Overheating E-Liquid May Produce Formaldehyde

[Myk]

So we had the scare story, now that the study is publicized where is it?

But the consumer is not a disinterested party. They (including me) have a horse in the race, a dog in the fight. We desperately want vaping to be found relatively harmless so it will not be regulated, making it more expensive and harder to come by. We want to be able to vape any time, any place, and so we want it to be declared harmless to bystanders.

As a consumer my interest is the truth.
If ecigs are worse than being in an atomic bomb blast I want to know the truth.
If ecigs are healthier than breathing "clean" air I want to know the truth.

I don't care what that truth is, I just want it.

 

[catilley1092]

So we had the scare story, now that the study is publicized where is it?




As a consumer my interest is the truth.
If ecigs are worse than being in an atomic bomb blast I want to know the truth.
If ecigs are healthier than breathing "clean" air I want to know the truth.

I don't care what that truth is, I just want it.

That's all that I want also, is the truth. No one can state with 100% certainty that e-cigarettes are good for our health, but on the other hand, common sense would tell most that tobacco (or any) inhaled smoke is.

The last few times that I went to the doctor, she was saying that my chest sounds better each time. I was beginning to have smoking related issues going on in my right lung, in particular plural fluid build up that would worsen in the winter. This at times caused much pain, as my lung was pressing against my rib. Also, I had two bouts with pneumonia in 2007 & 2008.

Once I quit smoking & was vaping only, only 3-4 days after beginning after 37 years as an active smoker, I got to feeling better. The plural fluid disappeared. I'm no longer coughing & can breath deeper w/out any pain.

These things aren't a coincidence & there are many more real life success stories.

The facts are, that I tried all of the things my doctors told me, patches, gum, pills, everything but smoking cessation counseling, which is a ripoff & largely a waste of funds. Only the e-cigarette device could compel me to kick the nasty habit, the last 3-4 cigarettes literally made me gag, the last one I crumbled after just 3 draws.

Now, there has to be something to this. It's the way that nicotine is ingested, there's nothing like the vaping experience. As to it's long term safety, that jury is still out. However, I cannot see vaping as bad health wise over smoked tobacco products. Provided that the e-juices are made of food ingredients & not imported from the cheapest supplier in Asia. This is why I choose my suppliers carefully & ask questions if there's doubt or concern.

Cat

 

[Katya]

The [ecig] consumer is not a disinterested party. They (including me) have a horse in the race, a dog in the fight. We desperately want vaping to be found relatively harmless so it will not be regulated, making it more expensive and harder to come by, and to justify our decision to switch from analogs. We want to be able to vape any time, any place, and so we want it to be declared harmless to bystanders. So, in a sense, ecig consumers would profit from favorable studies.

Yeah, we do have a horse in this race--it's called our lives.

I want to know exactly what's in that vapor I'm inhaling daily and I want to know the truth. I'm happy that good doctor Konstantin Farsalinos is involved--he's a cardiologist and a respected researcher. I'm glad he found traces of diacetyl (and other diketones) in some eliquids--it only confirmed what we vapers have suspected for quite a while. I'm glad he's looking into formaldehyde and its production during the process of vaping. Bless his heart--he publishes honest reports and tells it like it is. His studies help us all make informed decisions wrt our vaping habits. We all switched to vaping believing it's safer than smoking and I'm convinced that it is.

The more you know...

 

[Hulamoon]

When the reports come out and words like formaldehyde are tossed around I want to know is:

1) how proportionate to cigarettes

2) how proportionate to many other things that are in daily use and nothing is said about them.

Remember all the fuss a few years back when shipments were seized because the F word was being bandied about? At the end of the day the Courts threw out the seize and destroy order because the "scientific reports" failed to state that the F word was in such minute trace amounts, that it amounted to fraudulent government action.

I'm not arguing that we need to know what vaping entails.

I do not however have time for so-called "scientist" and "concerned citizen" Chicken Littles flapping their stubby little wings and bawling that the sky is falling when they don't tell me "compared to what"?

Remember the war's been on for a decade now. And if "they" had found anything seriously bad in vaping I can guarantee, by God, you would have heard about it by now.

I believe as a smoker that vaping is better. If you never started smoking, and have never been interested in smoking, then don't start vaping

 

[Feignix]

Also an issue in the bad stuff in the vapor we exhale. Those who share our atmosphere also share the risk, albeit to a lesser extent.
Proposed bans on vaping in public, especially in enclosed spaces, are not so unreasonable.

Enclosed spaces...that "should" be a no brainer, common sense, whatever, but since it's obviously not "common" enough, I'll go with that...in PUBLIC though....sheesh.....you gotta be kidding me! You mean I have to watch all these !@#%^ fear mongerers roll by in their SUV's or ANY vehicle with a "combustible" engine emitting "clouds" of proven harmful pollutants and toxins but I dare not take a few puffs off my Evod in PUBLIC-so it's back to hiding under my bed to consume my nicotine so MY socially unacceptable vise won't harm or offend someone else?! I might as well go back to smoking non electric cigarettes if that's the case! SMDH!

Maybe we should just all go drink the "kool-aid" and call it quits, returning Mother Earth back to the forces of nature that are MUCH kinder and gentler, to right all the wrongs us non-evolved underlings have bestowed upon her!

 

[Feignix]

The [ecig] consumer is not a disinterested party. They (including me) have a horse in the race, a dog in the fight. We desperately want vaping to be found relatively harmless so it will not be regulated, making it more expensive and harder to come by, and to justify our decision to switch from analogs. We want to be able to vape any time, any place, and so we want it to be declared harmless to bystanders. So, in a sense, ecig consumers would profit from favorable studies.

Please speak for yourself....I for one do NOT have the desire nor need to "vape any time, or any place..."!
Nor do I kid myself that it's harmless or ever expect it to be. What I expect is to be treated like the free citizen of the United States that I am and for the PROPER democratic process to decide my fate and the fate of my fellow vapers AND citizens, not special interest groups, corporations and the *bleepin* nanny state! I'm tired of the minority deciding the outcome for the majority when the majority claims it wasn't what they wanted....I might not be the sharpest knife in the drawer, but something doesn't add up!

What I WANT is for reason and decency to prevail, not the fear mongering, dirty tactics, double standards and hypocrisy that's running rampant and ruling the roost these days! Is that REALLY too much to ask for??

 

[Stosh]

Well it's not an e-cigarette study, but it's using higher heat than e-cigs, and much more vapor than the most ardent cloud chaser could produce....they cite 700 degrees F necessary, and Formaldehyde was found at 0.04 parts per million.

http://www.wizardsdenspfx.com/LDFog.PDF

 

[AndriaD]

The [ecig] consumer is not a disinterested party. They (including me) have a horse in the race, a dog in the fight. We desperately want vaping to be found relatively harmless so it will not be regulated, making it more expensive and harder to come by, and to justify our decision to switch from analogs. We want to be able to vape any time, any place, and so we want it to be declared harmless to bystanders. So, in a sense, ecig consumers would profit from favorable studies.

That's all very true, however, if there are as-yet-unknown hazards, we are the ones who most need and want to know -- our health depends on knowing the facts of vaping, not seeing it all thru rose colored glasses.

Or am I the only one who looked into the safety of these things, this technology, before diving headfirst into it? Sure, I already knew that cigarettes would kill me, but I wanted to have at least some assurance that their replacement wouldn't kill me just as fast, or why bother?

Andria

 

[DrMA]

Interesting point, Andria... I think I would've switched to ecigs even if they were exactly as harmful as the combustible ones because:
- they taste better
- they don't stink, and don't leave behind a stinky mess
- vaping is much cheaper and you're not knowingly supporting nanny statist overspending by paying ridiculous excise taxes. Also, it made me feel better to no longer support an industry with the track record that BT has.

As it turns out, however, vaping is at least 1000 times safer than smoking, and as a bonus we've still got the little advantages from above.

 

[kristin]

I see that the Burstyn review was paid for by CASAA. I would have more confidence in the results if the review had not been funded by an organization that wanted favorable results. Just as we were skeptical of tobacco research funded by BT, we should also be skeptical of ecig research funded by BE (Big Ecig).

You won't ever see unbiased FUNDING. The people who fund studies ALWAYS have skin in the game.

However, you can have unbiased researchers and there is the peer review process.

The Burstyn study was done by a researcher with no ties to the tobacco, pharmaceutical or e-cigarette industry, nor is he tied with anti-tobacco or pro-e-cig advocacy. The study was peer reviewed, which means that it went through a process of being read by other scientists and critiqued for methodology, accuracy and potentially biased conclusions. Then it was published on a respected journal and made free to the public for firther review. Not forgetting the fact that Burstyn got a measly $15k to do the study, which is hardly an incentive to risk your good name and the reputation of your University by lying or fudging the data - falsehoods which logically would come out during the peer review process anyhow. You can attack funding sources, but science is science.

CASAA represents CONSUMERS, not "Big Ecig." As consumers, we benefit from research regardless of whether the outcome is good for vaping or bad for vaping (obviously, it is still in our best interest to know if there is any danger to us.) As consumers, we are the most unbiased of all funding sources for research. EVERYONE else who funds research always has a financial stake in the game - including universities and health groups. BUt even with a financial stake, the research still has to stand up to scientific standards. Unfortunately, when you have unethical "researchers" like Stanton Glantz, who doesn't bother with peer review and does "scientific propaganda by press release," true science doesn't even stand a chance.

 

[rothenbj]

Thanks. I don't recall seeing that before.
I would like to see more studies comparing low-wattage and high-wattage ecigs. I would expect a difference in the Threshold Limit Values of contaminants and a difference in the sheer volume of PG and VG in the atmosphere, and perhaps more concern for bystanders. The Burstyn review probably included mostly low-wattage devices.
I see that the Burstyn review was paid for by CASAA. I would have more confidence in the results if the review had not been funded by an organization that wanted favorable results. Just as we were skeptical of tobacco research funded by BT, we should also be skeptical of ecig research funded by BE (Big Ecig).
We (vapers) are biased. We should admit that. We should not be too quick to criticize studies that are unfavorable nor too quick to praise studies that are favorable, although we have a natural tendency to do both.

I hate to tell you but BE had nothing to do with the Drexel study, it was funded by you and I (well at least me since I contribute monthly). Funny that there's no mention of research funded by BP and that includes what they fund to get their products reviewed and approved, and research to make their competition look bad (example, just about anything coming out of Cali on e cigs). If you want exhaustive studies, they're going to come from huge organizations and, believe it or not, they're all biased.

 

[Hulamoon]

Agree DrMA.

My point about formaldehyde fear mongering is this: OK so there are - for example 4ppm in vapor. The ANTZ, Seigal Glantz et al stop right there with that little nugget, and everyone starts flapping their hands.

Would these same wing flappers flap, screech and run around without their heads on if they also know that this compares to 1 ppm in regular air, 1 ppm in water, 5000 ppm in car exhaust, 400 ppm in burning cigarettes and 35-60 ppm in mushrooms? Now, I'm not absolutely sure about the examples I gave but I think they're there or thereabouts.

Wouldn't that put the whole thing into perspective?

As it turns out, however, vaping is at least 1000 times safer than smoking, and as a bonus we've still got the little advantages from above.

 

[Bobbilly]

Big Ecig. Lol

 

[Katya]

Big Ecig. Lol

Actually, the correct term is BV (Big Vapor).

 

[Nate760]

The [ecig] consumer is not a disinterested party. They (including me) have a horse in the race, a dog in the fight. We desperately want vaping to be found relatively harmless so it will not be regulated, making it more expensive and harder to come by, and to justify our decision to switch from analogs. We want to be able to vape any time, any place, and so we want it to be declared harmless to bystanders. So, in a sense, ecig consumers would profit from favorable studies.

1. What's with all this "we" crap? Please stop pretending to speak on other people's behalf.

2. For someone who claims not to be an ANTZ, you continue to do a great job of sounding like one. The red herring about "vapers just want to get around smoking bans" is one of the most annoying lies in their arsenal, and here you are not only repeating it, but implying that it's actually a fact. As a matter of personal convenience, I couldn't possibly care less about where I'm allowed to vape in public. Naturally, I'm opposed to something being banned on "public health" grounds that poses no demonstrable threat to public health, but that stance has nothing to do with my own habits. I don't vape in any location where I wouldn't have smoked, irrespective of whether or not the law allows me to, and "getting around smoking bans" had absolutely nothing to do with my decision to quit smoking and take up vaping.

 

[Feignix]

You know it's funny when I smoked cigarettes I had an extremely difficult time going more than a few hours before I felt as if I "had" to have another cigarette and the cravings got intense. Now that I haven't smoked in over 2 months I'm convinced more than ever there was something other than the nicotine that contributed if not caused a substantial amount of those cravings. I say that because while I typically vape 18 mg/ml strength nicotine and at times even "chain vape", I also have no problem going without or not vaping at my choosing. It's difficult to explain but it's definitely a different feeling. Sure, when I initially switched over to vaping exclusively, I don't know how I DIDN'T vape my face off, and I was even getting concerned at the amount I vaped those first few days. However I trusted my instinct and figured I would start to slow down and settle into a routine of sorts once my body adjusted to detoxing from all of the traditional cigarette chemicals and compounds. Now when I vape a lot, it's because I ENJOY not only the sensation of the vapor and the calming feeling I get from the act of it, but the delicious flavors I can now taste as well! On days that my juice doesn't taste so good to me I hardly vape, and have no issue whatsoever and I don't flip out or get short with everyone like I've been known to do with "smokes".

My point being that is seems there are a lot of misconceptions and false accusations running rampant, WITHIN the community even! Seems like it's being implied that vapers are just a bunch of nicotine junkies and addicts who are just biding their time with e-cigs and mods until they fall of the wagon and return back to their even MORE evil traditional cigarettes! Nevermind those who vape no nicotine, and or never smoked prior to vaping. That's another thing that makes me a bit uncomfortable, hearing fellow vapers state that people who've never smoked should NOT take up vaping. I understand where they're coming from but who am I to tell another grown person what they should or should not do unsolicited? Do people go around saying well if you've never had an alcoholic beverage it's best you stick to soda or tea, or the same with drinking coffee or energy drinks? Nope!

I get that vaping for a lot of people and perhaps even arguably most is or was a means to quit smoking, and as such is mainly about harm reduction as it is for me personally. However it's also an interesting hobby, and social convention for me as well. In my personal opinion this fight has much more to do then just establishing vaping as a viable form of harm reduction. It's also an opportunity for us to expose the corruption of the faulty system in place and lessen it if not eradicate it and teach reason and critical thinking to this and upcoming generations while maintaining the rights of adults in a free, democratic society.

 

[Nate760]

My point being that is seems there are a lot of misconceptions and false accusations running rampant, WITHIN the community even! Seems like it's being implied that vapers are just a bunch of nicotine junkies and addicts who are just biding their time with e-cigs and mods until they fall of the wagon and return back to their even MORE evil traditional cigarettes!

On average, vapers seem to have just as many misconceptions about nicotine as non-smokers do. I read these stories where people point with pride to how quickly they stepped down their nic level, as though they were in some desperate race with the Grim Reaper to get rid of this heinous addiction, when in fact they already got rid of the heinous addiction when they quit smoking. It's like it hasn't even occurred to them that nicotine dependence, in and of itself, is no more harmful than caffeine dependence, or that it's perfectly okay to vape just because you enjoy it. I get the impression with some of these people that they're so conditioned to ANTZ propaganda they can't even indulge the notion that it's possible to enjoy all the pleasures of smoking with none of the negative consequences.

 

[DrMA]

Agree DrMA.

My point about formaldehyde fear mongering is this: OK so there are - for example 4ppm in vapor. The ANTZ, Seigal Glantz et al stop right there with that little nugget, and everyone starts flapping their hands.

Would these same wing flappers flap, screech and run around without their heads on if they also know that this compares to 1 ppm in regular air, 1 ppm in water, 5000 ppm in car exhaust, 400 ppm in burning cigarettes and 35-60 ppm in mushrooms? Now, I'm not absolutely sure about the examples I gave but I think they're there or thereabouts.

Wouldn't that put the whole thing into perspective?

All the values you talk about are correct, but the units are not. Substitute ppm with ppb, and everything will be pretty close to reality.

Here's some interesting reading about formaldehyde and risk values: http://www.americanchemistry.com/Pr...ms-with-EPAs-Formaldehyde-Risk-Assessment.pdf
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2855181/

 

[sonicdsl]

Agree DrMA.

My point about formaldehyde fear mongering is this: OK so there are - for example 4ppm in vapor. The ANTZ, Seigal Glantz et al stop right there with that little nugget, and everyone starts flapping their hands.

Would these same wing flappers flap, screech and run around without their heads on if they also know that this compares to 1 ppm in regular air, 1 ppm in water, 5000 ppm in car exhaust, 400 ppm in burning cigarettes and 35-60 ppm in mushrooms? Now, I'm not absolutely sure about the examples I gave but I think they're there or thereabouts.

Wouldn't that put the whole thing into perspective?

But...but...putting it in perspective wouldn't get their point across that ecigs are BAD!!

On average, vapers seem to have just as many misconceptions about nicotine as non-smokers do. I read these stories where people point with pride to how quickly they stepped down their nic level, as though they were in some desperate race with the Grim Reaper to get rid of this heinous addiction, when in fact they already got rid of the heinous addiction when they quit smoking. It's like it hasn't even occurred to them that nicotine dependence, in and of itself, is no more harmful than caffeine dependence, or that it's perfectly okay to vape just because you enjoy it. I get the impression with some of these people that they're so conditioned to ANTZ propaganda they can't even indulge the notion that it's possible to enjoy all the pleasures of smoking with none of the negative consequences.

I do understand where this comes from though. I felt this way when I first switched way back in Aug '11 I too stated pride in reducing nic levels and felt one day I would go to zero nic! But since I learned the truth about nicotine, I have no qualms about it any longer. If I step down, go to zero, or even stop vaping, it's because I feel like it, not because I feel like I should.

 

[Hulamoon]

DrMA - I take your point so take this as a little humorous...This is great news foe many men and sexy ladies....Victoria's Secret bras contain less than 20 ppM formaldehyde which is apparently way under the industry standard of 75 ppm for clothing.

L Brands > Formaldehyde Information

In other words formaldehyde is out there and I'll bet it's in huge quantities comparatively speaking. But at the end of the day, for most of us the key is how much less than cigarettes.