I was put on Bystolic 5mg right before I started vaping, quitting analogs and the medicine has brought it down !
Concerned about my Blood pressure and cholesterol, vaping constantly...
- Thread starter my4jewels
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
jw50 and sugar,
Interesting counterpoints on which delivery system is more nic.
My body tells me that vaping put more nic in my system.
My very first vape sent a calming sensation through my body that only cigs could do.
But it did it quicker and with a single vape that lasted a very long time.
Since then, I've become a vapaholic. I've bought the toys and the goofy juices and just really enjoy it.
With experience came wisdom. I don't over-nic because I throttled back the % of nic in my juice.
The transition was strange. The tastebuds going haywire, the dehydration, the weird dreams, and the desire to have a package in my mailbox everyday. All these symptoms has disappeared as my body (and wallet) acclimated.
To the OP. You'll know if you over-nic. A little PG/VG added to the bottle will fix that.
Now that I don't smoke, I seem to have a stronger inclination to be nice to my body with foods and activity.
Anything is better than lighting a chemical soaked weed and inhaling it.
Interesting counterpoints on which delivery system is more nic.
My body tells me that vaping put more nic in my system.
My very first vape sent a calming sensation through my body that only cigs could do.
But it did it quicker and with a single vape that lasted a very long time.
Since then, I've become a vapaholic. I've bought the toys and the goofy juices and just really enjoy it.
With experience came wisdom. I don't over-nic because I throttled back the % of nic in my juice.
The transition was strange. The tastebuds going haywire, the dehydration, the weird dreams, and the desire to have a package in my mailbox everyday. All these symptoms has disappeared as my body (and wallet) acclimated.
To the OP. You'll know if you over-nic. A little PG/VG added to the bottle will fix that.
Now that I don't smoke, I seem to have a stronger inclination to be nice to my body with foods and activity.
Anything is better than lighting a chemical soaked weed and inhaling it.
No, according to studies by Professor Laugesen in 2009 and Professor Bullen in 2010, we are only receiving 10% of the nicotine per puff compared to cigarettes. The up to 40% is a consideration by a multitude of board members, and I believe preliminary findings by Eissenberg's most recent and still ongoing Virginia Commonwealth study. Initially, Eissenberg recruited subjects who had never used an e-cig and had no one there to teach them how to do it. Those subjects were getting little to no nicotine. In his more recent study, Eissenberg had 1 user reach nicotine levels comparable with a cigarette that I am aware of, and that subject was using a high voltage Chuck iirc.
Last edited:
just went to the doctor last week for the first time in 3 years. My blood pressure for as long as I can remember has been around 135/90. Smoked for 20 years. Quit and started vaping 3 months ago...My blood pressure as of last tuesday is 117/74. And I dont do a LICK of exercise! So those should be good news to you =) Nicotine by itself, delivered in the quantities that vaping produces, is not much worse than caffiene as a vasoconstrictor.
your blood pressure may go down, but the inhalation of nicotine is a vasoconstrictor, which means you could still have high bp, just because of continuing to inhale nicotine. It's good that you've cut your % quite a bit, chances are your bp will go down.
Someone else correct me if i'm wrong, but from my knowledge, nicotine inhalation and cholesterol levels are not directly nor indirectly related.
Someone else correct me if i'm wrong, but from my knowledge, nicotine inhalation and cholesterol levels are not directly nor indirectly related.
Could you please provide a copy or source references of the Professor Laugesen in 2009 and Professor Bullen in 2010 studies? "we are only receiving 10% of the nicotine per puff compared to cigarettes" - 10% as compared to cigarettes is not the same thing as 10% of the nicotine in e-liquid being absorbed/taken in by a vaper of the e-liquid. Even if 10% is correct - what happened to the other 90%? What percentage is a "multitude" and on what basis was the 40% derived? What do you mean by "was considered"? Was it agreed to or was it just "considered". "In his more recent study, Eissenberg had 1 user reach nicotine levels comparable with a cigarette" - My reading was that at less one vaper reached blood nicotine levels of 30ng/ml. 30ng/ml would be comparable to "unrestricted smokers" of cigarettes as reported in the Institute of Medicines - "Clearing the Smoke: Assessing the Science Base for Tobacco Harm Reduction." (See page 251). I still suggest lot's more research is needed and that the percentages you provided previously are not based on scientific research (or meaningful research) of e-cigs.
All right, let's take this a piece at a time.
"In the pharmacokinetic analyses, the serum nicotine Cmax for usual cigarettes was comparable with other studies. The 16 mg ENDD’s performance was consistent with findings from intensive-mode smoking machine tests of this same make of ENDD, which delivered 10% of the nicotine per puff delivered by a regular Marlboro cigarette (M Laugesen, 2009, TC2009/034355, submitted). This suggests that it is more like a NRT product, concerning nicotine delivery, than a cigarette." and "On average, the ENDD increased serum nicotine to a peak of 1.3 mg/ml in 19.6 min, the inhalator to 2.1 ng/ml in 32 min and cigarettes to 13.4 ng/ml in 14.3 min." - 'Effect of an Electronic Nicotine Delivery Device (e cigarette) on Desire to Smoke and Withdrawal, User Preferences and Nicotine Delivery: Randomised Cross-Over Trial' C Bullen, et al, tobaccocontrol.bmj.com, April 8th, 2010 - http://www.healthnz.co.nz/2010%20Bullen%20ECig.pdf
The Laugesen study referenced above and by myself is here; http://www.healthnz.co.nz/RuyanCartridgeReport30-Oct-08.pdf. All the studies done so far on e-cigarettes and/or e-liquid ingredients can be found here; CASAA.org - Labs, here; CASAA.org - Journal Reports, and also here; National Vapers Club - Scientific and Medical Information.
As to the rest of this section, I'll get to that farther below.
A multitude, as in a large number of ECF members talked it over in various places at various times and most seem to believe that they are getting more like 40% of the nicotine from their e-juice. This is not hard facts, just observation. If it was hard facts I would have given you actual percentages.
I notice you didn't bother to pull the whole quote. The qualifier there was "That I know of" meaning I had not read Eissenberg's preliminary results in some time and wasn't completely sure, but I did know 1 subject approached comparable levels. After finding the time to go back and re-read the info presented by Dr. Andrea Vansickle, an associate of Dr. Eissenberg, http://www.preventionconnections.org/conferenceslides/Tobacco_Harm_Reduction.pdf it turns out that there were two subjects that approached cigarette nicotine serum levels. The one I mentioned was actually using a P18 mod with 18mg e-juice, and the other was using a Chuck with 24mg e-juice to achieve 40ng/ml. As I mentioned in my earlier post, you might want to keep in mind that these are "Mod"ified e-cigarettes, not stock batteries like the ones used in the Bullen and Laugesen studies. In fact, the batteries and even the cartridges used in their studies were subpar to what we currently use in stock equipment.
Now, to get to the 10%, 40%, "where does it go" topics. Compare the milligrams of nicotine in a cigarette to the milligrams found in various levels of e-juice. Even at comparable serum levels the nicotine content is worlds apart. If you take the level of e-juice used by the Chuck subject (used because he's right in the middle of the 30-50 ng/ml cigarette serum level), 24mg times that by the most often mention daily e-juice usage which is 3mls, 24*3=72mg per day divided by the average 16 hour day, 72/16=4.5mg per hour. So in the one hour of ad libitum (unrestricted) vaping, the Chuck subject was able to gain the same serum levels at a +/- 4.5 mg content as cigarette smokers. Incidentally, 40% of 4.5 is 1.8, within the average yield (1 - 2) of nicotine from a cigarette. Does it actually mean anything? Scientifically no, but I believe the guesstimates are correct.
Look for yourself, and rather than accusing me, why don't you go donate to the study we vapers have been trying to fund for the last 6 months. IVAQS Project
"In the pharmacokinetic analyses, the serum nicotine Cmax for usual cigarettes was comparable with other studies. The 16 mg ENDD’s performance was consistent with findings from intensive-mode smoking machine tests of this same make of ENDD, which delivered 10% of the nicotine per puff delivered by a regular Marlboro cigarette (M Laugesen, 2009, TC2009/034355, submitted). This suggests that it is more like a NRT product, concerning nicotine delivery, than a cigarette." and "On average, the ENDD increased serum nicotine to a peak of 1.3 mg/ml in 19.6 min, the inhalator to 2.1 ng/ml in 32 min and cigarettes to 13.4 ng/ml in 14.3 min." - 'Effect of an Electronic Nicotine Delivery Device (e cigarette) on Desire to Smoke and Withdrawal, User Preferences and Nicotine Delivery: Randomised Cross-Over Trial' C Bullen, et al, tobaccocontrol.bmj.com, April 8th, 2010 - http://www.healthnz.co.nz/2010%20Bullen%20ECig.pdf
The Laugesen study referenced above and by myself is here; http://www.healthnz.co.nz/RuyanCartridgeReport30-Oct-08.pdf. All the studies done so far on e-cigarettes and/or e-liquid ingredients can be found here; CASAA.org - Labs, here; CASAA.org - Journal Reports, and also here; National Vapers Club - Scientific and Medical Information.
As to the rest of this section, I'll get to that farther below.
A multitude, as in a large number of ECF members talked it over in various places at various times and most seem to believe that they are getting more like 40% of the nicotine from their e-juice. This is not hard facts, just observation. If it was hard facts I would have given you actual percentages.
I notice you didn't bother to pull the whole quote. The qualifier there was "That I know of" meaning I had not read Eissenberg's preliminary results in some time and wasn't completely sure, but I did know 1 subject approached comparable levels. After finding the time to go back and re-read the info presented by Dr. Andrea Vansickle, an associate of Dr. Eissenberg, http://www.preventionconnections.org/conferenceslides/Tobacco_Harm_Reduction.pdf it turns out that there were two subjects that approached cigarette nicotine serum levels. The one I mentioned was actually using a P18 mod with 18mg e-juice, and the other was using a Chuck with 24mg e-juice to achieve 40ng/ml. As I mentioned in my earlier post, you might want to keep in mind that these are "Mod"ified e-cigarettes, not stock batteries like the ones used in the Bullen and Laugesen studies. In fact, the batteries and even the cartridges used in their studies were subpar to what we currently use in stock equipment.
Now, to get to the 10%, 40%, "where does it go" topics. Compare the milligrams of nicotine in a cigarette to the milligrams found in various levels of e-juice. Even at comparable serum levels the nicotine content is worlds apart. If you take the level of e-juice used by the Chuck subject (used because he's right in the middle of the 30-50 ng/ml cigarette serum level), 24mg times that by the most often mention daily e-juice usage which is 3mls, 24*3=72mg per day divided by the average 16 hour day, 72/16=4.5mg per hour. So in the one hour of ad libitum (unrestricted) vaping, the Chuck subject was able to gain the same serum levels at a +/- 4.5 mg content as cigarette smokers. Incidentally, 40% of 4.5 is 1.8, within the average yield (1 - 2) of nicotine from a cigarette. Does it actually mean anything? Scientifically no, but I believe the guesstimates are correct.
Look for yourself, and rather than accusing me, why don't you go donate to the study we vapers have been trying to fund for the last 6 months. IVAQS Project
Last edited:
My husband was a 3 pack a day smoker until a month ago and every time he had his bp checked it was dangerously high. The other day he had to go to urgent care with strep and his bp was normal. I am going to have it checked again in a few days but it looks promising.
My BP has always been normal- last few years (smoking too much, got a too sedentary job) it was tending towards high. Not enough to medicate, but enough to watch.
Since I quit smoking, and started vaping, I've dropped right back into the middle of the normal range.
Just one person- does it mean that vaping is good for BP? Means it was for me, I think. It's be hard to generalize, but I think there are a lot of examples of individuals for whom vaping, as opposed to smoking, has resulted in a net lowering (or at least decreased raising, perhaps) of blood pressure.
Nicotine is a known vasoconstrictor, though the degree to which it acts as such in the absence of other components of smoke is hard to estimate. It's reasonably certain (in my mind at least) that it will depend on how much nicotine you consume. And THAT is really hard to know, regardless of your delivery method. Cigs, e-cigs, patches, snus, or whatever. Use of these products is so varied. Some snus users keep a portion in for hours. Some, for 20 minutes. THey're all putting the same amount of nicotine in their mouths (if they use the same number of the same snus). BUt some are clearly putting a lot more of it in the trash after.
If you're in doubt, get your BP checked.
For some, vaping instead of smoking HAS helped to keep BP under control. BUt that's a far cry from saying that it always does.
Best,
Ande
Since I quit smoking, and started vaping, I've dropped right back into the middle of the normal range.
Just one person- does it mean that vaping is good for BP? Means it was for me, I think. It's be hard to generalize, but I think there are a lot of examples of individuals for whom vaping, as opposed to smoking, has resulted in a net lowering (or at least decreased raising, perhaps) of blood pressure.
Nicotine is a known vasoconstrictor, though the degree to which it acts as such in the absence of other components of smoke is hard to estimate. It's reasonably certain (in my mind at least) that it will depend on how much nicotine you consume. And THAT is really hard to know, regardless of your delivery method. Cigs, e-cigs, patches, snus, or whatever. Use of these products is so varied. Some snus users keep a portion in for hours. Some, for 20 minutes. THey're all putting the same amount of nicotine in their mouths (if they use the same number of the same snus). BUt some are clearly putting a lot more of it in the trash after.
If you're in doubt, get your BP checked.
For some, vaping instead of smoking HAS helped to keep BP under control. BUt that's a far cry from saying that it always does.
Best,
Ande
I think that a fire department will check your bp for free, I had a friend that would go to them around here and also get his sugar checked as well.
My bp has dropped a little since I started vaping 2 months ago. I would imagine that your cholesterol would be better since you're not putting all the tar and other additives into your blood stream and veins. I'd have it checked to be sure though. I always check my BP at the pharmacy when I go in for meds, once a month.
Thanks so much, everyone. Some of this got a little too techie for me, but I will keep vaping, and lowering my nic levels at intervals. I will let you know how my BP and cholesterol #'s are affected, if at all. I can't believe how easy it was to walk away from analogs, don't even want one. Not when I can vape all of these wonderful tasty treats!!!
Storm - Really not trying to accuse. I appreciate the time and effort you made in replying. I may have further questioning but not meant in accusing way. I am not anti-vaping. My initial concerns in this thread were the several comments that seemed to be suggestive to a newbie (which I am also as well) that vaping is a cure-all for all of ones ailments. I think that far from the case and that vaping is not at all risk free. I think you know as I do from other posts that some (very small number is my impression) vapers have concluded that vaping has caused them some serious health issues. Some of the negative claims seem quite irrational (IMO) and some not so irrational. I have not swallowed any and all of the negatives as being caused by vaping. But I don't really question those complaining that their adverse conditions are quite real. Likewise, I think it important that any and all understand that vaping - particularly those that choose to use nicotine - understand that vaping is a lesser risk than tobacco smoking (IOM) - not a no risk activity. Such understanding is particularly important to a newbie (IMO). Being a 50 pack year former tobacco smoker, unable to quit for a large number of years while knowing and believing that smoking was adversely affecting many things of my own system - perhaps to eventual kill me - yet continuing despite gums, patches, lozenges, etc. - vaping was my cure (IMO). As I see it, nicotine was part of starting that "cure" - and it was essential. My eventual goal is to have my complete cure - an existence that would avoid nicotine to me and to avoid providing it intentionally to others. Whether I achieve my eventual cure before the ills of my smoking years do me in is an unknown. But in the interim, I think it my duty, as a member of our society, to avoid, as best as I can, the contamination of some other society member's environment with nicotine. You will find, if you look, some negative comments I have made about a vaper you thought it "cool" to vape in a location prohibited to tobacco smokers. I found the action not only ill mannered but possibly contributory toward the environmental contamination that tobacco smoking prohibitions seek to avoid. And I thought this "coolness" was contributed to by the lack of information as to the negatives of nicotine and also possibly to mis-information about some of the possible hazards of vaping. Again, I may have more specific replies but not with any intent to do vaping in or to create bans and restrictions on vaping. And yes I do intend to contribute to the IVAQS Project that I interpret seeks to provide scientific information about vaping and its by-products. Thank you again.
It's all good Jw.
I do understand your position, although I really think e-cigs are going to be shown to not contribute anything all that harmful to the environments of others. I guess we will have to wait and see with the IVAQS. If you can look past the hype that's been raised about second hand cigarette smoke, you will find that the EPA doctored their results, which they have admitted, and NiMH has sat on studies for years proving that it's not as harmful as everyone has made it out to be. From my own research on nicotine, you would have to sit in an enclosed room for an hour with an active smoker to get the same amount of nicotine found in a pound of potatoes. One of Dr. Eissenberg's study subjects has stated that they watched their heart and blood pressure monitors while vaping, both readings actually went down and stablized after they were allowed to ad lib vape, and never climbed back up. Nicotine alone is being researched as a treatment for Alzheimer's and Parkinsons, and been shown to help in the regrowth of blood vessels and as such is being investigated for treatment in diabetic wound care, and has been proven to be protective against ulcerative colitis. (If you want links let me know.
)I certainly believe we need more studies, at the bare minimum to prove to the naysayers that vaping is indeed safer than smoking. In my mind the one unknown we're dealing with here is the flavorings, and I would like to see those looked into. However, nothing is completely safe; getting out of bed in the morning you could trip over your own dog, bash your head on the dresser and die before someone found you. Gasoline powered vehicles produce more dangerous chemicals than we ever could. And yes, it confuses me to no end when someone stops putting 10 mgs of tar per cigarette combined with arsenic, formaldehyde, benzine, cyanide, DDT, and the other 1000s of chemicals plus flavoring oils in their body and then panics over the ingredients of e-cigarettes.
According to one thoracic surgeon an ECF member talked to, the darn things are probably safer than traditional nicotine NRTs, and they certainly cause less suicides than Chantix.
Last edited:
Quote of Storm" - "In the pharmacokinetic analyses, the serum nicotine Cmax for usual cigarettes was comparable with other studies. The 16 mg ENDDs performance was consistent with findings from intensive-mode smoking machine tests of this same make of ENDD, which delivered 10% of the nicotine per puff delivered by a regular Marlboro cigarette (M Laugesen, 2009, TC2009/034355, submitted). This suggests that it is more like a NRT product, concerning nicotine delivery, than a cigarette." and "On average, the ENDD increased serum nicotine to a peak of 1.3 mg/ml in 19.6 min, the inhalator to 2.1 ng/ml in 32 min and cigarettes to 13.4 ng/ml in 14.3 min." - 'Effect of an Electronic Nicotine Delivery Device (e cigarette) on Desire to Smoke and Withdrawal, User Preferences and Nicotine Delivery:"
Storm - I think this is what you suggest supports the claim that only 10% of e-juice nicotine is absorbed: "In the pharmacokinetic analyses, the serum nicotine Cmax for usual cigarettes was comparable with other studies. The 16 mg ENDDs performance was consistent with findings from intensive-mode smoking machine tests of this same make of ENDD, which delivered 10% of the nicotine per puff delivered by a regular Marlboro cigarette."
ENDD for those not familiar is Electronic Nicotine Deliever Device. The last sentence above appears to be the what is claimed as supportive of the position. At best, this sentence is very confusing. But a reasonable interpretation (IMO) might be that a, say, 2 second puff of a Marlboro will deliver 10 times the amount of nicotine as will a 2 second puff on a pen-shaped Ruyan V8. (The ENDD used) Personally, I have no idea what a Ruyan V8 device is other than it was described in the text as being an automatic device. But I suggest the 10% comparison is meaningless in todays world of e-cigs. One just doesn't vape on an e-cig in the same way that we former smokers smoked on a tobacco cigarettes. My typical "puff" is maybe a 5 second puff on an e-cig. Don't recall exactly on the analogs but 2 or maybe 3 seconds at most. But what the puff time were and are, e-cigs puffs are longer and different. So puffs just aren't the same. My feeling is, I "puff" on an e-cig sufficient to get the same nic as I was previous getting from analogs. And, in any event, the quote does not say that 10% of the nic in the e-juice is absorbed by the e-juice puffer. Also, a reading of this paper evidences that the participants operated under the same problems as experienced by the 1st Eissenberg testing. That is, smokers were given specified e-cigs with the only instruction being to smoke it like a cigarette. The participants of the Laugesen study probably had never even see an e-cig before the study.
My feeling is that the second Eissenberg study will be more insightful. The preliminary results (IMO) are showing that unrestricted vapers are achieving nicotine serum levels comparable to unrestricted tobacco smokers. To me this makes more sense and is consistent with what I believe my own experiences to be. Is this harmless. I think the answer is no. Nicotine is not harmless. But, nicotine obtained from the e-cig is no worse than the nicotine obtained from the analog but if obtained from the e-cig the tars and thousands of chemicals of analogs are avoided both in the main steam and side stream. My hope is that further research will show that all of the nicotine in the e-juice can be accounted for as either absorbed by the vaper or gummed up on the coils of attys and that none of the nicotine is in the vapor exhaled by the vapor. (i.e. no second hand nicotine)
Im sure there will be arguments made that there are some positive benefits to be obtained from nicotine. That perhaps nicotine is no worse than caffeine. While there does appear to be some limited situations where nicotine may have beneficial effect on humans those situations are very limited. On the whole nicotine has adverse effect. For example see Clearing the Smoke: Assessing the Science Base for Tobacco Harm Reduction
Or see Nicotine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Nicotine is NOT the same as caffeine.
Storm - I think this is what you suggest supports the claim that only 10% of e-juice nicotine is absorbed: "In the pharmacokinetic analyses, the serum nicotine Cmax for usual cigarettes was comparable with other studies. The 16 mg ENDDs performance was consistent with findings from intensive-mode smoking machine tests of this same make of ENDD, which delivered 10% of the nicotine per puff delivered by a regular Marlboro cigarette."
ENDD for those not familiar is Electronic Nicotine Deliever Device. The last sentence above appears to be the what is claimed as supportive of the position. At best, this sentence is very confusing. But a reasonable interpretation (IMO) might be that a, say, 2 second puff of a Marlboro will deliver 10 times the amount of nicotine as will a 2 second puff on a pen-shaped Ruyan V8. (The ENDD used) Personally, I have no idea what a Ruyan V8 device is other than it was described in the text as being an automatic device. But I suggest the 10% comparison is meaningless in todays world of e-cigs. One just doesn't vape on an e-cig in the same way that we former smokers smoked on a tobacco cigarettes. My typical "puff" is maybe a 5 second puff on an e-cig. Don't recall exactly on the analogs but 2 or maybe 3 seconds at most. But what the puff time were and are, e-cigs puffs are longer and different. So puffs just aren't the same. My feeling is, I "puff" on an e-cig sufficient to get the same nic as I was previous getting from analogs. And, in any event, the quote does not say that 10% of the nic in the e-juice is absorbed by the e-juice puffer. Also, a reading of this paper evidences that the participants operated under the same problems as experienced by the 1st Eissenberg testing. That is, smokers were given specified e-cigs with the only instruction being to smoke it like a cigarette. The participants of the Laugesen study probably had never even see an e-cig before the study.
My feeling is that the second Eissenberg study will be more insightful. The preliminary results (IMO) are showing that unrestricted vapers are achieving nicotine serum levels comparable to unrestricted tobacco smokers. To me this makes more sense and is consistent with what I believe my own experiences to be. Is this harmless. I think the answer is no. Nicotine is not harmless. But, nicotine obtained from the e-cig is no worse than the nicotine obtained from the analog but if obtained from the e-cig the tars and thousands of chemicals of analogs are avoided both in the main steam and side stream. My hope is that further research will show that all of the nicotine in the e-juice can be accounted for as either absorbed by the vaper or gummed up on the coils of attys and that none of the nicotine is in the vapor exhaled by the vapor. (i.e. no second hand nicotine)
Im sure there will be arguments made that there are some positive benefits to be obtained from nicotine. That perhaps nicotine is no worse than caffeine. While there does appear to be some limited situations where nicotine may have beneficial effect on humans those situations are very limited. On the whole nicotine has adverse effect. For example see Clearing the Smoke: Assessing the Science Base for Tobacco Harm Reduction
Or see Nicotine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Nicotine is NOT the same as caffeine.
@JW; See, I did tell you to keep in mind that those were a sub-par brand of devices to what we have now. Runyan was the company that introduced e-cigarettes to the public, Hon Lik was working for the parent company when he invented them. The V8 is compatible with a DSE-801 penstyle.
It's true that I was mistaken in that Laugesen and Bullen were speaking of 10% of cigarette nicotine rather than e-juice, however, if you compare the amount of nicotine found in a cigarette to the amount in e-juice, then it plays out. We certainly aren't getting all the milligrams in the juice; as much as 36 mgs in a single ml of fluid, or the few serum test results that Eissenberg revealed through Vansickle would be much, much higher. As I mentioned before, if a person vaped 3 mg a day at 18 mg in a standard 16 hour waking cycle, they would be getting 4.5mg of nicotine per hour. We're also talking about people that had been denied nicotine for 12 hours before hand IIRC, and then all they were allowed for the next hour was 10 "puffs" of 30 seconds a piece. Personally I'd be vaping like a maniac for the ad lib hour. Lol
In Eissenberg's second study, ran concurrent with the one we've been discussing, (which is actually the 3rd) 6 bouts of 30 second puffs every 30 minutes on Vapor King 16mg cartridges and batteries only raised the subjects' nic levels to 6 ng/ml. Granted, these were new vapers, but it's also stock equipment; KR808s from a popular vendor, and a true 3.7 volt device compared to the 3.2 to 3.3 of an eGo. The 3 vapers in Eissenberg's 3rd study were all using Mods, capable of producing higher voltages for longer periods of time.
Runyan was the company that introduced e-cigarettes to the public, Hon Lik was working for the parent company when he invented them. The V8 is compatible with a DSE-801 penstyle.It's true that I was mistaken in that Laugesen and Bullen were speaking of 10% of cigarette nicotine rather than e-juice, however, if you compare the amount of nicotine found in a cigarette to the amount in e-juice, then it plays out. We certainly aren't getting all the milligrams in the juice; as much as 36 mgs in a single ml of fluid, or the few serum test results that Eissenberg revealed through Vansickle would be much, much higher. As I mentioned before, if a person vaped 3 mg a day at 18 mg in a standard 16 hour waking cycle, they would be getting 4.5mg of nicotine per hour. We're also talking about people that had been denied nicotine for 12 hours before hand IIRC, and then all they were allowed for the next hour was 10 "puffs" of 30 seconds a piece. Personally I'd be vaping like a maniac for the ad lib hour. Lol
In Eissenberg's second study, ran concurrent with the one we've been discussing, (which is actually the 3rd) 6 bouts of 30 second puffs every 30 minutes on Vapor King 16mg cartridges and batteries only raised the subjects' nic levels to 6 ng/ml. Granted, these were new vapers, but it's also stock equipment; KR808s from a popular vendor, and a true 3.7 volt device compared to the 3.2 to 3.3 of an eGo. The 3 vapers in Eissenberg's 3rd study were all using Mods, capable of producing higher voltages for longer periods of time.
Last edited:
Storm - I hope the research works out to support both positions. I suppose my (perhaps just me) major concern is that there is second hand, as some would call it, poison from vaping. I'm responsible if I wish to have or consume poison. Gov't can go take a hike. Same for other vapers as long as they understand what they are dealing with. But I don't want to impose any poison on unsuspecting or unknowledgeable others nor do I wish other vapers to do so. If we don't respect the rights of others - that is what brings our gov't in. There are a lot of, let me call them extremists, types that would apparent rather you smoke 5 packs of tobacco cigs per day than use a device that has not been proven to be safe. That is, smoke what we know is unsafe instead of things with unknown safety. I've heard it - probably and likely you're heard it - "Is it safe". "Safe" is next to an impossible argument. Safer I think is the argument and whatever I do has nothing to do with your safety. So go make yourself safe and leave me alone - thank you. Just some thoughts on the issue.
My blood pressure has gone down to norms, 120/70 with vaping and I used to have to take Norvask for high BP.
- Status
Similar threads
