I wonder if the Same Mindset could/should be used when people consider that they May be inhaling Aldehydes?
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
I wonder if the Same Mindset could/should be used when people consider that they May be inhaling Aldehydes?
Meh, different toxicities. One is the pretty dramatic collapse, seize and die, and the other is the whole slow chronic illness thing. Maybe instead of cyanide, little cumulative doses of arsenic would be a better comparison. Doesn't get you now, it's the down the road stuff.
Low level exposure to formaldehyde already occurs in the workplace. The accepted exposure levels are way lower now than they used to be, but it's not like it doesn't occur outside of vaping or smoking.
Wasn't so much going for the collapse, seize and die thing.
More along the lines of If something is coming out of my Drip Tip that is Unwanted, at what Exposure does it become Harmful? And what are Long Term Effects of such Harm?
Lots of Talk in this thread about Whether of Not things are being Produced. And Tons of Talk about the Mechanics of why they Should or Shouldn't.
But Not Much talk about what the Actual Risk may be by Inhaling Something at Some Level.
Oops--sorry. Edited my OP. I went to the source and indeed it says peer reviewed.
Also found this in the Acknowledgements:
"We would also like to thank the California Tobacco Control Program for their advice and consultation on this project."
Well, the 2 charts I posted about smokers doing better vaping than smoking came from the Truth Initiative, which is an established Antz foundation.
Yes, we always need to be aware of any potential conflicts when evaluating information and their sources.
It was bare coil, just testing at various settings (my probe is basically a thermocoupler at the end of a line, but my line is too large to use on a wicked and capped atty). The thing is, if TC is working properly, then it should be the same wicked and wet or not...it is the temp of the coil that dictates that coils resistance. We know that the tcr of those select wire types we use to be pretty dang accurate, so how that wire is heated and cooled really shouldn't matter.
A temp probe at the center of a wet wick would be interesting to know...just how much of the heat is transferred into the vape, vs. how much reaches the center of the wick.
There's always OSHA. and at least they're not looking at levels in relation to smoking or vaping. https://www.osha.gov/OshDoc/data_General_Facts/formaldehyde-factsheet.pdf
Yeah... NIOSH and the CDC seem to be More apt to do comparisons using there own Special form of Science.
Last edited:
"The temperature in which White Cloud Flings and cartridges vaporize the liquid is between 350 and 390 degrees." At what temperature does the e-liquid vaporize?
How do they know that? But suppose it's correct. I can produce vapor at lower coil temps than that. The liquid will stay in contact with the coil until it's warm enough to vaporize? So if there's too much cooling the liquid vaporizes slowly or not at all. We tend to restrict the air when the heat is low, to give the liquid time to absorb heat.
How do they know that? But suppose it's correct. I can produce vapor at lower coil temps than that. The liquid will stay in contact with the coil until it's warm enough to vaporize? So if there's too much cooling the liquid vaporizes slowly or not at all. We tend to restrict the air when the heat is low, to give the liquid time to absorb heat.
It just seems like if someone tells you something is Harmful, then the First 2 Thing a Person would ask would be...
"OK. At what Levels is it Harmful?"
and then...
"What is the Harm at Level X?"
Don't get me Wrong. Not advocating that Inhaling something like Formaldehyde is OK. Or that if something can be Avoided, then that shouldn't be Considered.
I'm just a Numbers Guy. And like to have Numbers that I can put next to Things.
The reason that doesn't work is folks have no real clue about the principle of relative risk. It's either all safe or all terrible. Anything in between requires thinking, and we know what happens when that's a requirement.
Absolutely right. And I assure you that nobody here "sees him as the absolute authority on any- and everything vaping-related." Far from it. We are a skeptical and cynical bunch and we always argue--just in case.
When Dr. F decided to issue his, somewhat misguided, warning against dry burning coils because "you are basically destroying the bonds between the metal molecules," he met immediately with universal criticism from vapers; some polite, some not so polite. This is from an old thread, so quoting is disabled--click on the links to my favorite posts.
The end of microcoils?
The end of microcoils?
The end of microcoils?
The end of microcoils?
Those are the polite ones.
Sorry, @Lessifer
I'm just feeling nostalgic.
Last edited:
I dont think Wang and the RCP are mutually exclusive. I believe it is possible they both could be right.
Wang didnt say vaping was bad, they just showed nasties at high temperatures.
No.
As I stated earlier, this test found (? still some unanswered questions, based on HOW the test was run) two possibly harmful compounds. If those two compounds were even at levels of or exceeding cigarettes.......there is still over 1000 OTHER harmful things in cigarette smoke we aren't getting.
I don't think they are Wrong. On the Population Level.
But the Population Level is comprised of Averages. And in some study results, Weighted Averages. The Population Level makes No Guarantees about the Individual Statistic.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
