Aspire official statement on Atlantis coils material

[beckdg]

i'm 2genewb on RC forums and dundadundun on fish forums. i stayed with freshwater/low tech planted tanks and land RCs. my main forums where i posted were ultimateRC and aquariacentral. though, i frequented many, often and posted elsewhere from time to time.

here, this is me... http://www.ultimaterc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=174225

 

[WharfRat1976]

I'll attempt it

Stated early.



Dr. Farsalinos is doing a study that will provide evidence on a number of these issues, so that's proof based on science, as are a number of his other papers. All we are doing is making personal observations here. There are some things we do know and some things we don't know. We all speculate that vaping is less harmful than smoking, but smoking has many more years of observation, medical surveillance and scientific study. vaping does not (yet). Vaping appears to be less harmful and some people have made a choice to do it over smoking. Some do it purely as vapers (me for instance) and accept the risk that gap represents.

I've watched my 77 year old mother recover some quality of life and lung function while suffering COPD after smoking since she was 14 years old and who now vapes instead. Her medical condition actually improved and her quality of life as well. To me thats enough proof that there is some worthwhile quantity of harm reduction. Can I measure it to a number or a conclusion? No, but I bet she can. We've seen the dire medical consequences of smoking and have accepted that - most people have personal experiences with friends or loved ones living with, or who have died because of it's complications.

There are people here who don't want this discussion for a number of reasons. One, one they feel it gives the ANTZ ammunition and two, they perceive it to threaten some aspect of their rationale for vaping. The ANTZ community doesn't want vaping on principle because it resembles smoking and its doubtful that their hardcore members will ever accept any of our positions or even the solid science of it when its finally presented.

Free speech and action often comes with the price of having to listen to dissenting opinions and positions and choose to disagree and co-exist regardless of that disagreement. Whether we like it or not, these are questions our community members are struggling with and want to talk about, regardless of whether VprJoe is a FOXNEWS style opportunist or not. Its gone beyond his blog statement, regardless of his motives. I honestly don't care what a media shill thinks, its not my concern and the conflict of interest he is in invalidates his statements.

We aren't trying to prove how much less harmful that reduction is - this is a discussion around aspects of a particular atomizer and its possible shortcomings. We've all already accepted the harm reduction and the risk gap by vaping. Its like you're standing up in a church meeting amongst the faithful and in the middle it demanding proof of God. I didn't bite, so you're drawing Ryedan into a prima facie argument and filibustering it, but its not what this thread is about.

I agree and well stated. I would like to know what the unknown material is in the Atlantis head. Sometimes I like proof that ignorance is bliss. I was a philo major so prima facie debate is a specialty of mine. I do think the words "harm reduction" are a total misnomer and somewhat "oxymoronic."

 

[aikanae1]

No, but that statement is too broad to apply to everything as a rationalization for doing it.

The problem is we are dealing with a lot of unknowns. We don't have long term medical surveillance, vendors don't fully disclose or even know themselves what the materials in their products result in after thermal decomposition and there are no immediate effects or evidence that makes the assessment clear. And a lot of these products come from a country with few controls in place that would otherwise enforce more vigorous consumer protections, and in the name of free trade, we bring these products into our consumer cycle with little oversight (at this point).

I work in the fire service. I teach the chemistry of pyrolysis and hazardous materials. I actively firefight and I wear and service SCBA (self contained breathing apparatus) and I observe and am exposed to a lot of their byproducts.

One thing I am very aware of is respiratory protection as it pertains to byproducts of combustion and byproducts of incomplete combustion. What we have learned in the last five years is that incomplete combustion is far worse than we ever thought. And while we believe vaping is a non-combustion process, I can tell you as someone with *some* expertise in fire science, that when an atomizer leaves charring, an incomplete combustion process has occurred. Thermal decomposition is extremely complex as its input are analog processes - random quantities of heat, oxygen, reducing agents, their ignition temperatures and their chemistry all change under their unique conditions. That's why no two fires are alike. Even the thermal cooling influence of juice on coil affects the results.

If I put on an arson investigators hat and looked at that photo I can tell you there was a high heat source with direct contact to that material, and the missing material was consumed (the reducing agent) and underwent thermal decomposition. Those same patterns in the picture I posted are the same kinds of things we see on furnishings after a fire.

Thermal decomposition produces smoke and smoke is toxic by its nature. It contains aerosols, particulates and gases, even if it is in minute quantities. Worse, it is now suspended in a vapor so as to be undetectable. Short of some extremely complex and expensive analysis, you really don't know what is going up the chimney of an atomizer.

What you can look at is the condition of the reducing agents (wick, coil and char and residue) and make some educated guesses about what might be in it, which is why I take apart atomizers after using them and assess if a combustion process has occurred - that evidence IF present is undeniable.

So, where do we go from here?

Its about personal risk assessment. Gather the information you can. Research as much as you can and be informed as you can about the processes involved and then decide risk versus reward. Nothing is risk free however, some things are clearly more risky than others and that's what makes it a personal decision.

Subohming introduces far more risk because the temperatures create radiant and contact energies high enough to result in thermal decomposition and that is an alarm bell that we should ALL be aware of.

One example from the fire service I can give you. For years we thought just man-made materials gave off toxic byproducts. We have now discovered that even a bale of hay produces hydrogen cyanide (H2S) in varying quantities - we were all shocked by this and the service has now been introducing air monitoring programs at fires to look for this. Hydrogen cyanide and carbon monoxide (CO - also called when together the "evil twins") are found in organic-only (ordinary combustible class A) fires and are a health risk if inhaled. Hydrogen cyanide attacks muscle tissue and particularly heart muscle. Carbon monoxide bonds with hemoglobin and prevents the transfer of oxygen to the cells in your body. It is now understood firefighters who die from heart attacks, hours or days later after a big fire may actually have been poisoned from these two byproducts. (Reference:http://www.montanafirechiefs.com/Assets/dept_1/PM/pdf/Toxic Byproducts of Combustion.ppt - Slide 51 in particular)

Sorry, its a long post but I wanted to brain dump this to put the picture into the context as I see it. You're welcome to whatever conclusions you want to make yourselves, but that's mine.

Wow. There was a lot said that makes a ton of sense to me.

One thing I've taken is the basic concept that vaping is safer due to it's avoidance of combustion and it's a good idea to keep that in mind.

A reason that some products may seem more satisfying is their ability to approach or achieve combustion. IMO that's counter productive to my personal goals.

Kinda sux that most of the fun things in life are harmful.

Sent from my LGLS990 using Tapatalk

 

[WharfRat1976]

Wow. There was a lot said that makes a ton of sense to me.

One thing I've taken is the basic concept that vaping is safer due to it's avoidance of combustion and it's a good idea to keep that in mind.

A reason that some products may seem more satisfying is their ability to approach or achieve combustion. IMO that's counter productive to my personal goals.

Kinda sux that most of the fun things in life are harmful.

Sent from my LGLS990 using Tapatalk

Your comment is the exact opposite of Firecrow's post. I read that he is saying "combustion" is undeniable. He says "thermal decomposition produces smoke" but we like to call it vapor.

 

[WharfRat1976]

"Incomplete combustion" is on par with "Harm Reduction." Same basic concept. It's a conundrum within a vortex all wrapped in much BS. I wish we could fast forward 15 years and look at the studies and the ramifications of incomplete combustion relative to atomization of ejoose and wick and coil material.

 

[WharfRat1976]

Here is the latest report on the Dr. Farce study. It is a good read and very pertinent to this thread and the others like it:
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/e-cigarette-research-temperature-of-evaporation

 

[chargingcharlie]

Your comment is the exact opposite of Firecrow's post. I read that he is saying "combustion" is undeniable. He says "thermal decomposition produces smoke" but we like to call it vapor.

I'm sure he'll clarify, but I didn't get that from his post. Combustion requires burning, and incomplete combustion is still a form of burning. A properly designed vaporizer should have no combustion going on in it (unlike what is shown in his images)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ryedan]

Your comment is the exact opposite of Firecrow's post. I read that he is saying "combustion" is undeniable. He says "thermal decomposition produces smoke" but we like to call it vapor.

I didn't get that at all either. It's amazing how different people interpret the same things differently!

 

[Katya]

Kinda sux that most of the fun things in life are harmful.

I know, right?

However, we can and should try to make them less so--at least when it comes to vaping. We've been doing it from the very beginning here at ECF (and on other forums) and I'm not about to stop now. Yes, it's discouraging to be constantly ridiculed, accused of being paranoid, hysterical, misinformed, or even being a shill for a competitor, but I've gotten used to it now. It still hurts, but it is what it is. The forum is huge now, less friendly, and populated by new vapers who probably assume that vaping is mainstream and regulated by someone, somewhere, so there is nothing to worry about.

When Smokey Joe started ECF, we knew nothing, so this forum became a place to discuss everything vaping and the safety aspect of it.

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-electronic-cigarette-examined.html#post11440

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...nterfeits-electronic-cigarette.html#post11693

Anyway, that old, small, friendly ECF doesn't exist anymore, but there are still plenty of good people who do care and continue the tradition. And I say thank you to each and every one of them. And thank you, Smokey Joe!

Back on topic: the very first questions about fiberglass/ceramic in Aspire coils were asked early on, in August, right after the coils were released and Rip took one apart. There have been many discussions on the subject, here and on other forums. Vapor Joes article didn't say anything new--just summarized the concerns other have voiced, but he has a big megaphone.

Aikanae, I know you like Aspire coils; if you want to continue using them but are concerned, write to them:

allen@eigate.com; allen@aspirecig.com (Allen Liu, CEO)

or

service@aspirecig.com

Judging from my most recent correspondence with them (about a month before Vapor Joes' article), I have a feeling that they are very well aware of the fact that the decision to use fiberglass in BVC coils was a mistake and are going to switch to a safer material (most likely Japanese organic cotton) sooner or later. How soon? Can't tell you. Probably as soon as the fiberglass coils are all sold out.

 

[Oliver]

Wow, thanks for resurrecting those ancient threads, Katya. I'm actually quite happy with how they've stood the test of time, save for a couple of glaring errors.

What they mostly show is that plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose! Had vaping stayed focused around those early devices we were using, we'd probably be a lot more certain about their safety. But then likely far fewer people would actually be using them.

That said, I do think this issue is slightly different. Without prejudice to whether or not the Atlantis tanks do release ceramic/silica fibres into the vapor stream, it's clear to me that a large company which is releasing hundreds of thousands of these into a large and growing market, especially this late in the game, should be pretty damned sure that they don't, and should have the data to show that they don't.

Also, we need these devices. As much as I enjoy doing my builds and the history of how we've gotten here, the Atlantis is the first of a series of iterations that are going to take "volume vaping" to the mainstream - and it's this kind of vaping I now believe will convert more smokers than the predecessor devices... so, I sincerely hope that Aspire either get this sorted, or they substitute materials if it proves impossible to get accurate data*.

On the other points about heat and incomplete combustion - this is surely where the next great innovation, temperature protection, is going to be essential. It's just a question of how quickly it can become an affordable solution. At current prices, I don't see it being taken up by the mainstream of current vapers, let alone the actual mainstream (of smokers).

Speaking to the point about doing one's due diligence on vaping, I'd say that temperature protection is a serious consideration that all vapers should make.

*remembering that "accurate data" means taking account of many variables as to how the products are used in practice, as well as having laboratory techniques which can detect problematic exposures.

 

[Katya]

Those threads were the reason I joined ECF, Oliver. I read every single one of them.

Thank you for this forum--and for your continuous efforts to make vaping a safe(er) and legal alternative to smoking.

Happy New Year!

 

[Firecrow]

I agree and well stated. I would like to know what the unknown material is in the Atlantis head. Sometimes I like proof that ignorance is bliss. I was a philo major so prima facie debate is a specialty of mine. I do think the words "harm reduction" are a total misnomer and somewhat "oxymoronic."

LOL - you're good at it!

Yes, I put "harm reduction" in the same bucket as "military intelligence" and "economic austerity".

Ignorance is bliss... until it harms you. Think back a hundred years ago at the things we did in medicine which we now look back on and shake our heads at. We'll be judged similarly I am sure. Hopefully our collective legacy will be a good one.

 

[Oliver]

Your comment is the exact opposite of Firecrow's post. I read that he is saying "combustion" is undeniable. He says "thermal decomposition produces smoke" but we like to call it vapor.

Thermal decomposition is undeniable (i.e. it happens, although to what extent we won't know until Farso comes back with some data). But in theory, vapor products can be made so that what comes out is what goes in, and nothing more.

What disturbs me is the notion that "bad things only come out at the point of dry puff" - I don't think we can be so sure about this. There's some non-ecig research on formaldehyde (for example) that suggests that harmful levels can be inhaled without detection. It's pretty irritating that we still don't know - almost all published research up to now has been done on gen1/gen2 equipment. But we will know very soon. Well, relatively soon anyway!

 

[Firecrow]

I'm sure he'll clarify, but I didn't get that from his post. Combustion requires burning, and incomplete combustion is still a form of burning. A properly designed vaporizer should have no combustion going on in it (unlike what is shown in his images)

Definitely will clarify.

Wow. There was a lot said that makes a ton of sense to me.
One thing I've taken is the basic concept that vaping is safer due to it's avoidance of combustion and it's a good idea to keep that in mind.
A reason that some products may seem more satisfying is their ability to approach or achieve combustion. IMO that's counter productive to my personal goals.
Kinda sux that most of the fun things in life are harmful.

Your comment is the exact opposite of Firecrow's post. I read that he is saying "combustion" is undeniable. He says "thermal decomposition produces smoke" but we like to call it vapor.

Correct me if I am wrong aikanae1, as I am not one to put words in people's mouths. I believe what you're saying is avoiding combustion is a good idea and some products push the limit in order to achieve a more satisfying vape, but may approach combustion, which is bad and what you've chosen to avoid.

If that's what you mean, I don't disagree at all with you.

This has turned into a general conversation (which is okay) which started specific to the Atlantis BVC design and has some general principles that are worthwhile to consider in all cases of vaping. This is not new - I don't think anyone here intends to burn juice or wick, we intend to vaporize e-liquid and only inhale that product, separate from any secondary byproducts that may be created through the device we buy or create to make that work.

To that end, I identified a specific case, from which you can apply to your own builds or atomizers you purchase, and that is close survelliance of your coil and wick, post use to look for 2 things, evidence of either combustion or incomplete combustion. Those can be observed by looking for charring of or missing wicking or coil materials, or any other materials within the atomizer (rubber or PVC seals).

​

I vaped this atomizer at around 11W-14W on a VaporShark rDNA30 for about 2 weeks. Is this excessive by your standards? I don't know.

If you see no charring, in my opinion you're as low risk as you can be right now with what we know - but it still has unknowns.

By no means am I saying the end is nigh for vaping or we should be dumping our commercial atomizers and going to rebuilding, or inventing a laser chamber system to only vaporize juice at a specific temperature (wouldn't that be nice? I'm sure somebody here or in China is working on that right now). I am saying we have observations we can make and based on those observations, make different choices or adjust our vaping behavior to avoid byproducts of combustion/incomplete combustion (and WharfRat1976, I promise not to use "harm reduction" here, lol). In the specific case of the Atlantis system, because of the unknown material and the evidence I presented in the photo, I shared those personal observations here. I shared my conclusions but invited everyone to draw their own and possible alternatives to mind. I'm not a scientist, I'm just a guy who runs into burning buildings and prys people out of smashed up cars for a living. But oddly enough the fire science part of my knowledge is somewhat applicable here and that's what I am relying on. Whether you think that dis or qualifies my statements I leave entirely to you.

Everything is subject to thermal decomposition, its a matter of sustained temperature. The power levels and some wicking materials we use may, under the right circumstances, thermally decompose. But we have personal control over this, IF this is an issue you believe is important to you.

As I said, smoke is composed of particles, gases and aerosols once something has approached or reached ignition temperature. If the vaporizing system reaches that point, what percentage of those three byproducts and what they are composed of that goes up the tip when you inhale is unknown. Dr. Farsalino's study is going to address much of this. I suspect (and I am saying this so I can look back on this conversation and say "See, I was right!") temperature is key.

Whether we use cotton, silica rope, rayon, ceramic wick or aramid fiber (thats what firefighter's bunker gear is made from to make it fire resistant - haven't seen that one yet, but I am sure somebody's gonna do it), each of these have ignition points. Hell, we've not even talked about the food grade flavorings with suspended solids in them yet - they factor in too. Each of these products adds a unique factor to what temperature is best to keep the coil at. But each of those have pros and cons. I like the flavor cotton imparts, but silica rope has a magnitude higher ignition point, but I see particulate risks with that, ceramic is great, but you need a genesis style atty setup that has limits and build characteristic I don't like, I can buy atomizers, but then I am relying on the manufacturers choices which they may not even disclose. The question is risk.

Those of you who were forced to sit though OSHA training may recall this slide:

​

Everyone here is going to choose one of these 4 options.

1. Avoid - some may, doubtful anyone here wants to.
2. Transfer - Buy bulletproof commercial atomizers from those who you trust and follow their instruction - may not really be an option, yet. DNA40 offers a glimpse into that future.
3. Reduce - Some of us will do this through choices and behaviour.
4. Retain - The "this whole conversation is silly, we all gotta die sometime... vape-on and accept the risk" crowd.

I am all about option 3. YMMV. 3 lets us keep our hobby (or addiction I guess) and we operate within as known and safe an envelope as the state of the art and our decisions permit.

Hopefully this answers more questions than it creates.

 

[Katya]

Option 3 sounds good.

SJ was right--plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose!

I can't believe that we're back to posting pictures of burning filler--after all those years. The picture below was posted in May 2009 and the thread (my favorite thread on ECF) is still alive.

Here's a lovely pic of said cartomizer I just ripped apart:

 

[Firecrow]

I love the label - thank GOD there is no electromagnetic radiation! That always had me worried.

 

[Katya]

I love the label - thank GOD there is no electromagnetic radiation! That always had me worried.

 

[Katya]

If the vaporizing system reaches that point, what percentage of those three byproducts and what they are composed of that goes up the tip when you inhale is unknown. Dr. Farsalino's study is going to address much of this. I suspect (and I am saying this so I can look back on this conversation and say "See, I was right!") temperature is key.

Whether we use cotton, silica rope, rayon, ceramic wick or aramid fiber (thats what firefighter's bunker gear is made from to make it fire resistant - haven't seen that one yet, but I am sure somebody's gonna do it), each of these have ignition points. Hell, we've not even talked about the food grade flavorings with suspended solids in them yet - they factor in too. Each of these products adds a unique factor to what temperature is best to keep the coil at. But each of those have pros and cons. I like the flavor cotton imparts, but silica rope has a magnitude higher ignition point, but I see particulate risks with that, ceramic is great, but you need a genesis style atty setup that has limits and build characteristic I don't like, I can buy atomizers, but then I am relying on the manufacturers choices which they may not even disclose. The question is risk.

Yup! Temperature is key. That's why we're all so excited about the DNA 40 technology and the results of Dr. F's ongoing studies. In the meantime, I just try to keep my wicks wet at all times and avoid fillers that turn into dust. And since I vape mostly at 6.5-7 watts (per single coil), I feel relatively safe.

And on the subject of silica wicks, here's my favorite video--I just like watching it.

 

[MrsMojoRisin]

I was following this thread when it was first posted and I have to say it made me a little nervous about the wicking material. I pulled the mesh screen off and looked inside and noticed a lot of charring, more than I would expect as the Atlantis is my least used tank (Reo/RM2 is #1 and the Protank2 with rebuilt coils is my stealth vaper). I have has the Atlantis shelved for a few days until I felt I could properly remedy the situation. So I just sat down and deconstructed the head- the wicking material was even nastier than I suspected- and rewicked with Koh Gen Do. I have to say I am very pleased with the results, great vapor, better flavor and feeling better about the wick has led to a more enjoyable vape. I imagine it would be fairly easy to most who rebuild coils frequently, I only ruined one coil in the process.

 

[The Ocelot]

This used head has been put through an ultrasonic cleaner - very effectively I may add, and allowed to dry.

​

Notice the thermal decomposition of the cotton that was touching the coils.

I did notice after cleaning that the Aspire whatever-it-is material became much less flaky and compacted quite a bit. If using these heads its possible pre-cleaning using the method I did might reduce post-manufacturing loose particles, but that's just speculation.

The concern I have is the burn-through. If the cotton is promoted as a protective barrier to the material in question, it is ineffective. I had no burnt taste or any indication that I could detect that this unit was "done", the flavor just became muted.

Decide for yourself, this is information only.

It just seems odd that they haven't used a carto type set-up, since it's proven technology.

Anatomy of a cartomizer [Original design]

Figure 1 - Parts of a cartomizer

1. Polyfill / Batting / Low density captive wadding
2. Inner Sleeve / Anti-Leak Filter / High density captive wadding
3. Center-tube / Vapor Stack / Coil Shield
4. Wick - Heating Coil & Scavenging Whiskers
5. Collar / Battery Connector / Anode Collar (with washer attached at the top)
6. Grommet / Center-post O-ring / Spindle Grommet
7. Center-post / Cathode Spindle
8. Cartomizer Casing
9. Rubber Cap
10. Plastic Cap
11. O-ring
12. Condoms / End Caps (the right one has an end cap plug inside of it)