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

[awsum140]

I think what this thread has shown is that increasing air flow, decreasing temperature (power related) and lowering the vaporization point of the liquid will produce a, potentially, safer set of conditions. The variables of air flow can be tested and quantified, but even. what could be called, baseline style information regarding temperature/air flow/aldehyde production would be extremely helpful. Certainly it wouldn't apply to every set of conditions, but the same is true of anything that gets tested that can have variations during actual use.

 

[mikepetro]

It's all so futile and fruitless and even common sense, if I set my toaster to 10 of course it'll burn my bread.. if I set it to 7 still gonna burn just not so black...

The entire basis is that when something gets really hot stuff gets burned..

"My" entire basis is that there is strong eveidence that VG (in particular) degrades into nasty aldehydes at certain specific temperatures. The Wang study identified those exact temperatures.

The question then comes, do we get that hot in our attys?

I identified the 18 main variables in an atty that determine coil temperatures. For the benefit of those who don't use TC mods, I took scientifically sound measurements at the coil while I vaped specific gear at various VV & VW settings.

No, I did not quantify the volume and velocity of my normal hit yet. I will at some point. For the purposes of these temperature measurements though, it is a very real world picture of how "I" vape, including any real world variability in my hits, although I did try to keep them consistant.

What I found was that our attys can easily exceed the thermal degradation points identified by Wang. I also found that we can exceed these points without tasting it. By the time we taste it we have gotten well into the degradation curve.

Then, for the benefit of the community I started cataloging different hardware and the temperatures reached at specific power settings. (I only use TC mods myself, so this isn't for me)

Now, because many of the 18 variables are user induced, the results will vary from user to user. However, this does give folks an idea of where to start being careful on a tested piece of hardware.

IMHO, at some point soon the Wang study will either be corroborated or proven false. I believe it will be corroborated, though various studies may disagree on the exact degradation temperatures.

At that point temperatures will become more important to a significant number of vapers. At that point this work may become quite valuable to some.

Although I still promote TC mods as they would be far more accurate than my reference charts as a TC mod will take into account the user specific variables like airflow.

If it is fruitless, futile, and senesless to you, cool. You don't need to read the thread.

Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk

 

[mikepetro]

The problem is there's just to many variables for anything to be exact enough for us to count on the data.

You can have the same atomizer, the same power levels, the same mod, the same coil, the same juice, the same airflow control setting, the same damn everything but you have two different people that inhale at different rates, for someone with big lungs and inhales fairly strong the results will be completely different than someone that inhales relatively slow since more airflow will cool the coil faster.

Then you have to take into account the machines used to test the devices, they can't taste, they can't tell if something is wrong, when formaldehyde or other carcinogens are formed generally we can taste it and stop use, adjust settings, change the coil etc, the equipment just isn't smart enough, most of it was designed to test cigarettes, well we don't smoke and vapor products are completely different.. Perhaps if they designed new equipment that was more realistic EG: the machine turns off if too high of formaldehyde levels are detected (based on an average of where 1000 vapers start to notice it burning at their rate of airflow).

Pretty much every study out there done on the vapor itself is flawed because of poor methodology that doesn't reflect real world conditions..

I agree, with the 18 variables, many of which are very user specific, it is an extremely difficult process to quantify.

However, why not quantify what we can?

The science community hasn't figured it out yet, or at least not published it if they have.

I bit off one piece of the puzzle, temperatures, and tried to understand it as much as possible.

What's the alternate? Throw up our hands and say "I guess we will never know"?



Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk

 

[mikepetro]

Create a methodology and equipment that can properly access atomizers under various conditions, to even consider beginning you'd have to perform a study determine average levels/cfm? of airflow for different settings for individual atomizers to have fairly accurate puffing patterns, eg average low/med/high, once you have the settings and amount of airflow passing over the coil and while being able to detect whether or not a user could tollerate/enjoy the vape only then will it be possible to reflect real world data.

Yes current data holds some value but does it educate us on how to properly operate our vapes safely? In this circumstance In Vitro versus In Vivo comes to mind, In Vitro studies while they are an important step in scientific research, in vitro shows us that yes lets say formaldehyde can affect cells in a certain way but In Vivo tests show how much they actually affect us and can determine the real effects to human beings because it actually measures how much it's affecting a live subject.

At that point there would be no need for what I am doing and I would move on to some other pursuit. I just haven't seen any such animal yet, so I try to understand what I can, under the existing circumstances.

Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk

 

[Eskie]

The question will be if the adehydes Wang measured to are reproduced at similar temperatures. In all likelihood yes, or at least not far off. We already know aldehyde production with different generation tanks occurs but under power conditions of wattage, not temp. The issue now is how to bridge that data to figure out what's producing what under those conditions.

Mike, you've done a lot to show temperatures can get higher than expected at "low" watt settings, temperatures at which aldehyde production is likely to occur and were not able to detect that by taste alone. This is invaluable information for lots of us, tootler to cloud beast. Of course eventually someone has to do this with a temp probe and collection of vapor to see if aldehyde production occurs in the coils we use at temps relatively close to Wang's findings. And right now, without a decent budget, it's not a weekend kitchen experiment.

 

[zoiDman]

Create a methodology and equipment that can properly access atomizers under various conditions, to even consider beginning you'd have to perform a study determine average levels/cfm? of airflow for different settings for individual atomizers to have fairly accurate puffing patterns, eg average low/med/high, once you have the settings and amount of airflow passing over the coil and while being able to detect whether or not a user could tollerate/enjoy the vape only then will it be possible to reflect real world data.

...

Sure, that would be Great. And it would be Closely aligned in Approach (and Cost) as to what would go into a PMTA.

But is it Really Needed for what the Average Reader of a thread like this?

Because one of the things that came out of this Thread was that TC (on the observed Boards Used) did a Pretty Accurate job of reporting Coil Temps.

Yes current data holds some value but does it educate us on how to properly operate our vapes safely?

I can't Define what "Safely" is even for myself, let along for someone Else, so I'm not sure how I could answer this Question.

I think what this thread Does Do is present possible ways to Vape "Safer". And or Concepts as to how to Reduce possible Harm if Harm Exists.

It also Quantified Coil Temperatures under Tested Conditions. Something I have seen almost No Data on. And moved the Conversation from the Subjective Debate as to whether or not a Coil could Reach a given Temperature to the coil Is Reaching the Observed Temperature under these conditions.

 

[mikepetro]

The question will be if the adehydes Wang measured to are reproduced at similar temperatures. In all likelihood yes, or at least not far off. We already know aldehyde production with different generation tanks occurs but under power conditions of wattage, not temp. The issue now is how to bridge that data to figure out what's producing what under those conditions.

Mike, you've done a lot to show temperatures can get higher than expected at "low" watt settings, temperatures at which aldehyde production is likely to occur and were not able to detect that by taste alone. This is invaluable information for lots of us, tootler to cloud beast. Of course eventually someone has to do this with a temp probe and collection of vapor to see if aldehyde production occurs in the coils we use at temps relatively close to Wang's findings. And right now, without a decent budget, it's not a weekend kitchen experiment.

I believe Wang, Geiss, and others are correct in that VG goes into thermal degradation at temps starting "around" 410f.

I don't believe either study in terms of quantification per puff.

Let's assume someone is running 100% VG in a TC mod at 480f. How much formaldehyde are they getting per puff?

All of those 18 variables come into play again. A user running dual Clapton coils covering 65% of the wick will get more than a user running a conservative single coil covering only 15% of the wick. A user hitting harder will get more than one tootling.

It will be years before anyone could accurately quantify nasties on a per puff basis accounting for the 18 variables.

I think the only real approach to solve that is to sample a large population of real vapers, actually vaping, while diverting 5% of the puff into a machine and extrapolate from there. You have to include the user, because the user is a significant portion of the variables, smoking machines are not the answer.

My whole premise is that if we know nasties start jumping through the roof at 450f, then let's just stay below that temp. If we avoid the trigger, then quantification is a non issue.

Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk

 

[corn flakes]

I agree, with the 18 variables, many of which are very user specific, it is an extremely difficult process to quantify.

However, why not quantify what we can?

The science community hasn't figured it out yet, or at least not published it if they have.

I bit off one piece of the puzzle, temperatures, and tried to understand it as much as possible.

What's the alternate? Throw up our hands and say "I guess we will never know"?



Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk

Mike

I would like to thank you again for your efforts in this.

 

[pufZeppelin]

yes, same here - I would like to give Mike a BIG Thanks for doing the work and putting together this thread...

consider myself a pretty level-headed vapor'er but reading this thread just opened my eyes to
perhaps - lower my VG ratio, use lower TEMP/POWER and try to use TEMP CONTROL more...

nice work Mike, Thank You

 

[440BB]

Are any answers about vaping absolute at this point? No. I'll gladly take heed of educated guesses with the information we have plus what we've gained here. The brave souls who make a real effort to understand more through trial and error while putting up with critics are vapers who have earned my respect, whether I agree or not.

I don't see many critics putting in the practical work to back up their point of view.

I needed to repeat myself.

Just like an armchair expert, it takes little effort to post this, maybe a minute.

Do I feel a little guilty about my minimal effort relative to someone who puts in the time and money to help us all find a safer vape?

Yes.

These efforts are how vaping had gotten safer over the years, not theoretical chat.

If someone wants it done differently, put some skin in the game.

 

[Mowgli]

I agree, with the 18 variables, many of which are very user specific, it is an extremely difficult process to quantify.

However, why not quantify what we can?

Excellent. Horseshoes, hand grenades, nuclear bombs and now temp control

 

[mikepetro]

Excellent. Horseshoes, hand grenades, nuclear bombs and now temp control

Oh, are we talking about those 3lb coils you build?

Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk

 

[Mowgli]

Oh, are we talking about those 3lb coils you build?

New stock on the way

 

[Robino1]

Mike

I would like to thank you again for your efforts in this.

View attachment 667771​

yes, same here - I would like to give Mike a BIG Thanks for doing the work and putting together this thread...

consider myself a pretty level-headed vapor'er but reading this thread just opened my eyes to
perhaps - lower my VG ratio, use lower TEMP/POWER and try to use TEMP CONTROL more...

nice work Mike, Thank You

I absolutely agree with the above!!

Thank you, Mike, for being curious enough to take on this project. One of which you never HAD to do.

 

[sorrynomore]

Mike

I would like to thank you again for your efforts in this.

View attachment 667771​

yes, same here - I would like to give Mike a BIG Thanks for doing the work and putting together this thread...

consider myself a pretty level-headed vapor'er but reading this thread just opened my eyes to
perhaps - lower my VG ratio, use lower TEMP/POWER and try to use TEMP CONTROL more...

nice work Mike, Thank You

I absolutely agree with the above!!

Thank you, Mike, for being curious enough to take on this project. One of which you never HAD to do.

Yup me too!
Thanks Mike!!!

 

[Burnie]

Mike

I would like to thank you again for your efforts in this.

yes, same here - I would like to give Mike a BIG Thanks for doing the work and putting together this thread...

I absolutely agree with the above!!

Thank you, Mike, for being curious enough to take on this project. One of which you never HAD to do.

Yup me too!
Thanks Mike!!!

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Me Too, What they said.

 

[homeuser6]

"The question then comes, do we get that hot in our attys?"
how am i supposed to know? i don't have a circuit board mod with a screen. i have a tube mech and rsst. although i studied here plenty before deciding how to build, my results are only guesswork.
wait, mike petro has offered thermocouple testing of my actual rig under my actual vaping conditions. man, i couldn't get to the post office fast enough. turns out i'm practically golden.
mike volunteered his time, effort and resources to answer my question. i think he joined the short list of people here who can answer with solid testing. (that is not to say there's any shortage of helpful people here).
another good reason ecf is the go to for vapers.
"The question then comes, do we get that hot in our attys?"
well, not me. thanks again, mike
( i expected you to be swamped with requests by now.)

 

[David Wolf]

I'll get an Ego One with a 1 ohm coil out to you to keep the fun rolling!

Give him a CLR rebuildable coil if you have it. I dont know of a better vaping single coil for MTL vaping at 10.5 to 11W of ANY style and time.

 

[mikepetro]

I have a bag full of Delta2s for testing as well, once I get back home.

Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk

 

[440BB]

Have a great weekend all!