Never heard of any of that
Next time on "Monkeys in Labcoats": Holy F it has Temp control?
Last edited:
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
Next time on "Monkeys in Labcoats": Holy F it has Temp control?
Wheres that frying pan emoji.......Never heard of any of that
Next time on "Monkey in Labcoats": Holy F it has Temp control?
Most of them are still testing with CE4 Clearos for tops and god only knows what for the battery.
They must have a dedicated team of archaeologists to dig those up.
Actually, you might be amazed, but I still see them all over the place. For example in cheap blister packs at the local gas station, or tobacco store. They bundle a CE4 and cheap a Ego clone battery, put it in a blister pack, and sell them for $5-$10. For that matter, as embarrassing as it is, I still see them similarly packaged in some B&M vape shops too.
95% of what is in that study already came out in the course of this thread, but it sure is nice to see the Universites and PhD types looking in the right direction, and not being so V/W driven. Their temperature variable list also looks remarkably similar to the chart I did. I have to be honest and say that I do feel a sense of validation after some of the flaming I got earlier on in this thread.
Maybe the next round of testing will get us up to a current era of hardware and styles.
I was pleased to see they applied IR in a technically sound manner, something I didn't have the resources to do.
I was surprised, but not shocked, about their temperature findings on drippers. I had just never considered or tested that genre. Squonking could potentially be similar depending on your squonk habits. The take away being squonk that bottle more often if in doubt.
I would love to see a study comparing temperature and carbonyls of puff styles, like MTL, DL, Tootle, Cloud, etc. Potentially including mg of juice per puff.
As for them using TC hardware, I really don't care as long as they are recognizing that temperatures (more so than voltage or watts) are a major variable. We can deduce our own personal risk tolerance if we are informed as to where the break points are for various genres and styles of vaping at a given temp.
It is all about reducing as much risk as we can while still getting a satisfying vape.
Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk
Maybe the next round of testing will get us up to a current era of hardware and styles.
I was pleased to see they applied IR in a technically sound manner, something I didn't have the resources to do.
I was surprised, but not shocked, about their temperature findings on drippers. I had just never considered or tested that genre. Squonking could potentially be similar depending on your squonk habits. The take away being squonk that bottle more often if in doubt.
I would love to see a study comparing temperature and carbonyls of puff styles, like MTL, DL, Tootle, Cloud, etc. Potentially including mg of juice per puff.
As for them using TC hardware, I really don't care as long as they are recognizing that temperatures (more so than voltage or watts) are a major variable. We can deduce our own personal risk tolerance if we are informed as to where the break points are for various genres and styles of vaping at a given temp.
It is all about reducing as much risk as we can while still getting a satisfying vape.
Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk
"There is growing evidence for the effectiveness of e‐cigarettes as a quitting aid and, although not completely harmless, the scientific consensus is that they are substantially less harmful than smoking tobacco. More research is needed, but there is now sufficient empirical evidence and real‐world experience over more than a decade to consider their use as a legitimate tobacco harm reduction tool for smokers who are unable or unwilling to quit with conventional strategies. Smokers should be advised that the highest success rates occur with daily use with nicotine e‐liquid and newer e‐cigarette models. After quitting smoking, it is preferable to aim ultimately to cease vaping if possible, but long‐term use of e‐cigarettes is safer than relapsing to smoking."
- April 2018
- Internal Medicine Journal 48(4):391-396
- © 2018 Royal Australasian College of Physicians
Last edited:
We need a double winner rating! Finally, somebody admitting that early tests showing high levels of formaldehyde were unrealistic!
A bit more good news in the scientific literature.
The mutagenic assessment of an electronic-cigarette and reference cigarette smoke using the Ames assay in strains TA98 and TA100 - ScienceDirect
Comparison of cellular and transcriptomic effects between electronic cigarette vapor and cigarette smoke in human bronchial epithelial cells - ScienceDirect
The more of this stuff that's published, the better.
The mutagenic assessment of an electronic-cigarette and reference cigarette smoke using the Ames assay in strains TA98 and TA100 - ScienceDirect
Comparison of cellular and transcriptomic effects between electronic cigarette vapor and cigarette smoke in human bronchial epithelial cells - ScienceDirect
The more of this stuff that's published, the better.
I agree, and more will come that I hope will help the FDA understand the relative risk of e-cigs compared to analogs. Both excellent studies validating the huge health delta between cigarettes and e-cigs. The first validates that some chemicals (T98 & T100) found in analogs don't exist in e-cigs. The second attempts to measure the oxidative stress of cells exposed to analogs and e-cigs, and once again, almost none measured for e-cigs. It's important to note that while each study is different, they are both focused on measuring attributes typically associated with cancer - both increased mutagenicity and oxidative stress are correlated to increased cancer rates. Fascinating...live long, vape and prosper!
I think they already know by now. Otherwise health concerns would be at the front of their regulatory reasoning and not the chiiiildren.
We are all just starting to get data on the level of risk. We have assumed, and rightly so, that vaping is far safer than analogs but objective scientists (there seems to be fewer these days), physicians and regulators need data to draw conclusions. This continuing stream of data will help but with the history of irrational actions by politicians, there's no telling how the data will be used by the FDA and others.
They have had the data, all they had to do is look at studies done across the pond.
In the US it's all about the $$$$.
If the FDA was concerned about health, cigarettes would not be on the market.
IMHO...
Health concerns aren't a big part of their argument regarding regulation. Those studies won't change anything. They're good for us vapers to further our knowledge of the risks we're taking but they do nothing to prevent the FDA from claiming vaping leads to smoking and the children need to be protected.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
