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
FDM- that blurb is talkign about a slow and steady buildup and tolorance to lactic acid, not abotu overloading a system which can lead to an irreversible condition called lactic acidosis which can be fatal (Devilfish- please don't worry- we're talkign severe overloading here and a breakdown in a body's metabolism- soemthign you most likely do not suffer- otherwise you'd not be able ot do what you do with hte weightlifting at all.)

There is also a danger of increased lactic acid in bodies which can not properly utilize hte acid, and whos mitochondria are damaged due to a mutation Mitchondrial Dysfunction- soemthign I suffer from, and have looked into a bit.

for the normal person- no, increased lactic acid in small amounts is not a problem, but goign overboard can very certainly cause severe medical problems

Lactic acidosis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 

DeviLFisH

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Jul 5, 2008
833
4
47
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."


:confused: we are inhaling excess fuel! ???haha I not sure maybe physcology here , there is lots of factors too ..maybe didn;t sleep well and diet.
but I do sleep well and have a good diet.but maybe is my physcology fear here

cos now constantly e puff within one hr I can always epuff till the cart dry battery weak.

and I do feel tired quiet easy when hit at gym.last time I don;t before I start e smoke.
 

TropicalBob

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Jan 13, 2008
5,623
63
Port Charlotte, FL USA
Nice find, FDM! Add this to the findings in "germ-killing vapor" and e-smoking may actually offer health and fitness benefits. The author, BTW, is a personal favorite. I used to regularly run her work in the Food&Health section for which I was editor.

Steve: Another pseudo-science site. There is no authority to such a site.
 
Last edited:

DeviLFisH

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Jul 5, 2008
833
4
47
Nice find, FDM! Add this to the findings in "germ-killing vapor" and e-smoking may actually offer health and fitness benefits. The author, BTW, is a personal favorite. I used to regularly run her work in the Food&Health section for which I was editor.

Steve: Another pseudo-science site. There is no authority to such a site.
:p:D curious bob als now you e puff ur own e liquid ?

or commerical types?
 

TropicalBob

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Jan 13, 2008
5,623
63
Port Charlotte, FL USA
:rolleyes: Good news, Steve. Gotta get that daily quotient of aluminum from the antiperspirant!

DevilFish: I'm about 95% in terms of vaping my own liquids. Sometimes, I still use some old E-Liquid that I bought months ago, but lately I'm using my own fluid mixed with Bickford extracts and vegetable glycerine. I just like the taste better.

BUT .. I really, really like the RY4 flavor from Ruyan/Janty and look forward to their new flavors coming next week. Also like Johnson Creek fluid. Just haven't ordered any of their new flavors yet.
 

DeviLFisH

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Jul 5, 2008
833
4
47
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."



:D I plan to use glycerine mix with tobaco liquid so

glycerine can be consider Flue??to muscles ?:oops:
 
Maybe you have all proved e-smoking as healthy now.. Would be nice if its true.. :)

But one thing I thought about last night hasnt crossed anyones minds it seems. If its sugar we are inhaling, then wont it be bad for our teeth?? I know that sugar in coffee is very bad because its hot (worse than regular sugar). And if we inhale it wont some of it stick to out teeth? And the constant inhaling all day would cause the teeth to be covered in sugar all day long...

Well just a thought.
 

Kate

Moved On
Jun 26, 2008
7,191
47
UK
The sweet taste comes from vegetable glycerine or propylene glycol. It's not an acid sweetness like sugar, it's neutral or alkaline. Anything that neutralises acid (like saliva and our vapour) stops bacteria feeding so it's actually good for teeth as it stops the acid that are harmful. Be sure to vape after every meal, lol, that gives teeth a chance to re mineralise after being in an acidic environment.

... At least that's what I've read, I'm not a chemist or dentist so can't be 100% certain about this but I have sensitive teeth and the last thing I want is to de mineralise them. I am satisfied that vaping is good for my teeth and look forward to fewer trips to the dentist.
 

Kate

Moved On
Jun 26, 2008
7,191
47
UK
You're welcome. The more good news we have to share about esmoking the better I reckon. It's great that TBob found the study on propylene glycol killing germs, that strengthens our hand when it comes time to justify to authorities why we should be allowed to carry on vaping.

The elixir of esmoking. Kills germs, good for teeth, stops depression, self medication for psychotics, might reduce chances of getting parkinson's disease and alzheimer's disease (smoking does apparently, not sure if it's the nicotine or not). What else ... not smelly, or offensive ... blah, blah ... nectar of the gods. ;)
 

prestontiger

Full Member
Aug 29, 2008
18
0
41
US Wyoming
Like so many before me, I'm to new and can not post links as of yet XD anyway, due to the fact this started as a topic about if pg is good, better than cigs or harmful, i thought this might be relevant, its the MSDS (material safety data sheet) that all employers in the states have to provide their workers with, on all chemicals, so that the workers are aware of the known risks of handling, consuming, and inhaling the chemical (along with some other stuff about fire and explosions lol) anyway enjoy just going to post the highlights of it for now, but if someone would like the "link" I just did MSDS propylene glycol in google, should turn up for you quickly

Hazards Identification
Emergency Overview
--------------------------
CAUTION! MAY CAUSE IRRITATION TO SKIN AND EYES.

SAF-T-DATA(tm) Ratings (Provided here for your convenience)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Health Rating: 2 - Moderate (Life)
Flammability Rating: 1 - Slight
Reactivity Rating: 1 - Slight
Contact Rating: 1 - Slight
Lab Protective Equip: GOGGLES; LAB COAT; VENT HOOD; PROPER GLOVES
Storage Color Code: Green (General Storage)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Potential Health Effects
----------------------------------

Inhalation:
No adverse health effects via inhalation.

Ingestion:
Relatively non-toxic. Ingestion of sizable amount (over 100ml) may cause some gastrointestinal upset and temporary central nervous system depression. Effects appear more severe in individuals with kidney problems.

Skin Contact:
Mild irritant and defatting agent, especially on prolonged contact.

Eye Contact:
May cause transitory stinging and tearing.

Chronic Exposure:
Lactic acidosis, stupor and seizures have been reported following chronic ingestion.

Aggravation of Pre-existing Conditions:
Kidney disorders.
 

jigtg

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Aug 4, 2008
331
2
Sparta, Greece
@prestontiger: MSDS is for handling not using.

Propylene glycol (PIM 443) contains much better info. It talks about ADI of 25 mg/kg and with e-cigs you would get 20(number of cigs)*0.1ml=2ml per day. Assuming 100% PG here. For a 75 kg person(me :) ADI would be 1875mg which is about 1.8ml given PG density of 1.036 g/cm³.
It is worth pointing out that you might already be receiving 1.8ml from food and other stuff per day. There is just no easy way to know. ADI recommendations do include safety factors, so I wouldn't personally be too worried about these limits exceeding.

adi "propylene glycol" - Google Search list plenty of good docs. http://www.health.gov.mt/fsc/fschome_files/afc_op_ej511_lauric_arginate_sum_en.pdf for instance talks about ADI of 0.5 mg/kg.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread