New studies find carcinogens in vg and pg at high temps, even in tootle puffers

[Ryedan]

Interesting, would love to have known what wattage he was using for these tests.

I think he was using the GG TC module for that experiment which afaik cannot be set for temperature, it just does it's thing. If he had it set in TC mode, which I believe he did from one of his comments, that TC doesn't seem to be particularly useful. Or maybe I'm not understanding the experiment.

 

[mikepetro]

The responses at your link are worth reading. Applying this curve directly to vaping a PG/VG mix is IMHO based on the comments another misapplication . If anyone believes that a 50/50 pg/VG mix is 75% VG after vaping half a tank I have some cheap land for sale in antartica
Stick with your assumption that you have to increase your TC temp due to coil gunk buildup and you're on track, for that is indeed the case based on heat transfer through the insulating properties of the gunk.

I am going to use the chart for the boiling point data. Though just for hits & grins I will do a stovetop test on a 50/50 mix, and a 100% batch of each PG and VG, and see how close I come.

As for the fractional distillation, I dont know the rates at which it occurs, but anecdotal evidence backs up that it does occur.

 

[awsum140]

I've never noticed any fractional distillation, but I'm lazy enough to vape every tank, basically, dry before refilling.

 

[VapNMirrors]

Another consideration for vaping is that we're probably at a few PSI lower pressure in our chambers which will reduce the BPs during our vape. Based on this, maybe up to 4-5 PSI.

So if we take our 14.7 PSI atmospheric pressure at sea level, and reduce by say 3.0 PSI for a nominal vape, then we're at 11.7 PSI while we boil our juice. Based on this calculator, that's at elevation of ~6300'.

So please make sure to climb halfway up a mountain while you do this.

 

[mikepetro]

Another consideration for vaping is that we're probably at a few PSI lower pressure in our chambers which will reduce the BPs during our vape. Based on this, maybe up to 4-5 PSI.

So if we take our 14.7 PSI atmospheric pressure at sea level, and reduce by say 3.0 PSI for a nominal vape, then we're at 11.7 PSI while we boil our juice. Based on this calculator, that's at elevation of ~6300'.

So please make sure to climb halfway up a mountain while you do this.

Yeah, I have access to pressure modules that can measure it. Would be a pain to rig the tubing to an atty. Not sure the view is worth the climb on that one though.

 

[Skold]

I have lurked here and find it all very irritating, why does someone always have to find things wrong. I don't wanna temperature control and never have, and tootle puffers are at more risk. I'm not changing my vaping habits cos of stupid research!

 

[Eskie]

I have lurked here and find it all very irritating, why does someone always have to find things wrong. I don't wanna temperature control and never have, and tootle puffers are at more risk. I'm not changing my vaping habits cos of stupid research!

No one is saying you should change your vaping habit. But if there is evidence that a vaping style of controlled temperatures with sufficient airflow will provide a slightly safer, however small that is, vape, shouldn't individual vapers then make an informed decision about how they prefer to go about it?

It's not about right or wrong. It's about understanding harm reduction, including recognizing the law of decreasing returns. In fact slight alterations in vaping habits may not make much of a difference at all.

 

[Skold]

I can't be bothered with research man, it's vaping. Not science!

 

[mikepetro]

I can't be bothered with research man, it's vaping. Not science!

Ahhhh, but for some of us pseudo-science is fun. Keeps me off the streets anyway.......

 

[herb]

I have lurked here and find it all very irritating, why does someone always have to find things wrong. I don't wanna temperature control and never have, and tootle puffers are at more risk. I'm not changing my vaping habits cos of stupid research!

I used to think that way many years ago , i knew it all back then and i was invincible after all so no worries.

Now , a couple decades later i wish i took things more seriously and didn't have such a care free attitude because i am now paying the price.

Anyway , nobody is telling you to do anything , people have the freedom to make their own choices but one thing is for certain , if you truly did not care about any of this you would of not commented on this topic positively or negatively.

Some people find topics that talk about harm reduction very annoying so you are not alone. They do not want to hear any possible negatives regarding vaping because the bottom line for them is they are better than cigarettes.

While true many others want to reduce any potential negatives even more so and these types of threads are the result .

 

[Skold]

Don't patronize me, I'm not some stupid kid. I take the things in life serious that need to be took serious & as for being care free I have a baby on the way so forgive me if all this research gets overwhelming.
There's no need for it man

 

[mikepetro]

I hate Squonking, never worked for me, doubt I will ever give it a shot again.
Consequently I dont lurk in squonking threads.....
Take what you can, leave the rest.

 

[440BB]

I'm fine with some vapers not wanting to know the details. Many smokers don't want to know the details either.

Posting in a thread you aren't interested in to say there's no need for it makes no sense.

I am glad the questions keep getting asked and the answers keep getting chased down. There is still much to learn about what and how we vape, whichever way we choose.

 

[Vaping!!!Jables]

Stupid science and research are so annoying lol

Sent from my HTC Desire 626s using Tapatalk

 

[Rossum]

I guess I'm missing something, but what was the point of those tests from Farsalinos? No specs on anything other than a DMM reading temperature isn't very informative other than seeing the progressively higher temperatures at each step.

Dr. F. was testing the GG TC module to see if it produced the temperatures that were claimed for each of the "steps".

I think he was using the GG TC module for that experiment which afaik cannot be set for temperature, it just does it's thing. If he had it set in TC mode, which I believe he did from one of his comments, that TC doesn't seem to be particularly useful. Or maybe I'm not understanding the experiment.

No, you can set temperature -- those were the "steps" that were shown on screen. But you can't set anything else like watts.

 

[Rossum]

I hate Squonking, never worked for me, doubt I will ever give it a shot again.

I hate tanks. Doubt I will ever bother with them again.

But we can still be friends, right?

 

[Skold]

Stupid science and research are so annoying lol

Sent from my HTC Desire 626s using Tapatalk

Tell me bout it!

 

[awsum140]

There's an old saying...ignorance is bliss.

 

[Vaping!!!Jables]

I was being sarcastic,but yes ignorance is bliss[emoji14]

Sent from my HTC Desire 626s using Tapatalk

 

[go_player]

Ahhhh, but for some of us pseudo-science is fun. Keeps me off the streets anyway.......

While I wholeheartedly agree with this on a personal level, I can see Skold's point. When I was a kid butter, eggs, and caffeinated coffee were treated as if they were hazardous materials, and in my house margarine was mandated, because my step-father was worried about his heart. These days we know (or think we know) that margarine is poison, eggs are an almost perfect food, caffeinated coffee is probably on net beneficial (if you want antioxidants drink coffee- it is so massively high in them compared to other foods that you should start and stop there, and coffee seems to have hepato-protective properties to boot.)

While these findings are interesting, they'd require a great deal of contextual interpretation to be meaningful. Does vaping in a CE4 produce more of two carcinogens than smoking does? Well, fine, we really do know, for sure, that smoking promotes a number of cancers, but unless we know how much these two carcinogens contribute to that effect, and to what degree they interact with other carcinogens in cigarette smoke, we can't really say much about how dangerous they are in this context, at these levels, in isolation.

Should this give people using CE4 type clearomizers cause for concern? I'd have to do a lot of reading to know for sure what I think about this, and I'm not going to because... well, I used iClear-16s for a long time, and they were always trouble. I'm much happier with better tanks, coils, etc, so I'll just stick with them for the moment.

Should everyone move to temperature control? It certainly seems like the conservative thing to do- if you're really concerned about which chemicals you're vaping then you clearly ought to. It's hard to know what's in what you vape at high temperatures, but I'm guessing that a lot less byproducts are produced at the boiling point of a 30/70 PG mix than at the coil temps you get when controlling only watts.

Should people be worried if they're not that conservative? I'm inclined to think that the answer is "No." I smoked for more than 30 years. _That_ was dangerous (and might kill me yet- my mother died of lung cancer 15 years after she quit smoking.) I'm inclined to think that the risks involved in vaping, even in CE4s with 100% VG (not that that would work out very well ), are very small compared to the risks of smoking. But I am a bit biased, and have been very wrong before, so...