Harvard Eliquid Study Today

Status
Not open for further replies.

tj99959

ECF Guru
ECF Veteran
  • Aug 13, 2011
    15,116
    39,600
    utah
    Who only vapes one or two ml these days? Pick a juice that tests at 1000µg or higher. There are several of them that are quite popular. vape 6 or 7 ml a day, which is by no means an extreme amount, and you're there. DL 20 or 30 ml of that same juice a day and you're far exceeding it.

    Is it you or the vendor that decides how many ml of liquid you will inhale/day?
    Is it the liquid vendor or the PV/topper designers that is to blame for high consumption.

    I've said for years that sub ohm/high wattage vaping is stupid. Thanks for proving my point!
    The base reason for vaping is the consumption of nicotine. You can consume the same amount of nicotine/day at your arbitrary one or two ml/day as you do at your 20-30 ml/day.
     
    Last edited:

    David Wolf

    Moved On
    ECF Veteran
    Dec 11, 2014
    2,847
    6,780
    Charlotte, NC
    Who only vapes one or two ml these days? Pick a juice that tests at 1000µg or higher. There are several of them that are quite popular. Vape 6 or 7 ml a day, which is by no means an extreme amount, and you're there. DL 20 or 30 ml of that same juice a day and you're far exceeding it.
    Valid point, I vape 3 to 4 ml a day and many tootle puffers vape this much, while subohmers vape a lot more juice. This post and Dr. Siegel's response was in regards to the juice tested in the study, which used cartridges apparently, and for those the consumption is typically less. It is true subohmers typically vape a LOT more juice, I believe its safer than cigarettes. Even if you assume vaping 10 mils a day, the worst case diacetyl level in THIS study is less than that in one pack of cigarettes. Now argue that.
    It's fine if you want to discuss juices outside of the study with higher levels of diacetyl that are 1000µg or higher, but I do ask that you provide links to the study or tests. I assure you I will stay away from them, lol. My suggestion - vape LESS juice, higher nic, and try vaping unflavored - less is safer than more, of vaping, of cigarettes.

    I believe in testing so that we can make an informed choice. The test results of this study were exaggerated as to the dangers with no comparison to smoking in the test, and no solid evidence of harm from the diacetyl levels cited in the study, both in the conclusion and write-up, and that was the point of this post:
    Harvard study DATA shows Avg Diacetyl Exposure from Vaping 750 Times Lower than Smoking
     
    Last edited:

    DeAnna2112

    Super Member
    ECF Veteran
    Verified Member
    Apr 21, 2015
    817
    1,732
    Indiana
    Dr. F never elaborated on what his conclusions were based on other than referring to established safety limits.
    These limits were set arbitrarily low.
    There are no tests I know of where diketones suspended and dispersed in PG and or Vg were tested for toxicity.
    Regards
    mike

    Whether your walking around a factory inhaling diketones, inhaling a draw from a cig or putting a mod up to your mouth to inhale vapor...your still inhaling diketones into your lungs. The end result is the same...when diketones are present and inhaled test have shown a reduction in lung function.
    Dr F used this finding in his research and felt it was important enough to include and make note of.
     

    Rossum

    Eleutheromaniac
    Supporting Member
    ECF Veteran
    Verified Member
    Dec 14, 2013
    16,081
    105,232
    SE PA
    Is it you or the vendor that decides how many ml of liquid you will inhale/day?
    Is it the liquid vendor or the PV/topper designers that is to blame for high consumption.

    I've said for years that sub ohm/high wattage vaping is stupid. Thanks for proving my point!
    Is it you or the vendor who decides to vape juice with really high levels of diketones?

    Assuming of course that the vendor isn't outright lying to you...

    I've said for years that vaping juice with high diketone levels is stupid. Thanks for proving my point.

    ;)
     

    beckdg

    ECF Guru
    ECF Veteran
    Verified Member
    Oct 1, 2013
    11,018
    35,706
    TN
    Is it you or the vendor that decides how many ml of liquid you will inhale/day?
    Is it the liquid vendor or the PV/topper designers that is to blame for high consumption.

    I've said for years that sub ohm/high wattage vaping is stupid. Thanks for proving my point!
    The base reason for vaping is the consumption of nicotine. You can consume the same amount of nicotine/day at your arbitrary one or two ml/day as you do at your 20-30 ml/day.
    Ummm...

    They won't sell me NIC BASE that strong until I get a degree, a lab and start a related business.

    :blink:

    I'd have to vape 400 mg/ml.

    Your way doesn't work for me. Never will.

    Tapatyped
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Rossum

    Rossum

    Eleutheromaniac
    Supporting Member
    ECF Veteran
    Verified Member
    Dec 14, 2013
    16,081
    105,232
    SE PA
    Valid point, I vape 3 to 4 ml a day and many tootle puffers vape this much, while subohmers vape a lot more juice. This post and Dr. Siegel's response was in regards to the juice tested in the study, which used cartridges apparently, and for those the consumption is typically less. It is true subohmers typically vape a LOT more juice, I believe its safer than cigarettes. Even if you assume vaping 10 mils a day, the worst case diacetyl level in THIS study is less than that in one pack of cigarettes. Now argue that.
    It's fine if you want to discuss juices outside of the study with higher levels of diacetyl that are 1000µg or higher, but I do ask that you provide links to the study or tests. I assure you I will stay away from them, lol. My suggestion - vape LESS juice, higher nic, and try vaping unflavored - less is safer than more, of vaping, of cigarettes.

    I believe in testing so that we can make an informed choice. The test results of this study were exaggerated as to the dangers with no comparison to smoking in the test, and no solid evidence of harm from the diacetyl levels cited in the study, both in the conclusion and write-up, and that was the point of this post:
    Harvard study DATA shows Avg Diacetyl Exposure from Vaping 750 Times Lower than Smoking
    You'll get no argument from me that the headlines this study generated are pure hyperbole.

    FWIW: I go though around 6ml of juice a day at medium power (around 20 watts) in an MTl style, and there's a reason the 'l' is lower case. But I still wouldn't use a juice with 200-some ppm of diketones in it. Why? Because to me there's no particular flavor profile that's worth the potential risk. After 36 years of smoking, I'm addicted to nic and the habit, but not to any particular flavor.
     

    VNeil

    Ultra Member
    ECF Veteran
    Verified Member
    Jun 30, 2014
    2,726
    6,868
    Ocean City, MD
    Whether your walking around a factory inhaling diketones, inhaling a draw from a cig or putting a mod up to your mouth to inhale vapor...your still inhaling diketones into your lungs. The end result is the same...when diketones are present and inhaled test have shown a reduction in lung function.
    Dr F used this finding in his research and felt it was important enough to include and make note of.
    @ DeAnna2112, that is simply not true. No tests have actually demonstrated actual lung damage from diacetyls. Some studies have suggested a correlation, specifically in industrial mixing environments, mainly those popcorn mixing stations. The studies have found correlation, nothing more. There is far more than correlation to science. Although correlation is more than good enough for propaganda purposes.

    If you want to insist that all inhalation of diacetyl is the same then you have to explain this 50 Ton Elephant in the Diacetyl Room....

    The average exposure of the affected popcorn workers was 0.2 ppm, which works out to about 2700 micrograms per day of exposure, and that is only 5 days a week (presumably), and maybe 50 weeks a year. Or 250/365 = 68% of a full time exposure.

    The average amount of diacetyl released in a single cigarette is about 330 micrograms, which works out to around 6700 micrograms per day. That is around 2.5x the daily exposure that the popcorn workers received, and it is typically 7 days per week, 52 weeks a year (most don't take an annual week or two or three vacation from smoking). For a 2 PAD smoker, that is 5x the exposure. Factoring in true annual exposure would raise that by a third or so.

    In the popcorn worker cases studied, full blown BO, requiring lung transplants for continued survival, occurred within 10 years. Significant lung impairment was found in workers after only 2 years.

    If you want to insist that all diacetyl inhalation is the same, you have to explain why significant smoker related lung disease takes 30-40 years to develop, at 2-5x the diacetyl exposure or more, when popcorn workers got it in less than 10 years. How many cases of "advanced COPD" do you hear about in 10 year smokers? Where are the legions of 20-something year olds with advanced COPD?

    Some like to argue that BO is some silent epidemic, that millions of smokers have died over the years with advanced COPD (with death often for other reasons like stroke or heart attack) ETA: that was really BO in disguise, but not one of these lungs was autopsied. How many pictures have you seen of "smoker's black lungs" taken from cadavers? Do you believe none of these lungs were cut open to determine the nature of the lung impairment?

    Even if you want to believe that fiction, you have to explain the timeline discrepancy.

    There is so much more to the diacetyl story. Unfortunately it is unlikely that gov't will take much interest in studying that 50 ton elephant. After all, gov't has bought and paid for "research" it can use to declare vaping "extremely hazardous to your health", justifying any and all controls, bans, and most importantly, taxation. No need to look any further when the goal is taxation and control, not a search for the truth.

    But that does not mean we need to buy that line. Please apply some critical thinking to your argument.
     
    Last edited:
    • Like
    Reactions: Jman8

    beckdg

    ECF Guru
    ECF Veteran
    Verified Member
    Oct 1, 2013
    11,018
    35,706
    TN
    Whether your walking around a factory inhaling diketones, inhaling a draw from a cig or putting a mod up to your mouth to inhale vapor...your still inhaling diketones into your lungs. The end result is the same...


    Any doctor or scientist who doesn't assume there's variables to isolate isn't worth his weight in slung poo.

    This is just incorrect, period.

    Tapatyped
     

    David Wolf

    Moved On
    ECF Veteran
    Dec 11, 2014
    2,847
    6,780
    Charlotte, NC
    You'll get no argument from me that the headlines this study generated are pure hyperbole.

    FWIW: I go though around 6ml of juice a day at medium power (around 20 watts) in an MTl style, and there's a reason the 'l' is lower case. But I still wouldn't use a juice with 200-some ppm of diketones in it. Why? Because to me there's no particular flavor profile that's worth the potential risk. After 36 years of smoking, I'm addicted to nic and the habit, but not to any particular flavor.
    Totally agree with you Rossum. I know you've seen these test results from Vaporshark, but perhaps others have not - note that I have checked on a couple of the flavors listed, and it appears that some of them have changed their forumulas and are now testing:
    VaporShark E-Liquid Testing.pdf
    The high levels of AP are also something to avoid, IMHO.
     

    Alien Traveler

    Vaping Master
    ECF Veteran
    Jul 3, 2014
    4,402
    5,789
    United States
    You will have to show me a study showing "some ejuices" with diactyl levels greater than say, around 6718 micrograms for a ml or two before I believe that... it's not true my friend. :)
    And the only bias Dr. Siegal has is to make it clear that vaping is healthier than smoking, and the data supports that. And so do I.
    Why in 1 ml? In study we are discussing it is shown you can find a juice with 500+ ug per ml.
    Many vapers vape 10-20 ml (and more) per day. So, they may consume as much as 10,000 in one day.
    Now you can see why I did not like Siegel's silence on this.
     

    David Wolf

    Moved On
    ECF Veteran
    Dec 11, 2014
    2,847
    6,780
    Charlotte, NC
    Why in 1 ml? In study we are discussing it is shown you can find a juice with 500+ ug per ml.
    Many vapers vape 10-20 ml (and more) per day. So, they may consume as much as 10,000 in one day.
    Now you can see why I did not like Siegel's silence on this.
    I do. I am a firm believer in looking at the data for myself. I'm a numbers guy. :)
    So if you are going to compare worst case ejuice numbers, you should be fair and compare it to worst case cigarette smoke numbers, which Siegel DID provide:
    "Even if one looks at the maximum detected level of diacetyl in the electronic cigarettes vs. real cigarettes tested, the exposure of a smoker is much higher than that of a vaper.
    Table 2. Maximum inhaled daily diacetyl dose associated with smoking vs. vaping
    Vaping: 239 micrograms
    Smoking: 20340 micrograms (see Pierce et al., 2014)"
     

    sofarsogood

    Vaping Master
    ECF Veteran
    Oct 12, 2014
    5,553
    14,168
    I hoped starting out that I could vape and vape and vape some more without restraint. Sorry, not going to happen. I still have to resist vape creep for a variety of reasons. Too many ml's tends to irritate my mouth and lungs. The irritation is minimal but zero would be better. Avoiding suspect chemicals is on the list but well down the list. The universe of flavors is vast and the human palet is adaptable. Why not put some boundaries around the flavor thing? The main thing that got me inerested in rationing was figuring out what a stockpile should be in case of government interference. 3 liters of 100mg nic fits easily in the freezer. If I continue to vape 70 mg of nic per say it would last 10-12 years. If I could get it down to 25 mg per day and keep it there 3 liters is a 30 year supply. (If I end up mixing for my brother cut those numbers in half.) Vaping is way lower risk than smoking but self control still matters, unfortunately (life sucks).
     
    • Like
    Reactions: David Wolf

    beckdg

    ECF Guru
    ECF Veteran
    Verified Member
    Oct 1, 2013
    11,018
    35,706
    TN
    @ DeAnna2112, that is simply not true. No tests have actually demonstrated actual lung damage from diacetyls. Some studies have suggested a correlation, specifically in industrial mixing environments, mainly those popcorn mixing stations. The studies have found correlation, nothing more. There is far more than correlation to science. Although correlation is more than good enough for propaganda purposes.

    If you want to insist that all inhalation of diacetyl is the same then you have to explain this 50 Ton Elephant in the Diacetyl Room....

    The average exposure of the affected popcorn workers was 0.2 ppm, which works out to about 2700 micrograms per day of exposure, and that is only 5 days a week (presumably), and maybe 50 weeks a year. Or 250/365 = 68% of a full time exposure.

    The average amount of diacetyl released in a single cigarette is about 330 micrograms, which works out to around 6700 micrograms per day. That is around 2.5x the daily exposure that the popcorn workers received, and it is typically 7 days per week, 52 weeks a year (most don't take an annual week or two or three vacation from smoking). For a 2 PAD smoker, that is 5x the exposure. Factoring in true annual exposure would raise that by a third or so.

    In the popcorn worker cases studied, full blown BO, requiring lung transplants for continued survival, occurred within 10 years. Significant lung impairment was found in workers after only 2 years.

    If you want to insist that all diacetyl inhalation is the same, you have to explain why significant smoker related lung disease takes 30-40 years to develop, at 2-5x the diacetyl exposure or more, when popcorn workers got it in less than 10 years. How many cases of "advanced COPD" do you hear about in 10 year smokers? Where are the legions of 20-something year olds with advanced COPD?

    Some like to argue that BO is some silent epidemic, that millions of smokers have died over the years with advanced COPD (with death often for other reasons like stroke or heart attack) ETA: that was really BO in disguise, but not one of these lungs was autopsied. How many pictures have you seen of "smoker's black lungs" taken from cadavers? Do you believe none of these lungs were cut open to determine the nature of the lung impairment?

    Even if you want to believe that fiction, you have to explain the timeline discrepancy.

    There is so much more to the diacetyl story. Unfortunately it is unlikely that gov't will take much interest in studying that 50 ton elephant. After all, gov't has bought and paid for "research" it can use to declare vaping "extremely hazardous to your health", justifying any and all controls, bans, and most importantly, taxation. No need to look any further when the goal is taxation and control, not a search for the truth.

    But that does not mean we need to buy that line. Please apply some critical thinking to your argument.
    Not to mention DA...

    just airborne
    VS
    In smoke particles
    VS
    Suspended in solution

    And

    Every breath for 8-12 hrs a day
    VS
    At your leisure

    The simplest understanding of your typical msds makes it painfully obvious that there's a whole lot more to it than just how much...

    Tapatyped
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Coldrake

    Rossum

    Eleutheromaniac
    Supporting Member
    ECF Veteran
    Verified Member
    Dec 14, 2013
    16,081
    105,232
    SE PA
    @ DeAnna2112, that is simply not true. No tests have actually demonstrated actual lung damage from diacetyls. Some studies have suggested a correlation, specifically in industrial mixing environments, mainly those popcorn mixing stations. The studies have found correlation, nothing more. There is far more than correlation to science. Although correlation is more than good enough for propaganda purposes.

    If you want to insist that all inhalation of diacetyl is the same then you have to explain this 50 Ton Elephant in the Diacetyl Room....

    The average exposure of the affected popcorn workers was 0.2 ppm, which works out to about 2700 micrograms per day of exposure, and that is only 5 days a week (presumably), and maybe 50 weeks a year. Or 250/365 = 68% of a full time exposure.

    The average amount of diacetyl released in a single cigarette is about 330 micrograms, which works out to around 6700 micrograms per day. That is around 2.5x the daily exposure that the popcorn workers received, and it is typically 7 days per week, 52 weeks a year (most don't take an annual week or two or three vacation from smoking). For a 2 PAD smoker, that is 5x the exposure. Factoring in true annual exposure would raise that by a third or so.

    In the popcorn worker cases studied, full blown BO, requiring lung transplants for continued survival, occurred within 10 years. Significant lung impairment was found in workers after only 2 years.

    If you want to insist that all diacetyl inhalation is the same, you have to explain why significant smoker related lung disease takes 30-40 years to develop, at 2-5x the diacetyl exposure or more, when popcorn workers got it in less than 10 years. How many cases of "advanced COPD" do you hear about in 10 year smokers? Where are the legions of 20-something year olds with advanced COPD?

    Some like to argue that BO is some silent epidemic, that millions of smokers have died over the years with advanced COPD (with death often for other reasons like stroke or heart attack) ETA: that was really BO in disguise, but not one of these lungs was autopsied. How many pictures have you seen of "smoker's black lungs" taken from cadavers? Do you believe none of these lungs were cut open to determine the nature of the lung impairment?

    Even if you want to believe that fiction, you have to explain the timeline discrepancy.

    There is so much more to the diacetyl story. Unfortunately it is unlikely that gov't will take much interest in studying that 50 ton elephant. After all, gov't has bought and paid for "research" it can use to declare vaping "extremely hazardous to your health", justifying any and all controls, bans, and most importantly, taxation. No need to look any further when the goal is taxation and control, not a search for the truth.

    But that does not mean we need to buy that line. Please apply some critical thinking to your argument.
    Is an exposure of xxxx micrograms per day the same no matter whether it comes from smoking, vaping, or ambient air? I don't think so.

    Put someone in a room with a certain concentration of stuff in the ambient air. After a while, the concentration of stuff in the deepest recesses of their lungs will have equalized with the ambient air, and the exposure to that concentration in the deepest recesses of their lungs is then continuous for however long they remain in that room.

    Most smokers do not draw smoke very deeply into their lungs. I certainly didn't (at least not since college and that smoke wasn't tobacco). They expel most of the smoke they inhale, whereupon it becomes diluted in ambient air. The same is true for MTL vapers. The DL cloud-chasing vapers are a different breed. They do draw vapor down into the deepest recesses of their lungs..

    Then then there's the question of form/state the stuff is in. It it in gaseous form? Is it attached to small solid particulates? Is it suspended in an aerosol composed of liquid droplets? How does that affect the effects? We simply don't know.

    But that doesn't change the fact that this study and the headlines it generated are obvious hyperbole and clearly part of a propaganda campaign. It's like studying drinking water, finding some detectable level of arsenic in much of it, and then generating all sort of headlines implying that drinking water is unsafe.

    What I don't understand is vapers who make excuses for those vendors in the industry who continue to sell products with high levels of diketones in them, without disclosing that fact, or who've gone as far as hiding that fact and outright lying to their customers.
     

    Rossum

    Eleutheromaniac
    Supporting Member
    ECF Veteran
    Verified Member
    Dec 14, 2013
    16,081
    105,232
    SE PA
    I do. I am a firm believer in looking at the data for myself. I'm a numbers guy. :)
    So if you are going to compare worst case ejuice numbers, you should be fair and compare it to worst case cigarette smoke numbers, which Siegel DID provide:
    "Even if one looks at the maximum detected level of diacetyl in the electronic cigarettes vs. real cigarettes tested, the exposure of a smoker is much higher than that of a vaper.
    Table 2. Maximum inhaled daily diacetyl dose associated with smoking vs. vaping
    Vaping: 239 micrograms
    Smoking: 20340 micrograms (see Pierce et al., 2014)"
    And this is just as misleading (in the opposite direction) as the Harvard study. It assumes nobody vapes more than 1ml a day and that the highest concentration of diketones in any juice is 239 ppm. Both of these assumptions are obviously incorrect.
     

    skoony

    Vaping Master
    ECF Veteran
    Jul 31, 2013
    5,692
    9,953
    70
    saint paul,mn,usa
    Whether your walking around a factory inhaling diketones, inhaling a draw from a cig or putting a mod up to your mouth to inhale vapor...your still inhaling diketones into your lungs. The end result is the same...when diketones are present and inhaled test have shown a reduction in lung function.
    Dr F used this finding in his research and felt it was important enough to include and make note of.

    The workers in the factories were handling large amounts of powdered diacetyl. Its more
    likely the dry particulate matter released directly into the air when dumping large quantities
    into the mixers was more hazardous than when the diacetyl was blended into the mix and was
    just present as a vapor. Look up the the occupational hazards of working with silica sand.
    Almost any dry fine particulate matter will cause problems in large scale industrial settings.
    Crushed limestone,perlites,titanium dioxide,guar gum and various grades of sand. I am
    familiar with these in an industrial setting. I can't imagine the stuff used in food processing
    other than the copious amounts of flour that were used in the Burger King bun plant I temped
    in on and off.
    to summarily say that diacetyl suspended in PG and or VG acts the same as when suspended
    in air as fine dry particulate matter is simply not true and there is no evidence that it does.
    @VNeil What do you make of this breakdown of comparative exposures? I have seen conflicting
    figures from different sources.

    Everybody is talking about vaping and "popcorn lung" again, so here's a graph
    Regards
    Mike
     

    David Wolf

    Moved On
    ECF Veteran
    Dec 11, 2014
    2,847
    6,780
    Charlotte, NC
    And this is just as misleading (in the opposite direction) as the Harvard study. It assumes nobody vapes more than 1ml a day and that the highest concentration of diketones in any juice is 239 ppm. Both of these assumptions are obviously incorrect.
    Agree it's misleading to ignore people vape more than 1ml a day however that was also in the study. The study addressed specific juices so I do not believe it was misleading to address only those juices.
     

    sparkky1

    Vaping Master
    ECF Veteran
    Jul 8, 2014
    3,429
    2,686
    Nashville
    Whether your walking around a factory inhaling diketones, inhaling a draw from a cig or putting a mod up to your mouth to inhale vapor...your still inhaling diketones into your lungs. The end result is the same...when diketones are present and inhaled test have shown a reduction in lung function.
    Dr F used this finding in his research and felt it was important enough to include and make note of.

    Diacetyl and 2,3-pentanedione exposures associated with cigarette smoking: implications for risk assessment of food and flavoring workers. - PubMed - NCBI
     
    Status
    Not open for further replies.

    Users who are viewing this thread