I need the antifreeze thing cleared up

[thewomenfolk]

I can't find a thread that fully explains why we can accurately claim that the PG we use is not the same thing that's used in Antifreeze.

Is Proplyene Glycol actually stated on bottles of Vanilla flavoring as an ingredient? Is it also stated as an ingredient on Antifreeze bottles? I'm confused.

 

[skyward]

anti freeze is ethylene glycol, it's apples and oranges

 

[tmbrown327]

PG is used in a lot of ways. One of the uses is in anti-freeze, a way to make it less or non-toxic. I'm sure they use a less pure (industrial) grade for this application, but it's still PG. Just the fact that it's used as an ingredient in this application doesn't mean it's harmful to us. There are a lot of threads on this.

 

[AngusATAT]

PG is used in a lot of liquid medications. Somehow I doubt that means that the pharmacists are all out to kill us.

Water is also an ingredient found in antifreeze. Does that mean the FDA should ban water?

It's called scare tactics.

 

[Nokosa]

Water is also an ingredient found in antifreeze. Does that mean the FDA should ban water?

It's called scare tactics.

This is pretty much the answer. There are several ingredients in anti-freeze that we use commonly on a daily basis, such as water.

Just because an ingredient is found in something harmful to us doesn't make that ingredient itself harmful.

Think of it as chemistry. Take two perfectly harmless ingredients and mix them together and they can make a deadly poison. Same concept.

PG is perfectly fine. PG, as an ingredient itself, is approved by the FDA. Go figure.

 

[catwoman19]

PG is used in a lot of liquid medications. Somehow I doubt that means that the pharmacists are all out to kill us.

Water is also an ingredient found in antifreeze. Does that mean the FDA should ban water?

It's called scare tactics.

Splenda is derived from sugar but it's first use was in clorox, I still use it in my coffee. You would have to be a chemist to assess what is toxic or not.Pg is also used in icing

 

[RenaissancePuffer]

While the wiki is not always the best source of information, their entry for PG is a good one. This may help answer some questions.

Propylene glycol - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[thewomenfolk]

Thanks for all your answers. Now I can at least speak about the issue with some real knowledge. Thanks for the Wiki link, good info! As for Proplylene Glycol it says... "The most direct way of applying a substance to the human body is injection into the blood or the tissue, closely followed by ingestion or inhalation. Making the curing agent reliably available to the organism is key to the efficiency of any pharmaceutical application. Propylene glycol USP/EP (pharmaceutical grade) is qualified and approved for this use as laid down in the respective Pharmacopoeia (USA, EU, Japan etc.)."

Yepsidoozers!!!

 

[dedmonwakin]

"In all fairness, it should be stated that PG was only added to anti-freeze to replace Ethylene Glycol. It had been a problem because dogs often lap up puddles of anti-freeze."

Propylene Glycol: The Good, the Bad and the Alternatives

 

[Eibhilin]

I used to work in supplements, and for YEARS the FDA has been trying to convince people that PG is safe for consumption.

accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?fr=582.1666

It's commonly used like aforementioned as an additive or carrier in medications, as well as used in foods, cosmetics, deodorants, supplements (Twinlabs Fish Oil for one) etc. I think it's hilarious that they use the preexisting public stigma of a product they've pushed so hard to show is safe to villainize a product that can save millions of lives. The wording I noticed in one of these reports given - "Propylene glycol is a component of antifreeze, a known carcinogen".

Unless the FDA is referring to carcinogens as "Generally recognized as safe", then the only concerns remain about ethylene glycol, and methanol which according to the same databases, either of which are carcinogenic either. Now you don't want to go ingesting the stuff either, for example ethylene glycol is known to cause crystallization/calcification in tissue, eg: kidneys.

From the CDC Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease Registry:

• 
  Ethylene glycol ingestion first affects the central nervous system (CNS). After a characteristic latent period, signs of inebriation may be followed by serious illness and even death, caused by toxic metabolites.
  
  Propylene glycol, which is much less toxic than ethylene glycol, is metabolized to compounds that are normal constituents of the citric acid cycle.
  
  No health effects have been reported in persons chronically exposed to ethylene glycol or propylene glycol at levels found in the environment.

This said I would be concerned about the material components used in liquids but if you're buying from a reputable dealer the likelihood that your liquid is any more dangerous than fish oil or cough syrup is slim. There is such a wealth of information and misinformation out there and the FDA, as always, is at the forefront.

(Maybe the better question is who stands to gain from a ban on a product that would potentially save one in ten lives? philly.com/inquirer/health_science/daily/20090924_FDA_bans_flavored_cigarettes.html)

 

[kristin]

First of all, the FDA didn't make any comments in it's report about propylene glycol being danagerous. It found trace amounts of diethylene glycol, which is a component in anti-freeze, in ONE sample.

Here is a link to their actual press release: FDA and Public Health Experts Warn About Electronic Cigarettes

Ignorant people blogging and reposting on the web changed it to say "propylene glycol" and started confusing people.

Propylene glycol is a food base. YES, it is used as a base in MANY artificial flavorings. I was just at the store a couple of days ago and checked - it was in 3 different McCormick liquid flavors, including imitation vanilla.

It is also in my toothpaste in my medicine cabinet.

If someone adds tea to arsenic, does that make tea dangerous by itself? Just because they may add PG to some antifreeze doesn't make the PG dangerous by itself. But, we're not even talking about propylene glycol in anti-freeze, it's diethylene glycol.

 

[RIMP]

It's also used in inhalers as apropellant/base for medicationsNOTHING is 100% safe I'd rather take my chances with 4-6 ingredients used in our food all the time, well except nic, than the 3000-4000 chemicals and carcinogens in cigs It's a new thing, and down the road we'll see where it leads But we all know what cigs lead to



RIMP

 

[Heed]

But we all know what cigs lead to

Vaping?

 

[scott58]

Vaping?

Good one!

 

[Kate51]

Great point, Kristin, the PG acts as a carrier, a surfactant, to the indgredients to keep everything suspended. Sugar in Kool-aid, comes to mind. Some people drink way too much KoolAid!!

 

[djabsynth]

I can't find a thread that fully explains why we can accurately claim that the PG we use is not the same thing that's used in Antifreeze.

Is Proplyene Glycol actually stated on bottles of Vanilla flavoring as an ingredient? Is it also stated as an ingredient on Antifreeze bottles? I'm confused.

In order to clear this up, there are 3 chemicals we need to look at. ETHYLENE glycol, PROPYLENE glycol, and DIETHYLENE glycol

First off, you'll notice they are all glycols - a generic name used in chemistry to describe certain alcohols

ETHYLENE glycol is antifreeze. This is the stuff you buy at Walmart and mix with water to protect your engine. It's usually dyed some fluorescent color and is very toxic. If you spill some while working on your vehicle, immediately clean it up as it has sweet taste and might attract animals.

PROPYLENE glycol is used in eliquid (and just about everything else) It is GRAS (geneerally recognized as safe) by the FDA and can be found in a multitude of products, foods, and cosmetics.

DIETYLENE glycol is the chemical that the FDA is concerned about. Ironically, it is used in COOLING systems as it's "antifreeze" properties are very poor, only lowering the freezing temp by a few degrees. It is toxic in humans. This chemical is the one that caused the FDA to be created (look up "Elixir sulfanilamide incident")


I personally feel the FDA (and many others) used the "antifreeze" argument as a scare tactic and sound bite. Compare these statements:

"One sample contained Diethylene Glycol, used in antifreeze..."
"One sample contained Diethylene Glycol, used in curing tobacco..."

or how about:

"..containing nicotine and propylene glycol, which is used in antifreeze."
"..containing nicotine and propylene glycol, which is used in hand sanitizer."

 

[Eibhilin]

First of all, the FDA didn't make any comments in it's report about propylene glycol being danagerous. It found trace amounts of diethylene glycol, which is a component in anti-freeze, in ONE sample.

Here is a link to their actual press release:

I noted that in the press release after I'd read the article I was referring to. I feel like it's not so much the issue of the FDA's press release at this point as most people are going develop impressions based on what they're seeing on the news, reading in their papers or magazines.

These largely are twisting the facts, and worse yet the FDA's testing wasn't peer reviewed, there were no medical trials, nothing clearly indicative of anything either way, but this is their very argument against the product when analog cigarettes kill millions of people each year?

At this point I would take anything the FDA has to say with a grain of salt. I can understand that they want studies for product that may be harmful but their assertions that there was TSNA detection without giving specific levels of contaminants seems irresponsible to me, especially since we could probably find trade levels of nitrosamines in tap water.

Anyway I digress, I'm going kind of off topic and this is only my 2nd post.

Time to find a tea alternative?

 

[kristin]

Time to find a tea alternative?

LOL!

Yeah, it's hard for us, because everyone (against e-cigs) seems to be ignoring the "reduced harm" concept.

They expect e-cigs to be 100% safe.

I said this in comments to another article against egics:

Using a parachute is not 100% safe. Yet, jumping out of an airplane without one is obviously much more dangerous.

Using a personal vaporizer is not 100% safe. Yet, smoking a tobacco cigarette obviously much more dangerous!

 

[RIMP]

Vaping?

Ya know Everyone likes a little a** but nobody likes a smarta** except me And vaping is so much better than the C




RIMP

 

[kristin]

These largely are twisting the facts, and worse yet the FDA's testing wasn't peer reviewed, there were no medical trials, nothing clearly indicative of anything either way, but this is their very argument against the product when analog cigarettes kill millions of people each year?

Actually, the FDA purposely contributed to the confusion.

They could have chosen to emphasize that the amounts of "dangerous" ingredients in e-cigs were miniscule compared to tobacco cigarettes. They could have pointed out that some of the things they found were also commonly found in other NRTs, which they approve. They could have said diethylene glycol was used in tobacco cigarettes as a humectant, instead of the dramatic "anti-freeze" note. They neglected to mention that the amounts of certain things found were in parts per BILLION, when they usually base approvals on parts per MILLION. They said that the flavors may appeal to young people, hinting that young people are buying them, which is simply not true in most cases. (Just look at the age polls here.) They suggest that the flavors are to entice children, ignoring that getting away from tobacco flavors is also beneficial for ADULTS. They neglect to mention how the cost is prohibitive for most kids and that most resellers avoid sales to minors - even though there is no current law against it.

So, the spin they put on the results was definitely to scare people and show the e-cigs in the most negative light as possible.