forum posts without sources

[macstrat]

there was a post made in the forum regarding the hazards of high voltage vaping. while i do not disagree with the hazards at all, i do think that when ecf is giving advice to people instead of dictating why things are bad, the sources for those studies and information should be cited. This will allow people to read the material adn make a proper informed decisions. if it is something that they do not understand then that is here they can as question on the forum, but referencing a study or research paper and then not linking to it is not only bad form, it also makes us, after a while, look like we are making stuff up. please cite your sources

aforementioned post: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/rebuildable-atomizer-systems/562106-ecf-sub-ohm-advisory.html

 

[rolygate]

Fair enough.

I write material that I know to be correct based on either experience of the millions of posts on ECF, my engineering background, research that I have read and know to be valid, the advice of professionals in any area that I am not competent to make judgements in, and especially a combination of all.

In order to write the post in the form of a research paper, which needs extensive citations in order to be of the correct format, it would take me a lot longer since collating research doubles or triples the time factor (for me - as I have no assistants). In addition, I cannot cite references where the post is made as a result of my experience - it is an opinion and can be taken as such because it does not cite any evidence.

The advisory on sub-ohm vaping was made as a response to the continual accusations of danger that we regularly see on this subject. I wanted to make it absolutely clear that sub-ohming is not dangerous, because we have not seen any evidence that it is. The first sentence of the advisory makes it very clear that we do not regard sub-ohming as dangerous at this time.

ECF does not dictate anything to anyone, but it is certainly our duty to give advice when we know beyond doubt that it is true.

So, if your enquiry is regarding this aspect: you feel that it is dangerous, and we should change our advisory accordingly, then please provide me with evidence for the particular aspect of risk you believe needs to be better emphasised.

If your enquiry, on the other hand, is regarding the many and varied notes of interest I have included, please advise which needs to be better explained - thank you.

Many thanks for your interest and assistance on this.

 

[macstrat]

First. I agree 100% with what you said and the way that it was phrased. I have read the studies and from my knowledge of chemistry and the lack of information we have currently on the manufacturing processes and standards of wick/juice makers that it is a hazardous issue that should be addressed.

In regards to experience, I can understand that completely. Information on things like batteries is general knowledge for some, and if it isn’t there are thousands of pages on battery information and how to care for and more importantly, what you shouldn’t do with a battery. To me that should be part of the research that’s done when you start vaping.

My main concern is that when I get users that come to me asking about a post that references a study, I have nothing to give them. My concern is that if we are going to be referencing studies and research, we (ecf) should provide a link to those papers so that the users can be better informed and there is less of a chance that things will be taken out of context from those studies. Something that can point them toward the information for their own decision making progress. If they don’t want to read them, that’s on them, but we at least provided the studies to back up what we are saying.

The two that I was asked about were:
1. A research study has already indicated that the vapor created by high-power vaping contains more potentially toxic compounds
2. Dr Farsalinos' recent study reports that a very high percentage of cream-type flavors contain diacetyl even when the vendor claims there is none present

As for the dictate comment, that was misphrased and I apologize for that. I reread that myself and drew a blank. What I wanted to get across is that because ecf is a leader in the ecig community, when ecf puts out a warning on a sticky, people tend to view it as either a directive or as fact, and 2 studies, does not make a solid foundation, it merely should make us think "maybe I should do some investigating into that." by providing the links to papers that are referenced, we can at least help then start on that journey.

 

[rolygate]

Thanks.

Re #1, the latest study to address this is Kosmider et al. Will see if I can find a link.

#2. See the posts by Dr Farsalinos and Kurt Kistler ('Kurt'), his co-author (a pro chemist who has been advising us on ECF for 4 or 5 years) on ECF in the thread 'Donate to Dr Farsalinos study'. They report that 7 out of 10 of the flavors they tested contained DA or AP, which they regard as toxic, even though all of the vendors told them their flavors were free of these materials.

This means that 7 out of 10 vendors are guilty of fraud and possibly criminal negligence. They are either lying or possibly even completely unaware of the toxic content of their products.

 

[rolygate]

I have seen literally hundreds of posts here on ECF warning people that "sub-ohming is dangerous".

It seemed important to point out that, as far as we know, it isn't. We have zero reports of injury or any other harm. This is an important issue because when something definitely is dangerous, such as stacking batteries in a mechmod, and when appalling injuries have resulted from it, then people need to take our warnings about it very seriously indeed. Therefore, warnings about something that has produced absolutely no incidents so far, that we know of, should be avoided - otherwise people will not take warnings seriously.

The very first sentence of the advisory makes it quite clear that we do not regard sub-ohming as dangerous. If this is not clear then I will edit the post to make it clearer.

This does not alter the fact that, like many things, individuals can take something that appears reasonably safe and make it dangerous.

It is vitally important that beginners are informed that some posts on ECF contain extremely bad advice that may put them at significant risk.

The problems that might be encountered with sub-ohming are limited to those people who go beyond the boundaries of safety. For example we have seen recent posts that advise people to stack batteries. This is terrible advice, as doing this in the past has resulted in serious injuries from explosions in these virtually sealed metal tubes, along with multiple home fires.

This bad advice must be countered immediately and strongly.

Also see this recent post about the madness of using stacked batteries when far better options exist:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...tacked-battery-experience-2.html#post13705157

We have also seen posts where it is suggested that people are using coils of such low resistance that they are vaping 20ml of refill liquid a day at 80 watts. Beginners may not know of the clear risks involved with consuming such huge amounts of super-heated refill per day when we already know that 7 out 10 products of the creamy/custardy type of flavor that may be used is contaminated with toxic adulterants, never mind the risks of super-heating average refills.

Beginners must be clearly and strongly advised that following advice to act in this way is a really terrible idea.

So to recap: sub-ohming is not dangerous, because we have not seen any incidents or harm as a result. However, there is some terrible advice circulating currently, and that needs to be very strongly countered, especially for beginners who may not know of the issues. It is entirely conceivable that some advice may lead to practices that entail more risk than smoking, and this is not the purpose of ecig use or ECF.

 

[JMarca]

I have seen literally hundreds of posts here on ECF warning people that "sub-ohming is dangerous".

It seemed important to point out that, as far as we know, it isn't. We have zero reports of injury or any other harm. This is an important issue because when something definitely is dangerous, such as stacking batteries in a mechmod, and when appalling injuries have resulted from it, then people need to take our warnings about it very seriously indeed. Therefore, warnings about something that has produced absolutely no incidents so far, that we know of, should be countered - otherwise people will not take warnings seriously.

The very first sentence of the advisory makes it quite clear that we do not regard sub-ohming as dangerous. If this is not clear then I will edit the post to make it clearer.

This does not alter the fact that, like many things, individuals can take something that appears reasonably safe and make it dangerous.

It is vitally important that beginners are informed that some posts on ECF contain extremely bad advice that may put them at significant risk.

The problems that might be encountered with sub-ohming are limited to those people who go beyond the boundaries of safety. For example we have seen recent posts that advise people to stack batteries. This is terrible advice, as doing this in the past has resulted in appalling injuries from explosions in these virtually sealed metal tubes, along with multiple home fires.

This bad advice must be countered immediately and strongly.

Also see this recent post about the madness of using stacked batteries when far better options exist:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...tacked-battery-experience-2.html#post13705157

We have also seen posts where it is suggested that people are using coils of such low resistance that they are vaping 20ml of refill liquid a day at 80 watts. Beginners may not know of the clear risks involved with consuming such huge amounts of super-heated refill per day when we already know that 7 out 10 products of the creamy/custardy type of flavor that may be used is contaminated with toxic adulterants, never mind the risks of super-heating average refills.

Beginners must be clearly and strongly advised that following advice to act in this way is a really terrible idea.

So to recap: sub-ohming is not dangerous, because we have not seen any incidents or harm as a result. However, there is some terrible advice circulating currently, and that needs to be very strongly countered, especially for beginners who may not know of the issues. It is entirely conceivable that some advice may lead to practices that entail more risk than smoking, and this is not the purpose of ecig use or ECF.

Roly, would it be fair to say we're seen no negative effects so far?
Being that the practice of sub ohm vaping is new and we are still unclear as to it's long term effects.

 

[rolygate]

As far as we know, sub-ohming has little elevation of risk. Specifically, there are no battery-related incidents reported*. Remember that even the Provari has multiple reports of battery meltdowns, so a sense of proportion needs to be maintained.

As regards overheating the refills, that is a different matter. It probably isn't a good idea, but then it's an individual's choice. Experienced members probably know that overcooking their e-liquid is not a great idea, there has been enough discussion of vapor research on here.

What is plain wrong is that there has been a lot of bad advice about specific modes of sub-ohm usage recently, and these could easily get picked up by beginners with no history in vaping, and who are therefore not equipped to evaluate risk. Beginners stacking batteries in a mechmod, or using sub-0.1 ohm coils and burning huge quantities of refill daily, is a frightening prospect.

People can do whatever they like but at least they need to know what the risks are. That is ECF's job and has always been ECF's job.


* [edit]
Update Sept 2014
A mechmod exploded at the VapeBlast event during a Cloud Contest. This is the first sub-ohm serious battery incident reported so far.

 

[joesquid]

So rolly,

I very new to vaping but not electronics and understand the problems associated with using batteries in series. Has there been any problems attributed to using batteries in parallel or do people not do it because they don't increase the voltage? Unless I'm overlooking something, it would be much safer because you double the current handling capability.

 

[rolygate]

In vaping it's all down to the equipment available plus fashion.

Boxmods can use a parallel battery circuit, but tubemods can only use single or series circuits. Because tubemods are where it's at right now (mechmods), there isn't really an option to use a parallel battery set-up. You'd get more battery life that way (amp-hours) but it looks as if the people who want that are using mega devices that fit a 26650 cell.

There are plenty of people who prefer boxmods but all the noise is coming from the metal tube mechmod people just now )

 

[p7willm]

Lack of evidence of harm does not mean there is no harm.

At one point doctors encouraged smoking, cigarette filters had added asbestos, ...... was sold to quiet babies.

Ecigarettes, as we use them now, have only been around for 10 years, which is not enough time to do an epidemiological study, even if someone tried.

You can say that all our ingredients are tested but only a very few have been tested for inhalation. If it was not for the nice people in the popcorn factories we would be vaping the stuff that gave them popcorn lung when they inhaled an ingredient that is safe for human consumption. What other flavoring ingredients are safe to eat but not to vape?

Using common sense vaping is better than smoking, but common sense can be wrong.

Is the outcome better for a smoker who tries to quit using the patch and a support group or for a smoker who vapes. What are the success rates for both? What happens to a large group of smokers who try vaping for 5 years, 10, years, 30 years? How many go back to smoking and how many have a problem caused by vaping?

If kids see people vaping how many of them will vape? How many will smoke? After 30 years is the better outcome for society to vape or not?

I do not think I will burst into flames if I use a .2 Ohm build. I do think it is less safe to use .2 than .6, but I DO NOT KNOW. TFA wild strawberry might turn into the elixir of life when vaped at .2 Ohms or it might kill me after 20 years.

 

[5150sick]

The only problem I see is these evil senators surely do not know the difference between a .25ohm coil or a 2.5ohm coil.
It would be safe to say that they don't even care.

But I can guarantee 100% that they have people on this forum reading these posts.

We start saying that ANY form of vaping is unsafe and it will be taken out of context and the next headline in USA today will read:

"12 Senators warn that Even professional ecigarette users say that ecigarettes cause cancer"

These people are saying right now that unflavored nic base at 60mg/ml is being vaped as regular eliquid!!!

Does anybody reading this seriously think that the Antz and Senators care about ohms law???
Or do they care about spinning this into something evil??

They (Evil Senators & ANTZ) ARE in here reading these posts daily. You are kidding yourselves if you think they are not!

 

[CKCalmer]

This means that 7 out of 10 vendors are guilty of fraud and possibly criminal negligence. They are either lying or possibly even completely unaware of the toxic content of their products.

But wouldn't that be like taking ten glasses of water from the Pacific ocean, then determining that the water contains 21% of this, 5% of that and so forth, so therefore the entire ocean must also contain the same 21% of this, 5% of that, etc.?

The Pacific is a big ocean - almost as big as the ocean of e-juice brands and flavors in the world right now.

 

[Tangaroav]

But wouldn't that be like taking ten glasses of water from the Pacific ocean, then determining that the water contains 21% of this, 5% of that and so forth, so therefore the entire ocean must also contain the same 21% of this, 5% of that, etc.?

The Pacific is a big ocean - almost as big as the ocean of e-juice brands and flavors in the world right now.

No, it means that 70% of tested e-juice were wrongly labeled and contained toxic ingredients.

Now, this study indicates that we NEED regulations to protect our health from a large % of charlatans, swindlers and incompetent vendors.

 

[CKCalmer]

70% of a small subset of e-juices were improperly labeled and contained toxic ingredients. It's not that action shouldn't be taken against them. It should. But you'd have to test thousands of e-juices to claim a widespread problem.

You did say that 70% of tested e-juices were dangerous, and as such, I agree that that statement is correct.. But I would worry about an implication that there is a problem with e-juices in a larger context. They'd have to test many more e-juices to be right with such a claim.

If thousands were tested, then please accept my apology for not knowing such.

 

[Tangaroav]

I agree with you that this does not mean that this 70% will hold if more e-juice vendors were tested. But I am worried that with all the new B&M and online e-juice vendors opening up all over the place, without standards, it becomes a free-for-all. This % could very easily get worst.

What really frightens me is that warnings about potential dangers of e-juice ingredients by E-cig experts like Doc Kistlers do not seem to stir much interest to vapers.

As an exemple here is a thread about the potential dangers of Organic flavorings, which seem to be one of the prefered flavoring of 'premium' juices:

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...sion/586462-organic-flavoring-e-liquid-2.html

That thread had around 500 views, and only 11 comments in two months. It refers to a recommendation from an interview of the Vapingreek with Doc. Kistler to stay away from organice flavorings, (who wants rotten organic compounds in their lungs he says). Doc Kistler recommends synthetic flavorings.

 

[tj99959]

Well I'm one of those that openly says that sub ohm vaping can be dangerous.

So why do I say this:
#1 There is a huge difference between 0.9 ohms and 0.09 ohms. There is no battery made that is safe @ 0.1 ohms. (0.1ohm@4.2v=42a)
#2 There is no longer a way to insure that batteries are what they are represented to be, even from "so called" trusted sources. That VTC5 may be a 25r, or it may be an UltraFire, there is no way that the average person can tell.
#3 There are way to many so called "experts" that have no EE background what so ever.
#4 There is a flood of very dangerous box mods on the market right now being made for ultra sub ohm vaping.


{MOD EDIT: Video removed}