First comprehensive scientific analysis of NET

[Str8vision]

A report from "E-Cigarette Research" was published in the "International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health" detailing the first laboratory analysis of NET. I found this interesting not only because I make and vape NET, but also because the potential hazards of NET have been widely questioned/debated in this forum. The report: IJERPH | Free Full-Text | Nicotine Levels and Presence of Selected Tobacco-Derived Toxins in Tobacco Flavoured Electronic Cigarette Refill Liquids | HTML Dr. Farsalinos' view on the results: A new study verifies that e-cigarettes are orders of magnitude safer than tobacco cigarettes

Personally, I'd like to see more research conducted along these lines, inquiring minds.....

 

[Bagazo]

Nice to see hard numbers especially when they are positive.

Too bad the lack of buzz still has me puffing on the cancer sticks.

 

[cinetrope]

The most encouraging part of this report for me, (disclosure: I only read Dr. F's summary) is that NETs are so much safer (100x-1,000x) than combusted tobacco. NET is easy to DIY and nothing in the FDA "Deeming Regs" will make it any harder. As long as we can buy tobacco, PG, VG, and liquid nicotine we will be able to safely vape as a form of THR or NRT. It may become a little more expensive and there will be a knowledge based barrier to entry that will prevent the vast majority of people who wish to quit smoking from using vaping to do so. This is the long term human tragedy of the proposed FDA rule.

 

[Str8vision]

I agree, NET is easy to produce and there is little that upcoming government regulation/taxation can do that will impact home extractors. The tobacco we use is already taxed and you can make a significant amount of NET from very small amounts of tobacco. Unfortunately, the analysis/report also concludes that our NET contains little, if any, nicotine so while tasty, it is nicotine deficient. That's where my freezer load of 100mg nic comes in. I certainly hope the government isn't counting on any additional tax revenue coming from me or they will be - sorely - disappointed.

And yes this analysis/report does indeed indicate that NET is by "orders of magnitude" safer than smoking, but most of us already suspected that. This is the first analysis I have seen that included synthetics and macerated NET from several manufacturers which is why I consider it the first comprehensive scientific analysis of tobacco e-juice and specifically.... NET.

 

[Str8vision]

Nice to see hard numbers especially when they are positive.

Too bad the lack of buzz still has me puffing on the cancer sticks.

Have you tried using WTA's? I haven't but others claim it provides the "Buzz" NET lacks. Could be worth looking into.

 

[Str8vision]

One thing I wish these reports would include is specific details concerning what solvent(s) and extraction methods were used by the NET manufacturers being tested. Are cold processed ethanol extractions as squeaky clean as cold/hot processed PG extractions and vice versa. Does steam distillation and supercritical CO2 extraction produce as clean a product as does simple macerated soaks and vice versa? I've not seen a comprehensive analysis detailing side by side comparisons of the various solvents/methods. Would be helpful and informative data for extraction enthusiasts.

 

[Bagazo]

No, too expensive.

I have played around with extracts but not in the usual way. Seems like eveyone tries to get more flavor out of their's but I want less, so I can use it full strength. Have a couple of reasons for losing interest but hopefully I will get back to experimenting soon.