New research finds that the quality of refill liquids for electronic cigarettes is surprisingly good

[Bill Godshall]

New research finds that the quality of refill liquids for electronic cigarettes is surprisingly good

Sales of electronic cigarettes have tripled in the U.S. every year since 2007. Financial analysts attribute some of the recent decrease in cigarette sales in the U.S. to the success of e-cigarettes, and some of them think that sales of e-cigarettes will surpass sales of tobacco cigarettes in the next decade. However, relatively little is known about refill liquids for electronic cigarettes (e-liquids). ln a study published online by the scientific journal Addiction, researchers from the University of Geneva (Switzerland) and from McNeil (Helsingborg, Sweden), a manufacturer of nicotine medications, analyzed some of the most popular brands of e-liquids, purchased on the Internet. The researchers analyzed nicotine content and nicotine-related degradation products and impurities (but not the other components in e-liquids). They found that half of the 20 bottles of e-liquids that they analyzed were acceptable as medicinal products. The other half contained up to five times the maximum amount of impurities specified for nicotine medications. Contrary to previous research, they also found that the nicotine content in the bottles corresponded to the labels on the bottles. Professor Jean-François Etter, one of the authors, said: “The quality of some brands was surprisingly good. However, for some brands of e-liquids at least, the manufacturing process or control systems are probably below required standards for nicotine medications”. Electronic cigarettes are a new galenic formulation developed to administer a range of substances, but they are not currently regulated as medicinal products in any country. Rather, they are regulated as tobacco products or consumer products. If they are compared with tobacco, not with nicotine medications, the presence of impurities in e-liquids is less relevant, because even if e-liquids contained the level of impurities found in this study, ‘vaping’ (using e-cigarettes) would still be much less dangerous than smoking. The success of electronic cigarettes challenges the current legislation, which allows nicotine only in tobacco and in nicotine medications.

The scientific article:
Jean-François ETTER, Eva ZÄTHER and Sofie SVENSSON. “Analysis of refill liquids for electronic cigarettes”. Addiction, 2013, 108: DOI: 10.1111/add.12235
Link to the article: Analysis of refill liquids for electronic cigarettes - Etter - 2013 - Addiction - Wiley Online Library

Contact:
Professor Jean-François ETTER, Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, IMSP-CMU, 1211 Geneva 4, Switzerland.
Tel +41 22 379 04 59 (office) and +41 76 348 57 86 (mobile).
E-mail: Jean-Francois.Etter@unige.ch
Skype: jfetter

 

[RosaJ]

Thank you again Bill for all you do for our community!

 

[AgentAnia]

It would be nice to think that the FDA, even the EU, or heavenforbid the WHO, might actually pay attention to encouraging research like this... [sigh]

 

[2coils]

Research and Facts will continue to overshadow the lies! Eventually even the FDA may have to open their eyes. Its going to look absurd if they get too aggressive and regulate these products out of existence. Already people are starting to raise their eyebrows. BTW self regulation seems to be working better than naysayers thought!

 

[xhuffer]

Wow galenic formulation. Had to look that one up. Now I understand. Thanx Bill. Always looking out for us.

 

[dherrington]

The last few lines of the article are telling. It says that e liquids are still much safer than cigarettes. I would think governments would be begging die hard smokers to convert to reduce health costs rather than fighting them every step of the way.

 

[AgentAnia]

I would think governments would be begging die hard smokers to convert to reduce health costs rather than fighting them every step of the way.

I agree, but here's the thing:

1. The Surgeon General's "smoking is harmful to your health" message has evolved over the years into a "smoking is evil" message.

2. The "smoking cessation" industry has evolved into a multi-million dollar industry over the years. BP came up with various NRT's but ignored the e-cig concept (even though the technology has been around for decades. Perhaps because it looks too much like smoking?). Because NRT's have had statistically poor rusults, BP has benefitted from and relies on repeat customers for their products, thereby increasing their revenues even more.

3. The regulatory/public health/legislative sectors bought into the existing "smoking cessation" and "smoking is evil" propaganda and have based their actions and policies on it. And at the same time, revenues from tobacco sin taxes support all kinds of non-tobacco-related programs, so while governments say they want us to stop smoking, they also rely on revenue from those who continue to smoke.

4. All this time, no one (to my knowledge) ever bothered defining the term "smoking" or bothered to clearly establish exactly which components of tobacco cigarettes were the dangerous ones. On a very primitive level, the terms "tobacco cigarette" and "electronic cigarette" contain the word "cigarette," so to uninformed or lazy minds, both must mean "smoking" and therefore both should be viewed with the same suspicion.

So, all these players are now entrenched in their existing belief systems.

And now, along come electronic cigarettes. They are, by all anecdotal evidence, far safer than tobacco cigarettes. They are, according to hundreds of thousands if not millions of vapers, far more effective than any smoking-cessation device BP has managed to come up with. And the word is getting out, to current smokers and the general public, that there's an alternative to smoking, one far less hazardous to smokers and non-smokers alike. And now all the players with their existing belief systems and years of on-the-record actions and statements, who started out by denying that ecigs could, in fact, by effective, are embarrassed they didn't think of it first and are looking for ways to backpedal, without outright admitting they were wrong. I'm hoping they'll find a way, so we can all get with leading our healthier, smoke-free lives!

[short version of this rant: Governments don't want to help smokers quit because they want/need the sin-tax revenue. They don't want to admit ecigs are effective because they're too embarrassed to admit they were wrong.]

So there.

 

[RosaJ]

You hit the nail on the head AgentAnia!!! Ditto everything you stated and add this one:

For decades now BP has been doing research to determine how nicotine can be used in the treatment of Alzheimers, Parkinsons, and other age related diseases. They've recently come out to say that eating bell peppers will benefit these patients because of the nicotine they contain. With ecigs these patients could get their nicotine without having to pay the exorbitant price of prescription nicotine. So BP is seeing that they won't be able to recoup the research and development expenses they've paid in therapeutic nicotine nor future revenue.

 

[AgentAnia]

Good point, RosaJ! I'm hopefull that the positive research being done on nicotine (and the fact that nicotine and tobacco are being viewed as two separate entities with different characteristics and health implications) will start to affect and reinforce people's opinions on the difference between tobacco cigarettes and ecigs.

An irreverant aside: If ecigs were ever to be banned, I picture myself cooking up a stew of eggplants, bell peppers, and every other nicotine-containing food I can find, and standing over the pot getting my fix by inhaling the steam! Don't know if the resulting concoction would taste good, but I'd probably try that too...

 

[2coils]

I agree, but here's the thing:

1. The Surgeon General's "smoking is harmful to your health" message has evolved over the years into a "smoking is evil" message.

2. The "smoking cessation" industry has evolved into a multi-million dollar industry over the years. BP came up with various NRT's but ignored the e-cig concept (even though the technology has been around for decades. Perhaps because it looks too much like smoking?). Because NRT's have had statistically poor rusults, BP has benefitted from and relies on repeat customers for their products, thereby increasing their revenues even more.

3. The regulatory/public health/legislative sectors bought into the existing "smoking cessation" and "smoking is evil" propaganda and have based their actions and policies on it. And at the same time, revenues from tobacco sin taxes support all kinds of non-tobacco-related programs, so while governments say they want us to stop smoking, they also rely on revenue from those who continue to smoke.

4. All this time, no one (to my knowledge) ever bothered defining the term "smoking" or bothered to clearly establish exactly which components of tobacco cigarettes were the dangerous ones. On a very primitive level, the terms "tobacco cigarette" and "electronic cigarette" contain the word "cigarette," so to uninformed or lazy minds, both must mean "smoking" and therefore both should be viewed with the same suspicion.

So, all these players are now entrenched in their existing belief systems.

And now, along come electronic cigarettes. They are, by all anecdotal evidence, far safer than tobacco cigarettes. They are, according to hundreds of thousands if not millions of vapers, far more effective than any smoking-cessation device BP has managed to come up with. And the word is getting out, to current smokers and the general public, that there's an alternative to smoking, one far less hazardous to smokers and non-smokers alike. And now all the players with their existing belief systems and years of on-the-record actions and statements, who started out by denying that ecigs could, in fact, by effective, are embarrassed they didn't think of it first and are looking for ways to backpedal, without outright admitting they were wrong. I'm hoping they'll find a way, so we can all get with leading our healthier, smoke-free lives!

[short version of this rant: Governments don't want to help smokers quit because they want/need the sin-tax revenue. They don't want to admit ecigs are effective because they're too embarrassed to admit they were wrong.]

So there.

I agree with all of the above EXCEPT the government being embarrassed. They are not embarrassed, nor could they care less about us. We live in a society that empowers a crooked government (not on purpose). Its greed that stands in the way of the well being of people. We see it all the time. I'd like to be a fly on the wall for a week in most senators offices while in a meeting with some lobbyists.

 

[DC2]

I agree with all of the above EXCEPT the government being embarrassed. They are not embarrassed, nor could they care less about us. We live in a society that empowers a crooked government (not on purpose). Its greed that stands in the way of the well being of people. We see it all the time. I'd like to be a fly on the wall for a week in most senators offices while in a meeting with some lobbyists.

While I agree with most of this, I really don't think anyone in the government likes to be embarrassed.
But I would qualify that by saying the embarrassment only counts if it is on a wide scale and draws a lot of media attention.

 

[2coils]

While I agree with most of this, I really don't think anyone in the government likes to be embarrassed.
But I would qualify that by saying the embarrassment only counts if it is on a wide scale and draws a lot of media attention.

I certainly do not want to take anything away from Agent Ania's post as it was pretty dead on. I would agree that nobody likes to be embarrassed. I just think this is not a matter of them being embarrassed they were wrong about e-cigs. If anything, they may be embarrassed that they were caught in a crap load of lies about e-cigs. And now that the truth came out they are back pedaling. I believe all involved knew that e-cigs could be a healthier alternative and at all costs tried to denounce them and now its backfiring. Public health was not their priority when they started this vendetta.

 

[AgentAnia]

If anything, they may be embarrassed that they were caught in a crap load of lies about e-cigs. And now that the truth came out they are back pedaling. I believe all involved knew that e-cigs could be a healthier alternative and at all costs tried to denounce them and now its backfiring. Public health was not their priority when they started this vendetta.

That was pretty much what I meant, 2coils. (I guess I should stop being so damned ladylike...) You do have a way with words!

 

[rothenbj]

Good point, RosaJ! I'm hopefull that the positive research being done on nicotine (and the fact that nicotine and tobacco are being viewed as two separate entities with different characteristics and health implications) will start to affect and reinforce people's opinions on the difference between tobacco cigarettes and ecigs.

It would be nice if tobacco would stop being vilified. Tobacco in and of itself is not particularly harmful, particularly if it is processed correctly. Snus has been studied for decades with very favorable results. Even most American smokeless products are also very safe. The government and the anti-smoking movement have promoted a lie for decades.

Tobacco only gets exceedingly unhealthy when it is ignited and inhaled, just like many fumes created by ignition- gas, airplane fuel, coal, charcoal, firewood, etc.