How many chemicals are really in e-liquid?

[charlzrocks]

My point is that over and over again I see us putting down cigarettes for their 4000 chemicals while not even knowing how many or what chemicals compose e-liquid. We've compared the ingredients of one against the chemical composition of another which is disingenuous. Of course I'm going to consider the knowledge of harmful chemical compounds more important to benign ones but it never hurts to be informed overall. I just don't want to blindly follow what everybody says just because they say it. Pointing fingers at 4000 chemical substances while not even knowing exactly how many are in the substance I'm advocating isn't my style. So, are we going to compare chemical compositions to chemical compositions, ingredients to ingredients, or do as we've done so far and compare e-liquid ingredients against the chemical composition of tobacco?

I feel that the fact I am no longer inhaling smoke and the tar that resides within, let alone the supposed 4000 other chemicals a much better thing than to worry about the number of chemicals in a given smoke juice. The whole question to me is a moot point. I am doing better without tobacco cigarettes, period.

 

[Mr.Mann]

Perhaps its just me, but every time I hear something like 'x causes cancer' my scientific self wishes it was phrased as 'x is correlated to risk of cancer.'

To say 'x causes cancer' implies if you do x, you will get cancer. Thus, everyone reading this sentence, who has smoked, will inevitably get cancer. As we all know that is not true, then it seems far fetched to say smoking causes cancer. Which I think relates to what OP is getting at. But, I realize, that if every vaper in the world went on record as saying smoking doesn't cause cancer, but does appear to have high correlation to risk of getting cancer, that ANTZ would cut out everything from "but" and on and make us look like deniers of a 'known scientific fact.'

With that said, I completely believe a report will come out some day that says vaping causes cancer, because as this post by DougW1971 notes, "everything will kill you." And even if it isn't 'vaping causes cancer' it'll be something else within the ingredients that once a vaper, or handful of vapers, have passed away, it'll be something in eliquid that is correlated with that person's death. Vapers will play the deny game while ANTZ will sound the trumpets of warning for all to pay attention to the notion that if you vape, you will die.



In another recent thread here on ECF (that is now closed) it was suggested that saying just because certain chemicals in vaping are used in other substances, doesn't make it right to note that data. Or put another way, as was stated in that thread, it is contributing to misleading information. Like arsenic in the above list. One might think it would be hard for a smoker to defend decision to smoke if a poison like arsenic is something they are knowingly putting in their body. Yet google "arsenic and chicken meat" and be prepared to realize that if you've had chicken anytime in the last oh say 50 years, you've been putting arsenic into your body. Think this will cause people to stop eating chicken meat? Or lead to bans on chicken meat? Yeah, me neither.



Quotes like this one and a whole bunch of others (on this forum and elsewhere) almost always leave me questioning a few things, or at the very least do a double take. My ongoing wish is for vaping to stand on its own without having to compare it to smoking in order to make vaping seem healthy (or healthier). But I reckon I could live another 50 years and that wish will still remain unfulfilled, especially as some vapers become ex-smokers and then appear a lot like ANTZ in relation to smoking.

One question I have though is if smoking is so darn lethal, and made that way by BT, then how the heck are some of you who smoked 2 PAD's for 40 years still alive? Furthermore, if you are no longer smoking, but still vaping nicotine say for your 2nd year straight, and feel 'very healthy' then either 40 years of very heavy smoking isn't all that lethal, or you are incredibly, super duper lucky.

Bottom line for me on this post is I do actually agree with where OP is coming from in this thread. I think OP, myself and most, if not all readers of this thread, are on the same general page when it comes to vaping - do it because it is a cool, enjoyable, rather harmless way to feed a desire for nicotine. But in doing it and then constantly comparing it to smoking, it would be nice if statements, or so called facts, were comparing apples to apples, rather than making claims that look a lot like how ANTZ talks about smoking. Not only would it be nice, it would be intellectually honest.

Great post. I have been thinking about this thread a lot (though not reading or posting in it anymore, well, until now) and I still applaud the OPs desire to get to the bottom of things. I have some other vape-related stuff nagging me (about health concerns) and I must say, I am a bit hesitant with putting it out there simply because I don't want to start stuff without necessary backing. I am researching now, but it's all so speculative when you take unrelated research and try to apply it to vaping.

 

[kristin]

Sorry, but I've never seen a retailer without a CASAA banner on the web-site or on the B&M. I guess I just have a different idea of "grassroots" and "industry lobby". CASAA may be wonderful, honest, professional and objective people who do everything in their power to make sure that those commissioned to do studies know that the results are not part of a quid pro quo. I speak for myself when I say what I distrust and why. .

So, what exactly would it take to convince you that CASAA is grassroots and not an industry lobby?

We aren't even an "e-cigarette advocacy group," for Pete's sake. CASAA is a Tobacco Harm Reduction organization that promotes ALL reduced harm products - from smoke-free tobacco, to e-cigarettes to even gums and patches long-term (whatever works.) We are mostly vapers and e-cigs fall under the umbrella of THR, but if e-cigs were somehow shown to NOT be a THR product, CASAA would still exist and still be advocating THR policies using other safer alternatives.

CASAA does NOT represent any industry. CASAA represents consumers' right to truthful information about THR and access to safer, effective alternatives to smoking. Vendors display our logo because they support us because we share a common goal and CASAA.org is an informational and ad-neutral site they can direct their customers to. I've seen ignorant e-cig vendors supporting the ACS by displaying its logo or the pink ribbon campaign. I doubt anyone would claim that means the ACS is an e-cig industry lobby, too! (And the vast majority of vendors have never even heard of CASAA. I can attest to that just after seeing how many at VaperCon were completely unaware of our existance and vape meet /online folks are supposedly the most knowledgeable about vaping and the issues.)

 

[Jman8]

I have some other vape-related stuff nagging me (about health concerns) and I must say, I am a bit hesitant with putting it out there simply because I don't want to start stuff without necessary backing. I am researching now, but it's all so speculative when you take unrelated research and try to apply it to vaping.

I was recently thinking about how when noobs come into vaping forum and mention health items they are experiencing (i.e. headaches) and we vapers have umpteen suggestions to address this. Admittedly, sometimes we'll suggest to stop vaping altogether, but far more often it is in vein of doing something in addition to vaping. Whereas if someone was experiencing problems from smoking, I'm thinking everyone, well just about everyone, would say 'stop smoking!' And likely not say things like, drink water, make sure you exercise, try this vendor instead, perhaps ease up in how much you are smoking, etc, etc, etc.

My apologies to Mr.Mann if my point above had nothing to do with what you were getting at.

 

[kristin]

I was recently thinking about how when noobs come into vaping forum and mention health items they are experiencing (i.e. headaches) and we vapers have umpteen suggestions to address this. Admittedly, sometimes we'll suggest to stop vaping altogether, but far more often it is in vein of doing something in addition to vaping. Whereas if someone was experiencing problems from smoking, I'm thinking everyone, well just about everyone, would say 'stop smoking!' And likely not say things like, drink water, make sure you exercise, try this vendor instead, perhaps ease up in how much you are smoking, etc, etc, etc.

My apologies to Mr.Mann if my point above had nothing to do with what you were getting at.

If people did their research instead of assuming it's the vaping, they'd know most of the "symptoms" new vapers experience are commonly associated with just quitting smoking, too.

 

[Jman8]

If people did their research instead of assuming it's the vaping, they'd know most of the "symptoms" new vapers experience are commonly associated with just quitting smoking, too.

True to an extent, but I specifically chose headaches for a reason, as that has to do with dehydration, in my understanding. Also, as one who hasn't quit smoking, I experience some of that stuff, even still, but don't attribute it entirely to vaping, or smoking. Fairly certain if I did neither, I'd still get headaches.

 

[Mr.Mann]

I was recently thinking about how when noobs come into vaping forum and mention health items they are experiencing (i.e. headaches) and we vapers have umpteen suggestions to address this. Admittedly, sometimes we'll suggest to stop vaping altogether, but far more often it is in vein of doing something in addition to vaping. Whereas if someone was experiencing problems from smoking, I'm thinking everyone, well just about everyone, would say 'stop smoking!' And likely not say things like, drink water, make sure you exercise, try this vendor instead, perhaps ease up in how much you are smoking, etc, etc, etc.

My apologies to Mr.Mann if my point above had nothing to do with what you were getting at.

Hell, I don't care what it had to do with, it was funny as hell! Which reminds me, I got a hangnail.

p.s. PM sent about what I was alluding to.

 

[kristin]

I never say vaping is safe for everyone. Heck, even aspirin - one of our most trusted, natural and considered "safe" medicines - can kill. (BTW - headaches are always listed as a side effect of just quitting smoking, too.) That's why the ANTZ insistence that vaping prove to be "safe" at a much higher level than many of the other things we already consider safe just makes me crazy.

I remember years ago having an argument with an ANTZ about how health professionals could never endorse e-cigarettes because they have an oath to "do no harm" and if e-cigarettes could cause anyone harm or continue addiction, they cannot be endorsed (even if they were far safer than smoking.)

What a ridiculous argument.

Doctors stuff cancer patients with poison and give medications with potentially deadly and/or addictive side effects to billions of patients, because the potential benefits outweigh the risks (including the risk of smoking vs. the risk of death from Chantix.) How can anyone argue (with a straight face and not lying) that the benefits of switching to vapor from smoke don't far outweigh the risks in exactly the same way?

 

[aceswired]

I believe that vaping is probably safe, but there just is no certainty. There are some here that want to believe it so badly that even the suggestion of uncertainty puts them in a defensive mode. Cognative dissonance, I suppose.

Truth is we cant be sure. It may prove less than safe. Its possible. But smoking is certainly unsafe, so....

Sent from my YP-G1 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Jman8]

I believe that vaping is probably safe, but there just is no certainty. There are some here that want to believe it so badly that even the suggestion of uncertainty puts them in a defensive mode. Cognative dissonance, I suppose.

Truth is we cant be sure. It may prove less than safe. Its possible. But smoking is certainly unsafe, so....

How is smoking "certainly unsafe?"

To me, drinking a couple shots of chlorox is something I see as 'certainly unsafe.'

If smoking is certainly unsafe, then a great many vapers / ex-smokers are certainly super duper lucky, freaks of nature.

Truth is, we can't be sure that ANY substance on this planet is 100% safe.
Hence, eCigs are not 100% safe. And by this ^ assertion, neither is anything else on this planet.

I almost always refer to vapor, containing nicotine, especially exhaled, as relatively harmless. I wouldn't say that about chlorox that is ingested. Heck, I wouldn't even say that about liquor.

I fully believe 'studies will show' eCigs to be harmful. And then later research to counter that. And further research to counter that second wave of research. And a fourth, fifth and umpteen wave of research that concludes, 'well, it's not 100% safe, but if you can just get around our organizational bias on this subject, here is the (ahem) truth about eCigs.'

 

[Myk]

How is smoking "certainly unsafe?"

To me, drinking a couple shots of chlorox is something I see as 'certainly unsafe.'

If smoking is certainly unsafe, then a great many vapers / ex-smokers are certainly super duper lucky, freaks of nature.

Truth is, we can't be sure that ANY substance on this planet is 100% safe.
Hence, eCigs are not 100% safe. And by this ^ assertion, neither is anything else on this planet.

I almost always refer to vapor, containing nicotine, especially exhaled, as relatively harmless. I wouldn't say that about chlorox that is ingested. Heck, I wouldn't even say that about liquor.

I fully believe 'studies will show' eCigs to be harmful. And then later research to counter that. And further research to counter that second wave of research. And a fourth, fifth and umpteen wave of research that concludes, 'well, it's not 100% safe, but if you can just get around our organizational bias on this subject, here is the (ahem) truth about eCigs.'

Smoking is certainly unsafe because smoke inhalation is not safe.
You're confusing the level of unsafe as not unsafe. Just because smoking doesn't "cause" cancer doesn't remove the fact where it is adding pollutants to the lungs that are not easy for the body to remove. Smoking as a habit builds those up. Some people are better at removing them than others (something many in the medical community don't like to admit, we are all individuals and while group studies may show what works with most it ignores the individuals).

 

[Jay-dub]

Please excuse me for polluting the 'Holier Than Though' thread with more of my 'Mindless Drivel' your Esteemed Eminence. (wheres the gag icon?)

I was into my MD's office today. Being a noob and only 26 days tobacco free after a 40 year carton a week cigarette habit, I am still ecstatic over the changes I am seeing including a drop in blood pressure (10 points on systolic and 20 points on diastolic) after seeing my BP slowly climbing over the last couple of years. Both the nurse and the MD were curious about ecigs and I quoted a couple of studies included on the ECTA website. ECTA Informational Publications/Studies/Articles/Videos

Nobody can be a total walking encyclopedia of facts concerning any particular product but lets look at what Wikipedia has to say about tobacco additives. "This is the list of 599 additives in cigarettes submitted to the United States Department of Health and Human Services in April 1994." Keep in mind this is 599 'additives' not just the chemicals in raw tobacco. Need to know more? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_additives_in_cigarettes

Lets also keep in mind that a steak can be a healthy part of a diet when consumed in moderation. If you burn the crap out of that same steak and still eat it you are consuming carcinogens. It's funny how burning stuff can alter the chemistry so much, but it is what it is.

While I can't answer your specific question about what chemical changes take place in vaporizing e liquid I can quote another study done in Sept 2012.
"On the base of the obtained results and on ARPA data about urban pollution, we can conclude by saying that could be more unhealthy to breathe air in big cities compared to staying in the same room with someone who is vaping."
http://clearstream.flavourart.it/site/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/CSA_ItaEng.pdf

Sorry to have confused your high and mighty argument with facts, but those facts are good enough for me.

I guess since I must come across as an ... it must be drawing out all the asses around here. Being a jerk over a topic you obvisouly don't get the jist of is wasting time and space here pal. If it's "holier than though" for me to try to have a conversation and be informed despite repeated attempts by people like yourself to misrepresent not only my question but my intent then fine, I'm holier than though.

Now, screw this us vs. them mentality. I don't care about ANTZ, I don't care about your opinions and I'm only posing these questions to gather knowledge and expertise on the subject at hand. Damn near every question I've asked here has been ignored for a bunch a juvenile finger-pointers to pucker up thier sphincters over things I'm not saying. This is impossible. Go back to patting each other on the back all the time. I'm still going to want to understand any and all threats to a hobby of mine I'm passionate about. You can choose not speak up against a lack of knowledge and misinformation. Not just against vaping, but from the vaping community itself. Or, as you have done, you can use snide remarks and name calling to not address a question or address a question that hasn't even been posed. I guess I'm the ........

 

[Talyon]

I guess since I must come across as an ... it must be drawing out all the asses around here. Being a jerk over a topic you obvisouly don't get the jist of is wasting time and space here pal. If it's "holier than though" for me to try to have a conversation and be informed despite repeated attempts by people like yourself to misrepresent not only my question but my intent then fine, I'm holier than though.

Now, screw this us vs. them mentality. I don't care about ANTZ, I don't care about your opinions and I'm only posing these questions to gather knowledge and expertise on the subject at hand. Damn near every question I've asked here has been ignored for a bunch a juvenile finger-pointers to pucker up thier sphincters over things I'm not saying. This is impossible. Go back to patting each other on the back all the time. I'm still going to want to understand any and all threats to a hobby of mine I'm passionate about. You can choose not speak up against a lack of knowledge and misinformation. Not just against vaping, but from the vaping community itself. Or, as you have done, you can use snide remarks and name calling to not address a question or address a question that hasn't even been posed. I guess I'm the ........

Sorry but can't help if u just don't get it......

 

[Jay-dub]

This whole thread:

Me: What is it?
Everyone else: It's not bad for you so why would you say such a thing?
Me: Huh? So what is it?
Everyone else: You're an Antz trying some gotcha-type posting!
Me: All I want to do is know what it is?
Everyone else: Quit making accusations about this when you don't even know what it is.
Me: But... how am I to know if I don't ask?
Everone else: Your being a concern troll because you won't accpet the answers we've given you to questions you haven't asked.
Me: Can someone answer the damn question?
Kristen: We've done studies and so far only confirmed what we already know. The scope of the studies are narrowing and more peer reviewed studies are needed but everything looks optimistic but this is a big endeavor and will take time. As for our knowledge database of flavoring we don't really have much of one as of yet.
Me: OMG, do you really get what I'm asking or are you trying to lure me into a false sense of security then accuse me of being a saboteur?
Kristen: "another post with more sense than the rest of this entire thread combined."
Everyone else: Ya dude, you suck even though we're obviously not taking the time to understand your questions or intent.
Me: Right back at you everybody.

 

[Anjaffm]

for a bunch a juvenile finger-pointers to pucker up thier sphincters

Or, as you have done, you can use snide remarks and name calling

Now, what's wrong with this picture?

Thanks for the laugh of the day

 

[Mr.Mann]

Jay, there is no "one" eliquid for us to even answer you on. If you had specified, then it may be easier to delve into, but to just say "how many chemicals are really in eliquid?," the question is a bit broad, don't you think? And the "really" part presumes that there is a specific answer. There isn't. I mean, there are thousands of possible chemicals that could go into one liquid and likely millions of combinations. But the fact is that there is not, and never will be one answer. There could be 1 to as many as you want. Now, if you picked a chemical and asked about it, it would be easier to have a directed conversation. There can be no direction within this framework.

 

[Jay-dub]

Jay, there is no "one" eliquid for us to even answer you on. If you had specified, then it may be easier to delve into, but to just say "how many chemicals are really in eliquid?," the question is a bit broad, don't you think? And the "really" part presumes that there is a specific answer. There isn't. I mean, there are thousands of possible chemicals that could go into one liquid and likely millions of combinations. But the fact is that there is not, and never will be one answer. There could be 1 to as many as you want. Now, if you picked a chemical and asked about it, it would be easier to have a directed conversation. There can be no direction within this framework.

I think it would be beneficial to start with a widely-used flavoring. Say, Vanilla, which I have chosen arbitrarily. It really doesn't matter because it's already been admitted that there isn't much knowledge on the subject. I don't believe flavors could really be threatened in the vape world like in the analogue world because we'd just flavor our own if producers could no longer do it for us. So, maybe regulators could understand that despite a lack of research, one thing is for certain: People will get the flavors they want one way or another and the industry is ahead of the curve in understanding and using the best science of our time to ensure quality and health. Nothing wrong with that. I'm not sure ignorance due to lack of studies is something that would quell the beast though. But, I'll remain hopeful.

I'd join CASAA to remain posted on current happenings but I'm pretty sure, like 90% of the people in this thread, they'd be better off having a bunch of yes men/woman join to tell them how perfect everything is.

 

[kristin]

Kristen: We've done studies and so far only confirmed what we already know.

That's not exactly what I said. I said the ANTZ have done studies and completely misrepresented the data in a negative light (so what people call "what we already know" wasn't really the truth) and CASAA provided a grant for the study that cut through the BS and showed that even the ANTZ studies that claimed "potential harm" showed little to no health risks to vapers and bystanders.

Me: OMG, do you really get what I'm asking or are you trying to lure me into a false sense of security then accuse me of being a saboteur?

I'm a little confused by this part of your post. I never accused you of being a saboteur? Or are those two separate thoughts?

 

[Jay-dub]

Now, what's wrong with this picture?

Thanks for the laugh of the day

Try having a bunch of people who don't understand the question make accusations at you over and over again. Restate the same question over and over again only to have it ignored and answers given that don't even pertain to the question by people treating you like your stupid. Fine, you're better than me. Now that we've established the point YOU want to make, will you please either add to or get out of the conversation? Thanks.

 

[Jay-dub]

I'm a little confused by this part of your post. I never accused you of being a saboteur? Or are those two separate thoughts?

That was me being suspicious of your sincerity. You never accused me of anything. Your response compared to the rest of this thread was almost too good to be true is all...