On another non-e-cig related forum I saw this anti-e-cig post. Anyone want to debunk it?

[HighlanderNorth]

• Diethylene glycol was detected in one cartridge at approximately 1%. Diethylene glycol, an ingredient used in antifreeze, is toxic to humans.
• Certain tobacco-specific nitrosamines which are human carcinogens were detected in half of the samples tested.
• tobacco-specific impurities suspected of being harmful to humans—anabasine, myosmine, and β-nicotyrine—were detected in a majority of the samples tested.
• The electronic cigarette cartridges that were labeled as containing no nicotine had low levels of nicotine present in all cartridges tested, except one.
• Three different electronic cigarette cartridges with the same label were tested and each cartridge emitted a markedly different amount of nicotine with each puff. The nicotine levels per puff ranged from 26.8 to 43.2 mcg nicotine/100 mL puff.
• One high-nicotine cartridge delivered twice as much nicotine to users when the vapor from that electronic cigarette brand was inhaled than was delivered by a sample of the nicotine inhalation product (used as a control) approved by FDA for use as a smoking cessation aid.

www .yourlawyer.com/topics/overview/Electronic-Cigarettes"]http://www.yourlawyer.com/topics/ove...nic-Cigarettes[/URL]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I tried to debunk it the best I could with my limited knowledge, and here's what I posted in response:


The last 3 of 6 complaints are mostly non-issues because most people I have talked to and most people over at ecf forums dont buy pre-filled cartridges. Besides, the pre-filled cartridges that have inconsistent amounts of nicotine probably came from inconsistent Chinese sources. There are plenty of US and UK sources who actually measure this stuff in labs. Besides, like I siad, most people dont use those cartridges anyway. I either buy American made, American mixed e-liquids which are mixed using a known quantity of nicotine, or I mix my own liquids using a known quantity of nicotine. Thats wipes out all of the last 3 issues.

If a known carcinogen was found in "1" cartridge, that again, was probably a Chinese product. I dont buy from China, and again. most people dont use cartridges.

Next: Tobacco specific impurities. The only way that could exist is in extracted e-liquiids made from tobacco leaf. But most e-liquids arent extracted from tobacco. Most tobacco flavored e-liquids arent even tobacco based in reality. Some are though, but they are extracted in lab situations. Is it possible that a minor amount of a carcinogen or 2 are in some of these products? Probably. Most? No.


Lastly, another mention of tobacco specific impurities. I have no idea how my PeachBerry fruit flavored e-liquid or my cappuccino, Smarty Pants, White Peach, Tiramisu, coffee, or honeysuckle would have ANY tobacco specific impurities considering that none of them are made or extracted from tobacco. Again, most arent.

The nicotine that is used in most e-liquids can be easily purchased from UK or USA, where it contains only nicotine and diluents like food grade vegetable glycerin.

So is your argument that we should maybe ban e-cigs because of the slight possibility that a minor number of Chinese made cartridges that most people dont use "might" contain a tiny number of chemicals that are known carcinogens, which would force people to go back to cigarettes, which contain FAR, FAR, FAR more carcinogens than some e-cigs may contain, and are FAR worse from a second hand standpoint?

There is no evidence that there is ANY second hand risk due to vaping, unless you are kissing the person and you take a drag, then blow it into that other person's mouth... Otherwise I dont how a water vapor that disperses almost immediately(unlike cig smoke) can somehow transfer nicotine to others(?)

Besides, if we are truly worried about carcinogens and poisons, then we should be much more worried about all the chemicals under our sinks, in our closets, in our bathrooms, etc. Just about everything you use to clean around your house can kill you! Should we ban it all?

Nicotine is also present in many other stop-smoking cessation products that people other than the primary user can get hold of and use improperly. Nicotine is available and sold in insecticides too in much higher concentrations!

The point of e-cigs is, if it helps people quit a habit that is not only MUCH, MUCH worse for their health, and the health of those around them, and terrible for our health insurance system due to the health related costs that are passed on to everyone, then maybe, just maybe its better to allow something that 'might be' a tiny fraction(and I mean tiny!) as unhealthy as tobacco products to help people quit those much more unhealthy products which will make life better for us all!


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your turn!

 

[Orobas]

I personally fail to see the point of trying to defend myself, my habit, and my hobby to an ambulance chaser.View attachment 132924

I appreciate your efforts, but I don't think that's the correct venue for refuting disinformation. They aren't offering any links to reputable sources for their hearsay, so respond with something more concrete if you feel you must respond at all.

here's one example: Study finds e-cigarettes no threat to heart | Fox News

I'm sure you can find more on casaa.org

 

[kiwivap]

Actually, I think you did a nice job on that by yourself. And yeah - what flavors exactly did they test, from where, and what quantities exactly were found - and was that using mass spec on exhaled vapor? Just a few questions I'd ask.

• Diethylene glycol was detected in one cartridge at approximately 1%. Diethylene glycol, an ingredient used in antifreeze, is toxic to humans.
• Certain tobacco-specific nitrosamines which are human carcinogens were detected in half of the samples tested.
• Tobacco-specific impurities suspected of being harmful to humans—anabasine, myosmine, and β-nicotyrine—were detected in a majority of the samples tested.
• The electronic cigarette cartridges that were labeled as containing no nicotine had low levels of nicotine present in all cartridges tested, except one.
• Three different electronic cigarette cartridges with the same label were tested and each cartridge emitted a markedly different amount of nicotine with each puff. The nicotine levels per puff ranged from 26.8 to 43.2 mcg nicotine/100 mL puff.
• One high-nicotine cartridge delivered twice as much nicotine to users when the vapor from that electronic cigarette brand was inhaled than was delivered by a sample of the nicotine inhalation product (used as a control) approved by FDA for use as a smoking cessation aid.

www .yourlawyer.com/topics/overview/Electronic-Cigarettes"]http://www.yourlawyer.com/topics/ove...nic-Cigarettes[/URL]


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I tried to debunk it the best I could with my limited knowledge, and here's what I posted in response:


The last 3 of 6 complaints are mostly non-issues because most people I have talked to and most people over at ecf forums dont buy pre-filled cartridges. Besides, the pre-filled cartridges that have inconsistent amounts of nicotine probably came from inconsistent Chinese sources. There are plenty of US and UK sources who actually measure this stuff in labs. Besides, like I siad, most people dont use those cartridges anyway. I either buy American made, American mixed e-liquids which are mixed using a known quantity of nicotine, or I mix my own liquids using a known quantity of nicotine. Thats wipes out all of the last 3 issues.

If a known carcinogen was found in "1" cartridge, that again, was probably a Chinese product. I dont buy from China, and again. most people dont use cartridges.

Next: Tobacco specific impurities. The only way that could exist is in extracted e-liquiids made from tobacco leaf. But most e-liquids arent extracted from tobacco. Most tobacco flavored e-liquids arent even tobacco based in reality. Some are though, but they are extracted in lab situations. Is it possible that a minor amount of a carcinogen or 2 are in some of these products? Probably. Most? No.


Lastly, another mention of tobacco specific impurities. I have no idea how my PeachBerry fruit flavored e-liquid or my cappuccino, Smarty Pants, White Peach, Tiramisu, coffee, or honeysuckle would have ANY tobacco specific impurities considering that none of them are made or extracted from tobacco. Again, most arent.

The nicotine that is used in most e-liquids can be easily purchased from UK or USA, where it contains only nicotine and diluents like food grade vegetable glycerin.

So is your argument that we should maybe ban e-cigs because of the slight possibility that a minor number of Chinese made cartridges that most people dont use "might" contain a tiny number of chemicals that are known carcinogens, which would force people to go back to cigarettes, which contain FAR, FAR, FAR more carcinogens than some e-cigs may contain, and are FAR worse from a second hand standpoint?

There is no evidence that there is ANY second hand risk due to vaping, unless you are kissing the person and you take a drag, then blow it into that other person's mouth... Otherwise I dont how a water vapor that disperses almost immediately(unlike cig smoke) can somehow transfer nicotine to others(?)

Besides, if we are truly worried about carcinogens and poisons, then we should be much more worried about all the chemicals under our sinks, in our closets, in our bathrooms, etc. Just about everything you use to clean around your house can kill you! Should we ban it all?

Nicotine is also present in many other stop-smoking cessation products that people other than the primary user can get hold of and use improperly. Nicotine is available and sold in insecticides too in much higher concentrations!

The point of e-cigs is, if it helps people quit a habit that is not only MUCH, MUCH worse for their health, and the health of those around them, and terrible for our health insurance system due to the health related costs that are passed on to everyone, then maybe, just maybe its better to allow something that 'might be' a tiny fraction(and I mean tiny!) as unhealthy as tobacco products to help people quit those much more unhealthy products which will make life better for us all!


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your turn!

 

[kiwivap]

I was also just thinking that some people do this stuff for all sorts of everyday products - this over-reactionary must know every last details of what is in this product - followed by hand waving over something actually harmless with a long chemical name.

 

[gthompson]

That's from the one (incredibly flawed) study done by the FDA a number of years ago. It's a bunch of hogwash.

 

[Absintheur]

The nitrosamine level in the average cartridge is 4 nanograms...an full flavor Camel clocks in at at over 7000 nanograms per cigarette...think I will stick with the e-cigs...

 

[Spazmelda]

I'll try.

Diethylene glycol was detected in one cartridge at approximately 1%. Diethylene glycol, an ingredient used in antifreeze, is toxic to humans.

-true, it was found in 1 (out of 18 Chinese cartridges tested by the FDA, iirc). Probably a contaminant of the PG. While diethylene glycol is toxic, such a small level is probably not going to cause harm. We obviously don't want it in our juice, but it's worth noting that no other testing has ever found diethylene glycol in any eliquids, and (also iirc) the compound was not found in the vapor, just the liquid.

Certain tobacco-specific nitrosamines which are human carcinogens were detected in half of the samples tested.

-true. TSNAs were detected at extremely low levels. The levels found were similar to those found in nicotine gum and patches. Again, I think I recall that they were not detected in the vapor.

Tobacco-specific impurities suspected of being harmful to humans—anabasine, myosmine, and β-nicotyrine—were detected in a majority of the samples tested.

-I can't remember, probably true. Again, at very low levels. You can find the FDA study and look for the info if you want to know. Oh, here it is:
http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/ScienceResearch/UCM173250.pdf

The electronic cigarette cartridges that were labeled as containing no nicotine had low levels of nicotine present in all cartridges tested, except one.

-also true. Poor quality control in these particular Chinese juices seems most likely explanation. The levels of nicotine were very low.

Three different electronic cigarette cartridges with the same label were tested and each cartridge emitted a markedly different amount of nicotine with each puff. The nicotine levels per puff ranged from 26.8 to 43.2 mcg nicotine/100 mL puff.
One high-nicotine cartridge delivered twice as much nicotine to users when the vapor from that electronic cigarette brand was inhaled than was delivered by a sample of the nicotine inhalation product (used as a control) approved by FDA for use as a smoking cessation aid.

-true, although their testing setup was not ideal for proper function of an e-cig, so that may have something to do with their results. Or it could be the quality control of the companies in question.

In all, this FDA report spun the data to make it sound much more alarming than it actually was. So, essentially the points are true, but the same data could just as well be used to demonstrate that e-cigs are safer than cigarettes and probably about the same risk profile as other NRTs (aside from the quality control issues which, IMO, were concerning).

Thats my stab at it.

BTW, most e liquids ARE extracted from tobacco, and that's where the TSNAs come from. Same as with NRTs.

 

[vsummer1]

Why don't you join CASAA and pool your resources since they have all this information on their website?

 

[yvilla]

Just a small correction/clarification to Spazmelda's correction to the OP's post: The "liquids" themselves are not extracted from tobacco. But of course the nicotine content, if any, is extracted from tobacco, just as is the nicotine found in pharmaceutical NRTs such as the patch, inhaler, and gum.

So in an 18 mg liquid, a paltry 1.8% of the liquid (the nicotine content) is in fact extracted from tobacco. There will indeed be minuscule quantities of TSNAs, so minuscule as to be at non-carcinogenic levels, just as in pharmacueutical NRT products again.

But the rest of the liquid, the other 98.2% of it, will be PG or VG, often a tiny amount of water, and flavorings.

To the OP, the FDA press release about its study has been debunked for years now. Take the advice given above and read some of the resources found at CASAA.org. It wasn't even the FDA study findings themselves that needed to be debunked - it was the ridiculous spin placed on them in the FDA press release that needed debunking (along with some other obvious flaws of the study, such as not comparing eliquid and vapor chemical content with smoke chemical content).

 

[xanderxman]

I guess some people would just prefer that we keep inhaling the thousands of harmful and deadly chemicals in cigs. Apparently that is so much safer than these "unknown" e-cigs. The world would be a better place if everyone just continued to ingest poison and lined the pockets of BT, BP and politicians. Let's all get back to the status quo immediately. End sarcasm.

I don't feel these are uneducated people putting out this filth. They are actually highly educated, highly paid lobbyists. They are preaching to the uneducated, however. And that is dangerous. The uneducated jump on the bandwagon and spread the wrong message to everyone they know.

 

[jonnypanic]

That's from the one (incredibly flawed) study done by the FDA a number of years ago. It's a bunch of hogwash.

Yeah, I see the same report cited each time this comes up. Old study done on sketchy products.

 

[Fiamma]

I guess some people would just prefer that we keep inhaling the thousands of harmful and deadly chemicals in cigs. Apparently that is so much safer than these "unknown" e-cigs. The world would be a better place if everyone just continued to ingest poison and lined the pockets of BT, BP and politicians. Let's all get back to the status quo immediately. End sarcasm.

I don't feel these are uneducated people putting out this filth. They are actually highly educated, highly paid lobbyists. They are preaching to the uneducated, however. And that is dangerous. The uneducated jump on the bandwagon and spread the wrong message to everyone they know.

I totally agree.

 

[classwife]

Moved to Media and General News from General E-Smoking Discussion

Also broke live link in first post.
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...g-links-junk-science-other-rubbish-posts.html

 

[DC2]

That sounds like it might be the result of actions discussed in this blog entry...
http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/12/action-on-smoking-and-health.html

This is a quote from the press release discussed in the above link...

In response to requests for legal assistance he is receiving from persons who purchased e-cigarettes based upon claims of safety, who subsequently learned that an FDA study showed that they contained deadly toxins and cancer-causing chemicals, Prof. Banzhaf has posted on line a template for drafting a class action law suit complaint against sellers of e-cigarettes. With this simple template, any attorney contacted by an e-cigarette purchaser can easily file his or her own new law suit.

So far I think I have only heard of one person who tried to file a lawsuit using this approach.
I wish I could find that thread now.

However, I don't remember hearing any follow-up information, so it is most likely that suit went absolutely nowhere.

 

[rolygate]

Diethylene glycol was detected in one cartridge at approximately 1%. Diethylene glycol, an ingredient used in antifreeze, is toxic to humans.

Indeed, it certainly is toxic when consumed in significant quantities; but (a) it wasn't detected in the vapor, and (b) in order to be toxic, in the quantity found, you'd need to drink about 5 gallons of the raw e-liquid. This would be difficult.

Certain tobacco-specific nitrosamines which are human carcinogens were detected in half of the samples tested.

No doubt. However the quantities found are (a) almost identical to those found in NRTs such as nicotine skin patches, and (b), "millions of times lower than conceivably harmful to human health", in the words of a professor who commented on this.

Tobacco-specific impurities suspected of being harmful to humans - anabasine, myosmine, and β-nicotyrine - were detected in a majority of the samplestested.

Who exactly suspects these are 'impurities' are harmful? They are the normal alkaloids found in tobacco and considered by experts to either have similar activity to nicotine or no activity in humans. They aren't impurities any more than nicotine is an impurity. In addition, we know for a fact that they are not harmful since hundreds of thousands of people in Sweden have consumed them in smokeless tobacco for decades with no harmful effect. The only effect of ad lib consumption of these tobacco alkaloids in Sweden (without the harmful smoke) is that Sweden has the lowest figures for tobacco-related cancers in Europe; and consumption of smokeless tobacco in Sweden is shown to have the same health outcomes as not consuming it at all. Anyone suggesting that consumption of tobacco alkaloids with smoke and most carcinogens removed is harmful needs to show some evidence for their statement. This would be difficult as there isn't any. Some of these compounds are now being used or trialled for medicinal use, such as reduction of inflammation in rheumatism; the pharmaceutical companies using these compounds presumably don't consider them harmful.

One high-nicotine cartridge delivered twice as much nicotine to users when the vapor from that electronic cigarette brand was inhaled than was delivered by a sample of the nicotine inhalation product (used as a control) approved by FDA for use as a smoking cessation aid.

That is the designed purpose of a 'high-nicotine cartridge' otherwise it wouldn't work. Something labelled 'high nicotine' which didn't do that would be fraudulently marketed. What exactly is the problem with this? People have a factor 10 difference in their tolerance to nicotine, and require individual trial to determine the beneficial level of nicotine for themselves. One person may require a dose 10 times stronger than another requires, to deliver the same effect. If the FDA don't know this they should get out of the business of declaiming on the subject of consumer product variations. If you need stronger coffee than your neighbor it's your business, not the FDA's - unless you think they should be telling you that you can't do that.

The mode of presentation of the FDA's tests constitutes a lie since findings that have no significance were purported to be harmful. The FDA are therefore liars, and this old study from several years ago has been the subject of much hilarity for years. Several professors and doctors expert in the subject area have commented on how utterly worthless and false the FDA's presentation was. When professors state the FDA are liars you can reasonably assume there is some sort of agenda, and you don't have to look far to find it: they work for the pharmaceutical industry.

E-cigarettes are the worst news pharma has ever had, since there is clear potential for reducing significant parts of their lucrative drug trade by 50% or more. In Sweden, there are 40% less smokers than elsewhere comparable due to their use of Snus (smokeless tobacco), and pharma's income is reduced in proportion - Snus consumers don't get sick and don't need chemotherapy drugs etc.; and Swedes don't buy NRTs much as they have something that works orders of magnitude better.

If 40% of Swedish smokers use Snus, we can reasonably expect that a larger percentage of smokers elsewhere will switch to ecigs, as they are far more acceptable to smokers and uptake has been much faster than for Snus. Certainly, a 50% switchover seems possible, and 60% seems more likely in the long term. A 60% reduction in the drugs trade for chemotherapy drugs, COPD drugs, cardiac drugs, vascular drugs and similar is a nightmare scenario for the pharmaceutical industry - it's one of their best money-spinners and may be as much as a $100 billion a year market. Add to that the global market for NRTs (quit-smoking treatments) that will take a similar dive and you can see what the problem is: pharma's worst nightmare. Since they are officially the world's biggest criminal fraudsters and corrupters - and some would say little more than licensed drug cartels - it doesn't take much imagination to see what they are likely to do about it: do what they habitually do, which is to corrupt doctors to lie for them and government officials to lie and regulate.

Pharma is desperate to stop the Sweden scenario spreading to other countries and has bought government employees across the world to help them stop it. The last thing they need is 60% less smokers getting sick or buying their virtually useless NRTs.

 

[Bronze]

Just follow the money (or lack of it). Governments are losing tax revenue on e-cigs so we're taking their lifeblood away from them. They aren't going to stand for this much longer. Just watch. They'll have their claws into us soon.

 

[Petrodus]

Just follow the money (or lack of it). Governments are losing tax revenue on e-cigs so we're taking their lifeblood away from them. They aren't going to stand for this much longer. Just watch. They'll have their claws into us soon.

I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government
from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.
Thomas Jefferson

Every generation needs a new revolution.
Thomas Jefferson

 

[Vocalek]

For future reference, here is an analysis of what the FDA's lab report really said, and how the FDA's anti-tobacco harm reduction staff spun the story. FDA's partial truths and exaggerations endanger health