Are we getting flavored nicotine deeper into our lungs with e-smoking?

[Schroedinger's cat]

Yesterday I read a long review paper about mammalian toxicity of PG and EG (generally good news for PG, what little is known. I have posted this yesterday).

One of the things that I found in that paper (and I had heard before) was that heated PG in solution was considered a good medium to deliver bronchodilator drugs to the lungs. So, I wondered, why is that, and does it have some consequence for e-smokers?

I searched some more, and today found a very old paper (from 1961), published in JAMA, the American Journal of the American Medical Association, in which they used a heated aerosol of 50% PG to get people with suspected lung cancer or other lung diseases to spit up their secretions, in order to examine what they brought up (for diagnostic purposes).

The idea behind this was to get more stuff brought up from the lungs compared to what one could do spontaneously (I hope you all have your meal well digested and in the past by now), and it apparently was a success. Then there was this sentence, which made me a little nervous:

“The ability of glycerin solutions to carry increased amounts of water deep into the lung suggests a therapeutic use in the moistening and loosening of inspissated sectretions”.

Now, e-smokers get into their lungs nicotine and other flavors, plus whatever else is these liquids we so avidly inhale. I am wondering whether this ability of glycerin may turn out to be a problem.

I did not have any cough –productive or not-since I started e-smoking (but I still smoke 4 real cigarettes a day, and I did not have a cough before). But that means very little.

Maybe it's a matter of temperature and other factors, and there is no problem whatsoever. I guess we’ll know in a few years….

PG

 

[Grenage]

This really is the million dollar question. We don't know if they are 'safe', or what the long-term effects of e-smoking flavours and ingredients are. Until proper studies are done, we're in the dark; even then, it could be 20-30 years before problems are identified.

That said, it's probably a lot safer than smoking real cigarettes.

 

[Schroedinger's cat]

That said, it's probably a lot safer than smoking real cigarettes.

I fully agree. If I did not believe that, there is no way that I would blithely inhale the contents of unsealed bottles of liquids made with unknown ingredients in China....

And I also agree that it will take many years before all problems are identified (if it took less than that, cigs may actually be better, which would be a pretty cruel irony....)

 

[Grenage]

if it took less than that, cigs may actually be better, which would be a pretty cruel irony

Let us hope this is not the case; if I were a betting man, I'd put some money on us making the right move. My dad said "it would be even better if you just quit", he's right, but I like smoking - as do most of us on this forum!

 

[TropicalBob]

In older discussions on this forum, we talked about the potential uses of our personal inhaler to deliver medical drugs via inhalation. Medicine already does this with other devices, but not with e-cigs, of course. Yes, there are some "health" liquids now with vitamins of questionable strength and benefit. But serious drugs, like bronchodilators, might benefit us e-smokers. With proper research, pleasant e-smoking of beneficial liquids could help optimize our lungs and bodies.

But, for capitalistic reasons, I don't see this happening. Big Pharma, Big tobacco, anti-smoking forces, governments -- none will want e-smoking to become truly mainstream and widespread. I will enjoy it as long as I can.

 

[jimldk]

Yesterday I read a long review paper about mammalian toxicity of PG and EG (generally good news for PG, what little is known. I have posted this yesterday).

One of the things that I found in that paper (and I had heard before) was that heated PG in solution was considered a good medium to deliver bronchodilator drugs to the lungs. So, I wondered, why is that, and does it have some consequence for e-smokers?

I searched some more, and today found a very old paper (from 1961), published in JAMA, the American Journal of the American Medical Association, in which they used a heated aerosol of 50% PG to get people with suspected lung cancer or other lung diseases to spit up their secretions, in order to examine what they brought up (for diagnostic purposes).

The idea behind this was to get more stuff brought up from the lungs compared to what one could do spontaneously (I hope you all have your meal well digested and in the past by now), and it apparently was a success. Then there was this sentence, which made me a little nervous:

“The ability of glycerin solutions to carry increased amounts of water deep into the lung suggests a therapeutic use in the moistening and loosening of inspissated sectretions”.

Now, e-smokers get into their lungs nicotine and other flavors, plus whatever else is these liquids we so avidly inhale. I am wondering whether this ability of glycerin may turn out to be a problem.

I did not have any cough –productive or not-since I started e-smoking (but I still smoke 4 real cigarettes a day, and I did not have a cough before). But that means very little.

Maybe it's a matter of temperature and other factors, and there is no problem whatsoever. I guess we’ll know in a few years….

PG

Well, think of this way.......it can help to loosen up all your Tar congested lung from all the cigarettes you have been smoking over all these years..so far nothing can remove that except PG (still need proof though..but I am getting good reviews so far from my 300 odd patients..)..have you read Cass emotive recovery from COPD??...that was one prime example...and a very good one too....PG is still in and under investigation and I am very happy to report to say that it has shown to be good and safe...so far..

 

[Schroedinger's cat]

Yes, I have read it, and was very impressed that it happened in such a short time.

Seriously, I would be amazed if e-smoking turned out to be worse than analog smoking, but it pays to be inquisitive, as people in this forum clearly are.

When I was young and living in Italy, women started smoking more and more, and there was an effort to get then to switch to "super-light" cigarettes so as to be safer. I then heard an epidemiologist saying that it was bad advice, apparently, because they had to suck hard and deep to get any satisfaction, and they got worse lung tumors than men, who smoked more potent cigarettes. Reading that article reminded me of these unintended effects that so often occur....