You sir are correct and I am an idiot, everybody please ignore my previous posts. I got excited and flipped my math.
Sent with no malice and not a whole lot of forethought from my new Galaxy Tab 4. Thanks Santa!
Older Folks and Vaping Front Porch - Part Three
- Thread starter MikeE3
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
You sir are correct and I am an idiot, everybody please ignore my previous posts. I got excited and flipped my math.
Sent with no malice and not a whole lot of forethought from my new Galaxy Tab 4. Thanks Santa!
It's the little retangular glass thingie at the end of a laptop that you touch & drag, or tap to control the cursor like a mouse would do. It's a touchpad.
A few years ago, I started a 'cane emergency cache wid sum (aka many) rechargeable AA/AAA/C/9V batts. If anyone one wants 'em, send me a PM. I'll send to a porcher on my dime! I might even find and toss in da charger.
All I can say is dat when new, not too bad. BUT, dey do slide down hill real quick and poop out at da wrong time (and yes, I had da proper charger and babied 'em). IOW, no value fer moi.
I'm wid Matt, buy ¢heap and many alkalines if ya need 1.5V and 9V!
IMHO, with today's batt technologies, it would be more advi$able to purchase new compatible devices using da new chemistry.
Totally unacceptable fer moi!
Just my experience$ and $.02 FRN...
I think the Euro is about 1.60 to 1. OOps should have kept reading.
Last edited:
Heres some good info if I did this right.
A Look at Formaldehyde Levels Found in E-Cig Vapor
Recently we reported on a story out of Japan evaluating levels of formaldehyde released through vaping. Yesterday another study on this same topic was published in the New England Journal of Medicine and has been picked up by mainstream media. In this study, researchers measured formaldehyde using a variable voltage battery set at 3.3 and 5 volts. The vapor was collected and evaluated from an unnamed atomizer after a 4 second puff. The study found that at low voltage (3.3V) no formaldehyde was detected. However, at high voltage (5.0V), levels of formaldehyde were detected at levels up to 15 times higher than cigarette smoke.
Without further investigation on the methods and conclusion of this study, the results are very alarming. We feel it is our responsibility to dig deeper and provide the public with the whole truth.
One glaring problem with this publication is the researchers found formaldehyde hemiacetals (a combination of formaldehyde and alcohols) not formaldehyde. It is also important to know that formaldehyde is present everywhere. It is found in every person, smokers and nonsmokers alike, and can occur anytime hydrogen, carbon, and oxygen are in the presence of each other.
The truth is, this study is deeply flawed in many ways. In fact, it is highly irresponsible to publish a half truth and present it as science. For starters, as outlined by Dr. Konstantino Farsalinos, the authors of this study failed to mention (perhaps unknowingly) that volts do not measure thermal energy. Energy should be expressed in watts. Therefore, with the published information we do not know how many watts were applied to the atomizer.
Fortunately, Dr. Farsalinos used the information that was provided to approximate wattage settings. According to the study, 5mg of e-liquid were consumed at 3.3 volts. Based on measurements performed by Farsalinos, “…such consumption is observed at about 6-7 watts at 4-second puffs. Thus, the atomizer resistance is probably 1.6-1.8 ohms. This means that at 5 volts the energy was around 14-16 watts.”
So, what does this mean in terms of realistic user conditions? If the resistance was between 1.6-1.8 ohms and the wattage is somewhere between 14-16 watts, the vaporizer is being overheated and the wicking material is being burned. Essentially, these researchers are collecting data on a dry or burnt hit.
What the authors of this study aren’t accounting for is how easily this scenario is detected by the user. An electronic cigarette user would never vape at these settings. No one continuously vapes an overheated atomizer. The taste is unpleasant, to put it mildly. Therefore, no vaper will ever be exposed to the reported levels of formaldehyde.
We can’t wait to get these in your hands! We know you’ll be quite pleased as your rDNA 40s begin to arrive in early January. All orders currently processing will ship within the next few weeks. No more backorders!
This method of measuring aldehydes in a lab environment is deceptive and unfair. The public deserves clear and concise results from scientific studies. If researchers continue to publish misleading findings and the media continues with its sensationalism the results can be damaging. How many smokers are afraid to switch to a device that could potentially save their lives?
For a more detailed breakdown on this study, I urge you to read Dr. Farsalinos’ response by following this link: Electronic Cigarette | www.ecigarette-research.com
A Look at Formaldehyde Levels Found in E-Cig Vapor
Recently we reported on a story out of Japan evaluating levels of formaldehyde released through vaping. Yesterday another study on this same topic was published in the New England Journal of Medicine and has been picked up by mainstream media. In this study, researchers measured formaldehyde using a variable voltage battery set at 3.3 and 5 volts. The vapor was collected and evaluated from an unnamed atomizer after a 4 second puff. The study found that at low voltage (3.3V) no formaldehyde was detected. However, at high voltage (5.0V), levels of formaldehyde were detected at levels up to 15 times higher than cigarette smoke.
Without further investigation on the methods and conclusion of this study, the results are very alarming. We feel it is our responsibility to dig deeper and provide the public with the whole truth.
One glaring problem with this publication is the researchers found formaldehyde hemiacetals (a combination of formaldehyde and alcohols) not formaldehyde. It is also important to know that formaldehyde is present everywhere. It is found in every person, smokers and nonsmokers alike, and can occur anytime hydrogen, carbon, and oxygen are in the presence of each other.
The truth is, this study is deeply flawed in many ways. In fact, it is highly irresponsible to publish a half truth and present it as science. For starters, as outlined by Dr. Konstantino Farsalinos, the authors of this study failed to mention (perhaps unknowingly) that volts do not measure thermal energy. Energy should be expressed in watts. Therefore, with the published information we do not know how many watts were applied to the atomizer.
Fortunately, Dr. Farsalinos used the information that was provided to approximate wattage settings. According to the study, 5mg of e-liquid were consumed at 3.3 volts. Based on measurements performed by Farsalinos, “…such consumption is observed at about 6-7 watts at 4-second puffs. Thus, the atomizer resistance is probably 1.6-1.8 ohms. This means that at 5 volts the energy was around 14-16 watts.”
So, what does this mean in terms of realistic user conditions? If the resistance was between 1.6-1.8 ohms and the wattage is somewhere between 14-16 watts, the vaporizer is being overheated and the wicking material is being burned. Essentially, these researchers are collecting data on a dry or burnt hit.
What the authors of this study aren’t accounting for is how easily this scenario is detected by the user. An electronic cigarette user would never vape at these settings. No one continuously vapes an overheated atomizer. The taste is unpleasant, to put it mildly. Therefore, no vaper will ever be exposed to the reported levels of formaldehyde.
We can’t wait to get these in your hands! We know you’ll be quite pleased as your rDNA 40s begin to arrive in early January. All orders currently processing will ship within the next few weeks. No more backorders!
This method of measuring aldehydes in a lab environment is deceptive and unfair. The public deserves clear and concise results from scientific studies. If researchers continue to publish misleading findings and the media continues with its sensationalism the results can be damaging. How many smokers are afraid to switch to a device that could potentially save their lives?
For a more detailed breakdown on this study, I urge you to read Dr. Farsalinos’ response by following this link: Electronic Cigarette | www.ecigarette-research.com
A few years ago, I started a 'cane emergency cache wid sum (aka many) rechargeable AA/AAA/C/9V batts. If anyone one wants 'em, send me a PM. I'll send to a porcher on my dime! I might even find and toss in da charger.
All I can say is dat when new, not too bad. BUT, dey do slide down hill real quick and poop out at da wrong time (and yes, I had da proper charger and babied 'em). IOW, no value fer moi.
I'm wid Matt, buy ¢heap and many alkalines if ya need 1.5V and 9V!
IMHO, with today's batt technologies, it would be more advi$able to purchase new compatible devices using da new chemistry.
Totally unacceptable fer moi!
Just my experience$ and $.02 FRN...
I just get those big 6 volt lantern bateries & open them up. Voila! 30 something baby AA's!
Yep - I keep thinking about getting one to charge NiCads but we've already got 4 battery chargers.
Yep again - I know about the 1.22 volts vs: 1.5 volts. Some google research actually returned some users of the Magic Mouse reporting the 1.22's don't work regardless that Apple says their mouse works with rechargeable batts. Apple even sells their own brand of rechargeable batts and charger.
Thanks for the post 2legs. This has been all over our local radio news station today. Kept repeating that e-cigs may be dangerous "a Portland researcher study shows that e-cigs can have 2 1/2 times the formaldehye of a regular cigarette". Nothing more than that - just an attention getting sound bite all day long.
Yes, Yes! Thank you. Of course now I'll have to order something else from Fasttech, too.
Absolutely! Spend $20 and save a buck on shipping, sounds good to me.
Did you find the reference? I know I've seen it here too, just can't remember where. CASAA?
Vapor Shark emailed it to me. I knew this study was in the works there is probably more on the docs website.
Hey 2legs - you seen this yet? A spacer to eliminate the spring and eliminate inconsistant Ωs.
https://squareup.com/market/AWEKillerModz/kayfun-spring-delete-spacer
Thread with a bunch of links here. http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ormaldehype-junk-study-released-jan-21-a.html The "study" was done in Sloth country at my old university.
- Dec 18, 2013
- 2,946
- 56,640
- 79
A cig testing machine would pull air thru a cig until it was all gone. Thinking about that... would that test result be accurate either? Wouldn't be possible to take a drag that long!
If they test an ecig the same way... it's obvious the test results would be ridiculously wrong. Not to mention a vv/vw mod wouldn't let you do it. They have a 10 second (now 20 with the SVD2) cut off.
If they test an ecig the same way... it's obvious the test results would be ridiculously wrong. Not to mention a vv/vw mod wouldn't let you do it. They have a 10 second (now 20 with the SVD2) cut off.
Quick question for my knowledgeable porchers - Smok SID vv for $15.00? Good buy? I know nothing about replaceable batteries but I need to add to my vacopolypse stash. Opinions?
Sorry misswish - don't know about that one.
- Status
Similar threads
