Hello and such greetings from RVA; Scientist here with sub-ohm related study

[nksmith86]

Hello ECF,

Been a regular face around reddit (or regular user name if you wish) and I caught wind of the new sub-ohm sticky and had to come see for myself. I have caused quite a stink in ECR regarding the topic and have come overt share my piece. Well, that and reddit has become a little more hostile than when I first joined ECR and I think its time for a slight change of pace.

In all honesty, I am here to comment and provide my input regarding the sub-ohm risk thread. I am presently conducting a research study at my university on the subject and I am plotting several different conditions including temp, and toxin content as temp increases. Yes, I have covered all of my bases, yes there will be airflow with wet wick and wire setups as well as raw dry wick and wire data. Truth be told the data is looking to shift towards being in favor of the warning. I will hopefully be publishing at the end of the summer; so if ya sit tight we can get some real, unbiased, neat and clean data and hopefully a conclusion that most of us can live with with minor refute.

Edit: My having a bit of inside perspective has told me this; The politics involved in the e-cig industry and in research areas is more ridiculous than you might think. Imagine sorority girls fighting over the president of the most popular fraternity and add Kim Kardashian and you have a slight idea of what it looks like. Drama FO DAYZ.

There are several issues with current studies:

1). There has been a massive influx of researchers because THIS is where all the money and notoriety is.

2). Most of the researchers aren't hard scientist. Meaning, they aren't biologists, chemists or analytical researchers. A lot are run by addictive studies researchers like another study being run at my Univ.

3). Addictive studies isn't analytical physics or analytical chem

4). .......**Most of these researchers aren't HARD SCIENTISTS**

5). The FDA pushing for results ends up in hurried studies and bad data.

6). These studies aren't run by vapers, and therefore don't have the proper insight and understanding that a gaping scientist may have.

7). Consulting everyday average joe vapers and perusing ECF does not make these researchers experts. To me research is like method acting; to know, you must do.

 

[chellemmm]

10 characters

 

[klynnn]

I look forward to your results when they come in. Welcome.

 

[v1k1ng1001]

Edit: My having a bit of inside perspective has told me this; The politics involved in the e-cig industry and in research areas is more ridiculous than you might think. Imagine sorority girls fighting over the president of the most popular fraternity and add Kim Kardashian and you have a slight idea of what it looks like. Drama FO DAYZ.

There are several issues with current studies:

2). Most of the researchers aren't hard scientist. Meaning, they aren't biologists, chemists or analytical researchers. A lot are run by addictive studies researchers like another study being run at my Univ.

6). These studies aren't run by vapers, and therefore don't have the proper insight and understanding that a gaping scientist may have.

As a philosopher, I find much of the discourse that is circulating in the media, i.e. soundbytes by doctors, scientists and public officials that don't understand vaping or the larger socio-ethical context, very troubling. On the other hand, there are a few that are right on the mark but they then appear to be the minority.

Good luck with your study. The kind of study you have planned is exactly what we need.

 

[tj99959]

Just remember;
Studies released before peer review is junk science.

 

[DoubleEwe]

Sounds very interesting, looking forward to hearing (reading) the results.

Just wondering if your study will include different wicking materials too? (Cotton, Silica, Ecowool, Ceramics etc)

 

[Completely Average]

I am presently conducting a research study at my university on the subject and I am plotting several different conditions including temp, and toxin content as temp increases.

That sounds great at face value, but it does beg a serious question.

When you find this "toxin content" are you also going to include the amount of exposure in both volume and time that it takes for these toxins to cause damage?

After all, your body requires zinc for you to live, but too much zinc can cause permanent neurological damage. Simple ingesting a toxin doesn't mean you're going to suffer any bad effects from it. The amount, and amount ingested over time play a huge role in the effects of ingesting toxic substances.


For example, most of us are aware that many ecig flavorings include diacetyl, which when inhaled can cause bronchiolitis obliterans, also known as "popcorn lung". But are the amounts we are inhaling while vaping enough to cause popcorn lung or is the dosage too small and/or too infrequent to do any long term damage?