Inhaling PG - perhaps not the great unknown after all

Status
Not open for further replies.

Nazareth

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Jun 14, 2008
1,277
17
USA
meh- Iggle- trolls like you aint worth the effort- have a nice 'good' life that apparently is so boring that you feel the need to obsess abotu other people and insult htem whenever you feel like it in an effort to make yourself feel better abotu yourself- if running others down is what it takes to make you feel better about yourself, then that's just sad- enjoy your 'good' life- and since you 'can't be bothered with me' I'm certain you won't 'bother' to respond- Yeah right!
 
Last edited:

Janet

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jul 14, 2008
732
296
67
Akron OH USA
Can any medical doctors jump in here please!? I am a bit concerned about the effects of PG. I know I'm better off without the old cigs. (Got rid of that cough thank God.) But now I have wicked cotton mouth in the morning and I didn't even have any alcohol! I would like to know exactly what happens in the body to cause this dryness. It can't be good for you. Where does the water go? Is it just eliminated through the process of uh...elimination? Gotta go to work now and will be looking forward to an answer when I get back home.
 

Nazareth

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Jun 14, 2008
1,277
17
USA
Janet- Stage actors have been exposed to htis stuff for quite soem time- much higher concentrations even than we esmokers get, and there has been no ill effects except for the occassional allergy to PG- as well, PG has been tested in animals for quite soem time with no ill effects, and even experiencing benifits. There are some articles on Med Sites like pubmed central I believe if ya wanna check that out more.
 

igglepiggle

Moved On
Aug 19, 2008
3
0
Janet- Stage actors have been exposed to htis stuff for quite soem time- much higher concentrations even than we esmokers get, and there has been no ill effects except for the occassional allergy to PG- as well, PG has been tested in animals for quite soem time with no ill effects, and even experiencing benifits. There are some articles on Med Sites like pubmed central I believe if ya wanna check that out more.

Janet

May I suggest you make an appointment to see your own doctor to discuss your concerns. Pay no heed to the nonsense spouted by our dyslexic friend. Stage actors VERY rarely have exposure to any form of PG and on the rare occassions they do it is nowhere near as concentrated as a direct inhilation from an e-cigarette.

The long term effects of PG on the body when consumed in this way are not yet known. My advice to you is give up smoke inhilation altogether and allow your lungs a chance to do what they were meant to do.
 
Janet
the same problem exists with the normal cigarette
The dryness of the mouth finds himself with the normal cigarette and also PG (but in this case it is burnt)
But PG is not cited as dangerous in normal cigarettes
Why should it be with the E-Cig?
Perhaps dryness of mouth are caused by the PG, this could be a possibility
These dryness of mouth are also a side effect including neuroleptics
it's a feeling uncomfortable but not serious
 

Stan Ferou

Full Member
ECF Veteran
Jul 6, 2008
35
0
N/A
Pay no heed to the nonsense spouted by our dyslexic friend
Are you so insecure that you feel the need to resort to peripheral, pedantic attacks on people's grammar, not to mention insulting dyslexics everywhere - it's not an intellectual disability. Try to discuss and debate things without being such an obnoxious little prat, if you can, then maybe someone will take you seriously - I doubt it tho. In short, come back when your balls have dropped, alright luv? :)
 

RatInDaToilet

Moved On
Aug 23, 2008
0
0
121
  • Deleted by RatInDaHat
  • Reason: Guy is just trying to start fights. Ame person as igglepiggle

RatInDaToilet

Moved On
Aug 23, 2008
0
0
121
  • Deleted by RatInDaHat
  • Reason: Guy is just trying to start fights. Ame person as igglepiggle

RatInDaToilet

Moved On
Aug 23, 2008
0
0
121
  • Deleted by RatInDaHat
  • Reason: Guy is just trying to start fights. Ame person as igglepiggle

Nazareth

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Jun 14, 2008
1,277
17
USA
No worries Naz. It's like he's stalking you too. Why is he still here?

Yes he is Karen- He pretends to be older and educated with a degree- but his childish actions belie the fact that he's nothign more than an obsessed highschool prat tryign to portray hiomself as soemthign he's not. Only little kids do what he is doing!
 

locha

Full Member
Aug 19, 2008
44
0
42
Birmingham UK
Speaking bout actors. I'm a singer (and was an actor for a brieeeeeef period) and i know a thing or two about smoke machines. I hate them.
Srsly, I HATE THEM. Cant breathe anywhere near them. This of course may have something to do with a way I'm singing, but thats the way that i feel.

Ecigs on the other hand, I dont feel anything even remotely similar to smoke machine. Yes, there is some similarity in taste, but none of the throat soreness, or breathing problems. I'm not using this device for long, but on stage an even hour is long enough for me. Not being a scientist - my own impression is that the amount of smoke that i'm inhaling in my ecig is much smaller then when i'm sining. This, or there is something different in PG used for eliquid.
 

Nazareth

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Jun 14, 2008
1,277
17
USA
I'm almost certain it's the same stuff Locha- it would take a powerful lot of esmoking however to create as much as the fog machines create- we're only exposing ourselves to small amounts compared to how much the machines produce, so maybe that's the difference- what we exhale looks like a lot I suppose, but it certainly wouldn't fill a whole stage & what we exhale diminishes quite quickly compared ot the bulk that hte machiens produce-
 
R

RatIsCu.nt

Guest
  • RatIsCu.nt
  • Deleted by shawnp1

FDM

Full Member
Aug 7, 2008
23
1
Argentina
:oops: after used for one mths +

I discoverd I feel my muscles seem weak abit maybe due to excessive pg cause lactic acid

next I found my throat seem got lots phlegm .
have to clear my throat..:oops:


Found this (I'm not allowed to post URLs):

The New York Times
May 16, 2006

Lactic Acid Is Not Muscles' Foe, It's Fuel

By GINA KOLATA
Everyone who has even thought about exercising has heard the warnings about lactic acid. It builds up in your muscles. It is what makes your muscles burn. Its buildup is what makes your muscles tire and give out.

Coaches and personal trainers tell athletes and exercisers that they have to learn to work out at just below their "lactic threshold," that point of diminishing returns when lactic acid starts to accumulate. Some athletes even have blood tests to find their personal lactic thresholds.

But that, it turns out, is all wrong. Lactic acid is actually a fuel, not a caustic waste product. Muscles make it deliberately, producing it from glucose, and they burn it to obtain energy. The reason trained athletes can perform so hard and so long is because their intense training causes their muscles to adapt so they more readily and efficiently absorb lactic acid.

The notion that lactic acid was bad took hold more than a century ago, said George A. Brooks, a professor in the department of integrative biology at the University of California, Berkeley. It stuck because it seemed to make so much sense.

"It's one of the classic mistakes in the history of science," Dr. Brooks said.

Its origins lie in a study by a Nobel laureate, Otto Meyerhof, who in the early years of the 20th century cut a frog in half and put its bottom half in a jar. The frog's muscles had no circulation — no source of oxygen or energy.

Dr. Myerhoff gave the frog's leg electric shocks to make the muscles contract, but after a few twitches, the muscles stopped moving. Then, when Dr. Myerhoff examined the muscles, he discovered that they were bathed in lactic acid.

A theory was born. Lack of oxygen to muscles leads to lactic acid, leads to fatigue.

Athletes were told that they should spend most of their effort exercising aerobically, using glucose as a fuel. If they tried to spend too much time exercising harder, in the anaerobic zone, they were told, they would pay a price, that lactic acid would accumulate in the muscles, forcing them to stop.

Few scientists questioned this view, Dr. Brooks said. But, he said, he became interested in it in the 1960's, when he was running track at Queens College and his coach told him that his performance was limited by a buildup of lactic acid.

When he graduated and began working on a Ph.D. in exercise physiology, he decided to study the lactic acid hypothesis for his dissertation.

"I gave rats radioactive lactic acid, and I found that they burned it faster than anything else I could give them," Dr. Brooks said.

It looked as if lactic acid was there for a reason. It was a source of energy.

Dr. Brooks said he published the finding in the late 70's. Other researchers challenged him at meetings and in print.

"I had huge fights, I had terrible trouble getting my grants funded, I had my papers rejected," Dr. Brooks recalled. But he soldiered on, conducting more elaborate studies with rats and, years later, moving on to humans. Every time, with every study, his results were consistent with his radical idea.

Eventually, other researchers confirmed the work. And gradually, the thinking among exercise physiologists began to change.

"The evidence has continued to mount," said L. Bruce Gladden, a professor of health and human performance at Auburn University. "It became clear that it is not so simple as to say, Lactic acid is a bad thing and it causes fatigue."

As for the idea that lactic acid causes muscle soreness, Dr. Gladden said, that never made sense.

"Lactic acid will be gone from your muscles within an hour of exercise," he said. "You get sore one to three days later. The time frame is not consistent, and the mechanisms have not been found."

The understanding now is that muscle cells convert glucose or glycogen to lactic acid. The lactic acid is taken up and used as a fuel by mitochondria, the energy factories in muscle cells.

Mitochondria even have a special transporter protein to move the substance into them, Dr. Brooks found. Intense training makes a difference, he said, because it can make double the mitochondrial mass.

It is clear that the old lactic acid theory cannot explain what is happening to muscles, Dr. Brooks and others said.

Yet, Dr. Brooks said, even though coaches often believed in the myth of the lactic acid threshold, they ended up training athletes in the best way possible to increase their mitochondria. "Coaches have understood things the scientists didn't," he said.

Through trial and error, coaches learned that athletic performance improved when athletes worked on endurance, running longer and longer distances, for example.

That, it turns out, increased the mass of their muscle mitochondria, letting them burn more lactic acid and allowing the muscles to work harder and longer.

Just before a race, coaches often tell athletes to train very hard in brief spurts.

That extra stress increases the mitochondria mass even more, Dr. Brooks said, and is the reason for improved performance.

And the scientists?

They took much longer to figure it out.

"They said, 'You're anaerobic, you need more oxygen,' " Dr. Brooks said. "The scientists were stuck in 1920."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread