Brace yourselves new Formaldehype junk study to be released Jan 21

[WhiteHighlights]

I may have to try to stay up for the 11pm news. I think I caught part of a teaser on our local ABC station (WCVB) 'ecigs are worse than cigarettes' and they were going to talk to someone. They obviously missed the caveat about using them as intended This won't be good.



ETA: I just sent the news group an email and suggested they do more research before the 11pm news and get the rest of the story. I included a link to Clive. I doubt it will make a difference, but I tried.

ETA 2: I just sent them the link to Dr Farsalinos too.

 

[Lessifer]

From the Reuters article: 'Pankow conceded that the study could have contained more context about overall relative risk, but said the authors "just wanted to get it out."'

Since when did "First!" become a justification for publishing shoddy incomplete work?

It's ok if people will take this data out of context, because we haven't provided any, because we "just wanted to get it out."

It's ok that we submitted this "peer reviewed study" as a letter to the editor, which by definition has no peer review, and shows an incomplete method, because we "just wanted to get paid."

 

[Painter_]

Dr. Farsalinos issued this statement.

The deception of measuring formaldehyde in e-cigarette aerosol: the difference between laboratory measurements and true exposure

 

[pennysmalls]

Dr. F just plain rocks, period.

 

[TravTech]

Sadly, much of science has become politicized over the years. It's more about where their funding comes from than unbiased research. It's like pharmaceutical science no longer seeking true cures, because there's much more money in long term treatment.

 

[WhiteHighlights]

Dr. F just plain rocks, period.

Agreed. I love this line, it's so nicely put that it makes me smile:

In fact, it is very easy to produce as much aldehydes as you want in the lab with an e-cigarette device. However, this has nothing to do with exposure from e-cigarette use.

 

[caramel]

I may have to try to stay up for the 11pm news. I think I caught part of a teaser on our local ABC station (WCVB) 'ecigs are worse than cigarettes' and they were going to talk to someone. They obviously missed the caveat about using them as intended

I somehow can't find that part of the test where they also lit the tobacco cigarettes from the wrong end to see what that does to the aldehydes.....

 

[Kent C]

Dr. F just plain rocks, period.

Sigh.... Not that it wouldn't have come up sooner or later but Dr. F was the first to mention publically of the possibility of problems with high watt/subohm vaping. Whether or not these 'studies' were a result of what he proposed is unknown but there was little or no word of it, except in the sub-ohm forums here, in any media.

 

[catlady60]

I'm battling a couple of ANTZ, one of them from San Francisco, regarding this junk science article. Needless to say, my blood is boiling, trying to reason with anti-nicotine tyrants who think we should all rot in prison.

 

[pennysmalls]

Sigh.... Not that it wouldn't have come up sooner or later but Dr. F was the first to mention publically of the possibility of problems with high watt/subohm vaping. Whether or not these 'studies' were a result of what he proposed is unknown but there was little or no word of it, except in the sub-ohm forums here, in any media.

I wasn't aware that. I think it would have come out eventually, probably much later than sooner as evidenced by the ignorance in regards to vaping shown by these other researchers.

 

[caramel]

I'm battling a couple of ANTZ, one of them from San Francisco, regarding this junk science article. Needless to say, my blood is boiling, trying to reason with anti-nicotine tyrants who think we should all rot in prison.

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” - Upton Sinclair

 

[Kent C]

I wasn't aware that. I think it would have come out eventually, probably much later than sooner as evidenced by the ignorance in regards to vaping shown by these other researchers.

I'm astounded by the ignorance of some of the ANTZ and their lackeys. Some do know and just lie. Some haven't a clue.

 

[Lessifer]

Sigh.... Not that it wouldn't have come up sooner or later but Dr. F was the first to mention publically of the possibility of problems with high watt/subohm vaping. Whether or not these 'studies' were a result of what he proposed is unknown but there was little or no word of it, except in the sub-ohm forums here, in any media.

I don't want to knock Dr. F, I believe his intentions are good, and he is truly interested in the science, but yes some of his opinions/comments have been less than beneficial to the industry. Incomplete data is incomplete data, whether it pertains to aldehydes or diketones or whatever. The truth of the matter is that his studies are still on-going, and at this point I don't know that I trust his methods any more than I do anyone else's, though he does seem to be better at distinguishing real world conditions from extreme conditions.

 

[Charming]

I just saw this article and my blood pressure went up 20 points. I just quit the cigs and started vaping 8 weeks ago and if anyone tries to take my vape away....well...it'll be ugly!

 

[Kent C]

I don't want to knock Dr. F, I believe his intentions are good, and he is truly interested in the science, but yes some of his opinions/comments have been less than beneficial to the industry. Incomplete data is incomplete data, whether it pertains to aldehydes or diketones or whatever. The truth of the matter is that his studies are still on-going, and at this point I don't know that I trust his methods any more than I do anyone else's, though he does seem to be better at distinguishing real world conditions from extreme conditions.

Again, this was going to come out one way or another, it's just that Dr. F was the first to say it in a wider public manner than our forums. I mentioned this in the first thread on it and not everyone was pleased. I'm glad he's on the case anyway. Just pointing out the sequence of the news cycle and the fact that these days, any even possible negative will be looked at by the ANTZ as another 'opportunity' to spin the negative out of it - plus they don't mention the 'solution' - temp control - that was a result of intelligent minds working in the free market.

 

[xtwosm0kesx]

I don't want to knock Dr. F, I believe his intentions are good, and he is truly interested in the science, but yes some of his opinions/comments have been less than beneficial to the industry. Incomplete data is incomplete data, whether it pertains to aldehydes or diketones or whatever. The truth of the matter is that his studies are still on-going, and at this point I don't know that I trust his methods any more than I do anyone else's, though he does seem to be better at distinguishing real world conditions from extreme conditions.

He's a fellow vaper so he should understand real world vaping situations very well.

I highly doubt he would do anything to directly hurt the industry, but he's also the type of person that won't gloss over the truth, even if its hurtful to his (our) interests.

 

[DrMA]

I updated the OP with links to replies and critiques form our allies.

But you don't need more than 1 guess as to where the most egregious FUD comes from. Yep it's People's Republic of Kalifornia

http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-electronic-cigarette-formaldehyde-20150121-story.html

 

[Lessifer]

He's a fellow vaper so he should understand real world vaping situations very well.

I highly doubt he would do anything to directly hurt the industry, but he's also the type of person that won't gloss over the truth, even if its hurtful to his (our) interests.

Definitely, I just meant that right now, a cautionary warning that more research is needed can easily become a crusade in favor of federal regulations.

 

[DrMA]

Definitely, I just meant that right now, a cautionary warning that more research is needed can easily become a crusade in favor of federal regulations.

Yeah, cause FDA are sooo expertly at vaping they could come up with sensible and relevant safety regs as to voltage/power/temp. NOT! Those clowns can't even tell the difference between liquid droplets and solid smoke particulates.

 

[aznnp77]

INCOMING!

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/01/21/usa-health-ecigarettes-idUSL1N0UZ24620150121

OP updated with links

Every article I read adds a little more detail. I wish they would be more specific on equipment, but let's be honest here. All you guys that thought they were purposely sub-ohming for a test study like this are kidding yourselves. In my mind, I just assumed they were using an standard ego battery with a ce4.

The Reuters article gave the detail that they used "Halo Cigs liquid" and " a personal vaporizer from Innokin."

That makes sense because the innokin battery has a digital reader on it. I'm assuming that they used a VV3, not that it matters if they used an MVP or whatever else, but I doubt it.

So we know for sure that they were not sub-ohming because I think the VV3 only fires down to like 1.3 ohms or something. It would be safe to assume at this point that the tank they used was either an iClear15 or an iClear30, would it not?

Before you guys get all defensive, I agree that more details about the study need to be released for us to get a better idea, but this study did catch my eye because it has actual numbers and data with it. I vape and am not some outsider or anything.

I'm just picturing some "scientist" pressing the fire button, waiting 4 seconds, releasing, then firing again immediately. Repeating the process until 3ml of juice was used. That would be the dumbest study ever though, so I'm kind of giving them the benefit of the doubt on that.

It makes me happier knowing that I don't sub ohm and primarily just use Kanger tanks at around 3.8 to 4 volts at 2.2 ohms. If I was a sub-ohmer though, it would make me a tad bit uneasy.

On a related note, we're assuming that the carcinogens are primarily coming from dry hits. Would a really old coil that tastes burned and ashy be giving off "dry hits" even if it were saturated? I have a friend that waits an abnormally long time before he changes his coils, so I'm wondering if he's doing any harm to himself other than his vape tasting like crap.