Oh, OK, gottcha Scott. I tend to make folks guess whether I am answering them back, or have just left, when in fact I am still typing.
New studies find carcinogens in vg and pg at high temps, even in tootle puffers
- Thread starter mikepetro
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Through trial and error I found the right spot. Really, in terms of aldehyde production, you are concerned with the spot that gets the hottest. As one would expect, that is in the center wraps of a coil. Think about the days where we would dry burn a coil looking for hot spots, the center always glowed red first then the glow would move outwards from the center.
On a rebuidable coil finding that placement was quite easy. On a cartridge coil I used a sewing needle to punch a hole through the wick material in order to get the probe down around the center wraps.
They measure a spot, and give you the average of the spot, and the spot is much much larger than the coil. So their measurements tend to be below the actual maximum temp of the coil.
I have also tried VERY high end infra red cameras. The problem with any "non-contact" approach is that you have to leave the coil visible to take a measurement. Therefor you are not getting the same temps as you would in the closed chamber of the atty, with the same air flow factors etc. To get an accurate measurement you have to place the probe in the coil and then close the atty up and be able to hit it normally, otherwise you are not duplicating the variables of a real hit.
It is true that to measure temp based on wattage settings under normal use to know what temp your coil is reaching, contact is the only way that works. There are other cases where the top need not be on at all. For instance, if you just want to check if your TC device is keeping the coil at the set temp or not. In that case the coil temp is the coil temp and the device is regulating properly or it isn't. Also if you want to measure at what temp things start breaking down. They will break down at specific temps regardless if the top is on or not. Although for aldehyde testing once you have verified a TC device is accurate, you don't need a lead at all. I don't really know why he was wanting to measure coil temp in the first place, so this may just all be useless rambling.
Also, typing this made me think, we could potentially pour VG into a temp regulated deep fryer and measure the breakdown on a larger scale, without even needing a vape coil. Seems like measurements might be easier to read and understand on a larger scale and could then be calculated down to our scale. I mean we know there can be trace amounts of aldehydes in the air and that could throw off a reading from vaporizing 1 puff worth of liquid. But if we vaporized say 1 liter at the same temp we would expect the reading to be at least 1000x higher than 1ml thus eliminating any trace amounts from the air as false positives. OK 1 liter might be a bit much, but you get the point. Not sure if there is any real usefulness there though. Just something that crossed my mind.
Yes, I agree, you could use an infra red "camera" to validate the accuracy of your TC mod, thats what I did when I got the first DNA40 beta. A handheld infra red thermometer (gun) with a ~12:1 distance to spot ratio is just not precise enough though, trust me - I have tried extensively.
Regarding your second paragraph, I agree, and thats why I latched onto to the Wang study in the opening post. They just measured aldehydes of PG and VG at specific temps without trying to duplicate an atty. Although I think their measurements are an extreme as 100% of their juice was exposed to the maximum Temp, where in an actual atty only a fraction of the juice is exposed to the maximum temp.
Kind of the point of the thread - to determine what temperatures non-tc coils reach under real vaping circumstances.
The way the Hohmtech kanthal tc works means that you have no way of knowing what temperature you're at unless you've actually measured a baseline using a temperature probe. The temperature limit of 700 Fahrenheit is pretty much meaningless without calibrating the temperature units accurately.
Sent from my Thor E using Tapatalk
The problem remains that the "safe" temperature is still extrapolated from the device independent study of Wang. We still don't have that useful test of coil production of aldehydes in a real world setting under known temp conditions. Mike's tests with a formaldehyde probe are a step in that direction but are still not as sensitive as other more expensive laboratory test methods. It may well turn out that aldehydes are lower in real world use than in the reactor of Wang. So it still remains to be determined if wattage use is significantly "riskier" than temp control.
I disagree.
My admittedly less sensitive instrument, crude by laboratory standards, clearly measured aldehydes at temperature levels that did not taste burnt and were not dry hits. A more sensitive instrument would likely just have measured more precisely.
Since I was able to see a temperature threshold before the aldehydes became measurable I feel confident that a TC device would allow me to remain below that threshold. I have no such reassurance from a VV/VW/Mech unless the specific coil/atty build being used was benchmarked for temperature somehow.
Now, how much is "safe", I dont know, thats for the Phd types to figure out. My premise is that if you can minimize/avoid the exposure altogether and still get a satisfying vape, then it is bound to be "safer".
An analogy would be - how much mercury can be ingested and be considered safe? Why not just avoid mercury altogether if you can?
BTW, these measurements were very close to Dr Kurts measurements using the more precise laboratory instruments.
Last edited:
Which many have indeed opted to do, both before and after vaping entered the scene.
An option which still exists, obviously. I'm not interested in it, but it's there.
Paraphrasing some guy named Bill, who came long before me...
"To vape, or not to vape. THAT is the question."
I don't want to get into TC wars, but I will say using it some of the time as well as suggestions MikeP made, I have significantly reduced temps in my tank. Adding 10% DW to my (required) max VG vape, not chainvaping, using several different setups and rotating them, and keeping my wattages low have definitely improved the temperature in my VW vapes as well. I can tell merely by how much my tanks are not heating up, as compared to before. It's a noticeable difference and can be picked up on by the sensation of HEAT in my hand, if I touch my tanks.
So, I will say, precise or not, I KNOW I am getting lower temps in my tanks through real world experience, although I own 0 pieces of measuring equipment (well, maybe the husband has something, I doubt it) other than my own sensation of warmth/heat but I do believe that they are real. I've also tried chainvaping the heck out of a tank with max VG to compare and it's noticeably different. I do understand the power of placebo and etc., but it really was noticeably different.
I mention this because while TC isn't for everyone all the time, there are still valuable takeaways from this thread and data, even if it may not be the most precise data, it appears to be repeatable, reliable data and I do think there are useful things on this thread not just for TC vapers, but for vapers generally....
If no one ever completed the first experiment, science would have been far less precise than what it is today.... LOL.
Anna
So, I will say, precise or not, I KNOW I am getting lower temps in my tanks through real world experience, although I own 0 pieces of measuring equipment (well, maybe the husband has something, I doubt it) other than my own sensation of warmth/heat but I do believe that they are real. I've also tried chainvaping the heck out of a tank with max VG to compare and it's noticeably different. I do understand the power of placebo and etc., but it really was noticeably different.
I mention this because while TC isn't for everyone all the time, there are still valuable takeaways from this thread and data, even if it may not be the most precise data, it appears to be repeatable, reliable data and I do think there are useful things on this thread not just for TC vapers, but for vapers generally....
If no one ever completed the first experiment, science would have been far less precise than what it is today.... LOL.
Anna
If no one completed the first experiment, we would never have discovered how to make fire. That would mean no matches or BIC lighters. That would mean no way to light a cigarette without either lightning or a forest fire. And that would mean we wouldn't be smoking in the first place. We also wouldn't have the internet, and we probably wouldn't know how to use a keyboard.
See? Science matters.
Last edited:
Wait, earlier in this thread (even on the first page) it was indicated that aldehyde levels were higher in VG than in PG, yet this chart seems to indicate the opposite. It also stated that below 470F was safe for a 50/50 mix, while this indicates you have be below 420F. I have been vaping at 435F using a 65PG/35VG mix thinking I was in the clear, but this seems to change all of that.
It's left me wondering too, as I vape a similar mix. I've been shooting to keep around 400F myself.
Yes, it was indicated that "Wang" measured higher aldehydes in VG than in PG. My measurements produced different results. I do not have an explanation for that, other than I used actual real vaping conditions. I have a few theories, but they are just that, "theories". I dont have the instrumentation to prove those theories out. My results were very repeatable is all that I know for sure, and the increase of nasties as temp increased was clear to me.
Also, given the granularity of 20 degree increments, I would call 440 the threshold shown in this dataset. It would require several solid days of more tests to get down to a 5 degree granularity. Frankly, the view wasnt worth the climb to me. I saw and proved what I needed to prove. That was simply that there is indeed an aldehyde/temp relationship, roughly where it starts, and that it was clearly below where you could start to taste it.
BTW, if you want to get the whole story on my methods and results, read the blog article on it. My blogs are linked in my signature.
My take away from the data I collected is that I personally set my mods at a maximum of 450 or less. I figure that way I am keeping exposure levels to a very low level. Most of the time I vape at 420, only pushing past that when my coil starts getting dirty. I also vape a 50/50 mix as I find that I can run higher PG ratios at a lower temp and still get a satisfying vape. I play with even higher PG ratios on occasion but havent landed on a sweet spot yet, 50/50 is just habit (and easy to mix).
Looks like we vape very similar.I vape 50/50 nic strength between 20 mg and 35 mg unflavored at around 410 F.
OK, the fact that you are comfortable up to 450F makes me feel a bit better at my 435F. I don't go beyond that (nor do I go less than that). As always I definitely appreciate your work and what you have been doing for the vaping community.
When I started vaping...4+ years ago...50/50 (and even 70PG/30VG) was readily available to buy online...
Then...with the appearance of sub-ohm coils and 500W Mods...these e-juices were largely replaced by 30PG/70VG and 20PG/80VG e-juices...
Since I'm too inept/lazy to DIY...does anyone here know where to buy premade 50/50 or 70PG/30VG e-juices???
[NOT because of the safety or vaping qualities of the PG or VG...but I'm finding that I'm spending way too much time cleaning the "VG film" off my car and apartment windows...
]..
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
