being pointed out by our own scientists Burnstyn, Polosa, Hajek, et al, when reviewing the ANTZ studies.
"Diacetyl was detected but not quantifiable in the e-cigarette emissions (Table 2) and was not detected in the air/method blank, but it was quantified at substantially higher levels in Ky3R4F MSS. The levels of diacetyl were 99.9% lower on a per-puff basis in the e-cigarette emissions than in Ky3R4F MSS." [the Ky3R4F MSS being the cigarette used].
Everybody who takes any FDA approved anything has the same outcome, they eventually die. To date there are no exceptions. The FDA's singular contribution is making sure all their snake oil is outrageously, shamefully expensive. Then along comes a brilliant, low tech, low cost, low risk cure for smoking. If we use it we'll still die eventually but some of us might live a little longer and live a little better. The FDA hates it because it's not expensive and complicated and easy to control and because it's makes people's lives better without sending them to the poor house. Those FDA guys look in the mirror and they think they see nice guys, not evil. That is the problem.
Oops my comment has little to do with the original post but facts have little to do with the ecig debate.
Nice to see that Diacetyl Emission Levels were so Low when testing was done on this Vype ePen.
But Not all that surprising seeing that Diacetyl and Acetyl Propionyl are not ingredients of the e-Liquid that was used when the Testing was performed.
"Diacetyl was detected but not quantifiable in the e-cigarette emissions (Table 2) and was not detected in the air/method blank, but it was quantified at substantially higher levels in Ky3R4F MSS. The levels of diacetyl were 99.9% lower on a per-puff basis in the e-cigarette emissions than in Ky3R4F MSS. The homologue acetyl propionyl was not detected in the e-cigarette emissions or in the air/method blanks; however, it was quantified in Ky3R4F MSS at substantially higher levels ([URL='http://pubs.acs.org/doi/suppl/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.6b00188/suppl_file/tx6b00188_si_002.xlsx']Supporting Information Table S4). The levels in the e-cigarette aerosol were estimated to be at least 99.9% lower on a per-puff basis as compared with those in Ky3R4F smoke. Neither diacetyl nor acetyl propionyl is an ingredient included in Vype products; therefore, their presence in these aerosol measurements is unlikely."[/URL]
[URL='http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.6b00188#tbl2']
[URL='http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.6b00188#tbl2'][URL='http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.6b00188#tbl2'][URL='http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.6b00188#tbl2']
[URL='http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.6b00188#tbl2'][URL='http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.6b00188#tbl2'][URL='http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.6b00188#tbl2'][URL='http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.6b00188#tbl2'][URL='http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.6b00188#tbl2'][URL='http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.6b00188#tbl2']http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.6b00188
[/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL]
But Not all that surprising seeing that Diacetyl and Acetyl Propionyl are not ingredients of the e-Liquid that was used when the Testing was performed.
"Diacetyl was detected but not quantifiable in the e-cigarette emissions (Table 2) and was not detected in the air/method blank, but it was quantified at substantially higher levels in Ky3R4F MSS. The levels of diacetyl were 99.9% lower on a per-puff basis in the e-cigarette emissions than in Ky3R4F MSS. The homologue acetyl propionyl was not detected in the e-cigarette emissions or in the air/method blanks; however, it was quantified in Ky3R4F MSS at substantially higher levels ([URL='http://pubs.acs.org/doi/suppl/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.6b00188/suppl_file/tx6b00188_si_002.xlsx']Supporting Information Table S4). The levels in the e-cigarette aerosol were estimated to be at least 99.9% lower on a per-puff basis as compared with those in Ky3R4F smoke. Neither diacetyl nor acetyl propionyl is an ingredient included in Vype products; therefore, their presence in these aerosol measurements is unlikely."[/URL]
[URL='http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.6b00188#tbl2']
[URL='http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.6b00188#tbl2'][URL='http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.6b00188#tbl2'][URL='http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.6b00188#tbl2']
[URL='http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.6b00188#tbl2'][URL='http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.6b00188#tbl2'][URL='http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.6b00188#tbl2'][URL='http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.6b00188#tbl2'][URL='http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.6b00188#tbl2'][URL='http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.6b00188#tbl2']http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.6b00188
[/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL]
At any rate, vaping is a decidedly better method of getting our nicotine and satisfying the hand to mouth habit we all developed while smoking cigarettes. For me, it's not so much the nic, but the relaxing effect of simulating smoking that satisfies.
That said, it's comforting to find that huge groups of doctors agree that vaping is magnitudes better for their patients than inhaling a burning compound of tobacco, paper, and chemicals. My doctor has been on board with my vaping for 6 years now, since I demonstrated it to him in 2010 and explained how it worked.
That said, it's comforting to find that huge groups of doctors agree that vaping is magnitudes better for their patients than inhaling a burning compound of tobacco, paper, and chemicals. My doctor has been on board with my vaping for 6 years now, since I demonstrated it to him in 2010 and explained how it worked.
Give your Doc some time... soon he/she will adopt the FDA's position. Mine did some time ago and I walked out of her office right in the middle of an exam. Still haven't paid her.
And I won't either.
I don't see medical people that often these days. Not a cold, sore throat, cough, flu... nothing in almost 4 years. Coincidently, about the time I started vaping. And when I do go for a routine test, I always check the "non smoker" box and never mention vaping. They're too quick to blame everything from a hangnail to cancer on things they don't understand.
If you're not careful with wire cutters, you might get a hangnail which -could- turn into cancer.
i try to be optimistic as to the FDAs concern for truth.......but their track record proves time and time again that its only Money and Power they are after
How funny
these lab techs were breathing in the actual Formaldehyde all the while scaring the crap outta the public by reporting that we are the ones breathing it in through vaping
He had never seen an ecig up close until I demonstrated mine for him in a patient room (at his urging). He still asks me about mine and how it's working from time to time. After my testimony and demonstration he put a display in his waiting room with pamphlets about quitting smoking with electronic cigarettes. I have an appointment in early November for a checkup. I think I'll print out the Royal College of Physicians study and hand it to him.
I'm living proof that they work. After smoking for 40 years and trying to quit multiple times, I dropped them during the first year I vaped and never touched another one. That's significant because I never really lost the desire even when I quit cold turkey for two years once. I can truly say that I'm cured of ever wanting another as long as I can vape.
I'm old enough to remember when doctors smoked like chimneys. I've even had doctors examine me while their cigarette burned in an ashtray in the room. My childhood doctor once talked about going to AMA meetings at the hospital where the smoke hung in the air during the meetings.
Times have changed for the good with vaping. There are doctors who accept the fact that vaping is safer than smoking and are agreeable that vaping is a good thing if it keeps you off the smokes.
Somewhere around 2025 the original tobacco settlement agreement will run out. It will be interesting to see if it's renewed. I'm thinking that it's the only thing that is saving tobacco companies from government shutdown over time. States are hooked on tobacco settlement money and are willing to accept cigarettes over vaping because we don't contribute to the state funding from a similar agreement.
Times have changed for the good with vaping. There are doctors who accept the fact that vaping is safer than smoking and are agreeable that vaping is a good thing if it keeps you off the smokes.
Somewhere around 2025 the original tobacco settlement agreement will run out. It will be interesting to see if it's renewed. I'm thinking that it's the only thing that is saving tobacco companies from government shutdown over time. States are hooked on tobacco settlement money and are willing to accept cigarettes over vaping because we don't contribute to the state funding from a similar agreement.
Last edited:
I smoked for over 35 years and tried everything under the sun to quit!!! always went back to cigs
I haven't touched a cig in almost 4 years now, not since the first day I vaped today the wife and I are meeting a NEW family doctor and I plan on telling him I Vape! if he bawks at it I'll be looking for Another doctor.... no time for ignorance
I haven't touched a cig in almost 4 years now, not since the first day I vaped
today the wife and I are meeting a NEW family doctor and I plan on telling him I Vape! if he bawks at it I'll be looking for Another doctor.... no time for ignorance 
I got a feeling many who choose vaping will be contributing before long. Fortunately, I won't be one of them...
I smoked for over 35 years and tried everything under the sun to quit!!! always went back to cigs
I haven't touched a cig in almost 4 years now, not since the first day I vaped
Same here. I smoked for so long that the hand to mouth followed by the relaxing exhale is ingrained into my personality. That's the reason I'm still vaping six years after quitting smoking. The thing that replaced smoking satisfies the need for the hand to mouth habit.
My doctor is on board with vaping. I'm glad to find out that it's 95% to 99% safe to do because it's hard for me to sit still without vaping here and there.
- Status
Similar threads
