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
And its,,, 1-2-3,, What i'm I vaping forrrrrr.
Don't know and I don't bang the door,,,,
On the next vaping store,,,
And it's 4-5-6 just make up your dam old mind..
just pick up the vape or smoke, It really don't matter were all gonna chock,
At some point........
Don't know and I don't bang the door,,,,
On the next vaping store,,,
And it's 4-5-6 just make up your dam old mind..
just pick up the vape or smoke, It really don't matter were all gonna chock,
At some point........
Polishing was included in the $10, not as heavily polished as the original, but smooth enough that there wont be any cut fingers.
Yep, I think it looked better before I grouted the joints though. Still need to take a brick and sand a few spots, but thats not going to happen until Spring.Oh, by the way- did you get your sidewalk finished???
Here is a full copy of the replication study. Very interesting.
Food and Chemical Toxicology
Volume 111, January 2018, Pages 64-70
Aldehyde levels in e-cigarette aerosol: Findings from a replication study and from use of a new-generation device
Received 3 October 2017, Revised 1 November 2017, Accepted 2 November 2017, Available online 3 November 2017.
Notice that VG scored the highest of all the liquids tested, and 270C is a temp that folks do vape at.
I tried to pull those tables off with Edit, but apparently once they're uploaded that's it. The tables are a little misleading as Wang calculated in ug/mg of liquid, and Dr. F calculated in ug/gm and then has a figure of liquid per puff in mg. I'm sure there's a way to superimpose these data, but tough to then relate back to temp/watt. Regardless, it does seem that aldehyde production was lower than that earlier clearo study, which we sorta already knew, but pulling it together relying on temp rather than the variability of wattage is still sitting unanswered. However, Dr.F does show how much less of this crap is produced compared to a cigarette.
Mike, your temp/formaldehyde data does seem consistent in the picture drawn by those studies, but the 50/50 measurements you graphed are still tough to explain. Have you had any further thoughts on that?
Mike, your temp/formaldehyde data does seem consistent in the picture drawn by those studies, but the 50/50 measurements you graphed are still tough to explain. Have you had any further thoughts on that?
Hey Mike
Just wanted to say thank you for this thread and your blogs. My daughter recently sent me an article about high temps and carcinogens associated with vaping. My wife vapes so my anti smoking and anti vaping daughter likes to keep us informed of all impending doom and gloom in regards to vaping. As a former smoker and a former vaper I had joined ECF back when I vaped. This forum usually has good info on the doom and gloom so I came here looking for the other half of the story.
I only read the first thirty and last thirty pages of this thread and all of your testing indexs. Needless to say I am impressed with the amount and quality of your work. So much so that i took all my wife's rta's and switched them to NI200 coils (only because that's what I have on hand) and have indoctrinated her on the tc mode of her mod.
So thank you again for your work it is greatly appreciated!!
Sincerely,
Gene
By the way I served on the JFK (ships company) from 1978-1982. My wife is third generation from the old country and she can make a mean pierogie!!!
Just wanted to say thank you for this thread and your blogs. My daughter recently sent me an article about high temps and carcinogens associated with vaping. My wife vapes so my anti smoking and anti vaping daughter likes to keep us informed of all impending doom and gloom in regards to vaping. As a former smoker and a former vaper I had joined ECF back when I vaped. This forum usually has good info on the doom and gloom so I came here looking for the other half of the story.
I only read the first thirty and last thirty pages of this thread and all of your testing indexs. Needless to say I am impressed with the amount and quality of your work. So much so that i took all my wife's rta's and switched them to NI200 coils (only because that's what I have on hand) and have indoctrinated her on the tc mode of her mod.
So thank you again for your work it is greatly appreciated!!
Sincerely,
Gene
By the way I served on the JFK (ships company) from 1978-1982. My wife is third generation from the old country and she can make a mean pierogie!!!
Small world!!!! Remember those two ice cold beers out in the middle of the Indian Ocean? Possibly the best beers I ever had. I forget how many days we had been at sea, but it was looooong time.
Great info - thanks for posting the study @mikepetro !
My highlights:
Arrows compare vaping 5ml flavored at 9W vs. smoking 1 cigarette.
1 cigarette = 1434 total
5ml = 174 total
5ml vaping = 0.12 cigarette
"More importantly, using
the same liquid with a new-generation atomizer at realistic (no dry
puff) conditions, aldehyde levels were extremely low and unlikely to
cause any substantial health harm to EC users."
"Herein, unflavored liquid emitted lower levels of aldehydes compared
to the flavored sample but the absolute difference was minimal and of
questionable clinical significance. However, we tested just one flavored
liquid and it is possible that other flavors could contribute to higher
aldehyde emissions. Since the vast majority of EC consumers use flavored
liquids (Farsalinos et al., 2013b), it is essential to replicate the
study by Khlystov and Samburova (2016) and further examine this
issue using different flavors."
My highlights:
Arrows compare vaping 5ml flavored at 9W vs. smoking 1 cigarette.
1 cigarette = 1434 total
5ml = 174 total
5ml vaping = 0.12 cigarette
"More importantly, using
the same liquid with a new-generation atomizer at realistic (no dry
puff) conditions, aldehyde levels were extremely low and unlikely to
cause any substantial health harm to EC users."
"Herein, unflavored liquid emitted lower levels of aldehydes compared
to the flavored sample but the absolute difference was minimal and of
questionable clinical significance. However, we tested just one flavored
liquid and it is possible that other flavors could contribute to higher
aldehyde emissions. Since the vast majority of EC consumers use flavored
liquids (Farsalinos et al., 2013b), it is essential to replicate the
study by Khlystov and Samburova (2016) and further examine this
issue using different flavors."
Last edited:
The longest I ever did actually at sea was 6 1/2 weeks, although that was part of an 8 month deployment. luckily our ships were not dry. We were allowed to drink on board although the amount was controlled 3 tins of beer, per day, per man, perhaps!
Occasionally we used to have American sailors visit us on board, we always felt it was our duty to buy them a beer.... things sometimes got out of hand. When everyone in a mess deck buys you a beer it kind of mounts up.....
I had totally forgotten that! We had been out to sea for 120 days! People sold their beer tickets twenty dollars a pop! What I didn't forget was becoming a Shellback when we crossed the equator!!! Fun times looking back 35 years...
I still have the "Bird Farm News" edition of that event, they even made the dope dog go through it.
I had my fun the night before though, the few shellbacks on that ship ran and hid as they knew they were fair game. It was kind of disappointing that didnt do it again on the way back, but so few had joined the ship that it would have been worse than a college fraternity hazing, the poor few would have slaughtered.
For those who wonder what we are talking about, here is a very toned down accounting of it:
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-initiation-to-become-a-Shellback-in-the-U-S-Navy
Best bottle of Wild Turkey I ever had was when I was restricted to the ship in port on Thanksgiving and a buddy brought one on board for me. I almost got my feet bit off when I was painting the waterline between ships in Diego Garcia harbor.
Good times at the Iron Butterfly peso show in Olongapo City. I still have my Mojo Makes Me Smart shirt but it doesn't fit as good as it did 50lbs ago.
Good times at the Iron Butterfly peso show in Olongapo City. I still have my Mojo Makes Me Smart shirt but it doesn't fit as good as it did 50lbs ago.
OK, so I have been talking with a guy who is intimate with the type of instrument I used.
Here is what he said:
(I believe in full disclosure)
"I've skimmed over your tests.. So these comments are just first pass. Probably not what you want to hear, but... I don't think your restore will prove to be accurate, the good news is I think you were measuring acetaldehyde and formaldehyde (and other compounds)
I spent decades working with the technology you used to measure. I don't know Extech, but I know the technology.
In combustion or reaction by product monitoring, I always focused on two areas first.
1) Representative sample. Is there a reaction that can change concentration of the analyte during sample gathering, conditioning (if any), transport and analysis. Example CO continues to oxidize post combustion, you can lose 10x or more of the CO (v/v) if you don't measure at or near combustion or reaction temperature.. H2O condenses, etc. I would have to refresh my understanding of CH2O to see how cooling of the sample affects it.
-- At this point I would ignore this issue. I think there is a bigger issue
2) What is the real LOQ (limit of quantification) for the measuring device. I looked briefly at the Extech unit, it is an electrochemical sensor. The biggest problem with electrochemical CH2O measurement is usually cross sensitivity to other aldehydes hydrocarbons, VOC's , etc .. They state 50% for ethanol and methanol for example. So if you had 1ppm of ethanol or methanol and 0ppm CH2O, it would read 0.5ppm CH2O. They don't state acetaldehyde
I would be very interested in acetaldehyde cross interference. I suspect the cross sensitivity is close to 1:1. If so you were measuring formaldehyde + acetaldehyde + other VOC's
I don't know the PG/VG heat reaction by-products. I'm sure there is a list somewhere. I would ask Extech for their complete cross interference list.. Then if you can find out what else is in heat reacted PG/VG , you can add or subtract the interfering compounds.
You can get a repeatable measurement without accuracy. If the CH2O and VOC's repeat, the displayed CH2O will repeat. But the VOC's and acetaldehyde might be a big part of the CH2O reading.
This is not a bad thing. If you were measuring formaldehyde and acetaldehyde, the numbers are even safer."
So...... I am going to email the manufacturer of the sensor and ask them point blank if there is a cross interference with acetaldehyde or other aldehydes, as its not listed in their documentation if there is.
If there is, then everything I did is invalid, and merely represents (more/less) total aldehydes.
Here is what he said:
(I believe in full disclosure)
"I've skimmed over your tests.. So these comments are just first pass. Probably not what you want to hear, but... I don't think your restore will prove to be accurate, the good news is I think you were measuring acetaldehyde and formaldehyde (and other compounds)
I spent decades working with the technology you used to measure. I don't know Extech, but I know the technology.
In combustion or reaction by product monitoring, I always focused on two areas first.
1) Representative sample. Is there a reaction that can change concentration of the analyte during sample gathering, conditioning (if any), transport and analysis. Example CO continues to oxidize post combustion, you can lose 10x or more of the CO (v/v) if you don't measure at or near combustion or reaction temperature.. H2O condenses, etc. I would have to refresh my understanding of CH2O to see how cooling of the sample affects it.
-- At this point I would ignore this issue. I think there is a bigger issue
2) What is the real LOQ (limit of quantification) for the measuring device. I looked briefly at the Extech unit, it is an electrochemical sensor. The biggest problem with electrochemical CH2O measurement is usually cross sensitivity to other aldehydes hydrocarbons, VOC's , etc .. They state 50% for ethanol and methanol for example. So if you had 1ppm of ethanol or methanol and 0ppm CH2O, it would read 0.5ppm CH2O. They don't state acetaldehyde
I would be very interested in acetaldehyde cross interference. I suspect the cross sensitivity is close to 1:1. If so you were measuring formaldehyde + acetaldehyde + other VOC's
I don't know the PG/VG heat reaction by-products. I'm sure there is a list somewhere. I would ask Extech for their complete cross interference list.. Then if you can find out what else is in heat reacted PG/VG , you can add or subtract the interfering compounds.
You can get a repeatable measurement without accuracy. If the CH2O and VOC's repeat, the displayed CH2O will repeat. But the VOC's and acetaldehyde might be a big part of the CH2O reading.
This is not a bad thing. If you were measuring formaldehyde and acetaldehyde, the numbers are even safer."
So...... I am going to email the manufacturer of the sensor and ask them point blank if there is a cross interference with acetaldehyde or other aldehydes, as its not listed in their documentation if there is.
If there is, then everything I did is invalid, and merely represents (more/less) total aldehydes.
Mike, I don't think your results are totally invalid at all. If anything they show a, potentially, lower level in acetaldehyde since the results may show all aldehydes. Unless you're willing to invest in lab grade gear I think you (we) will have to be satisfied with "the sum" results the instrument is capable of.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
