Poisonings From E-Cigarette Liquid Up Sharply

[mn shutterbug]

minnesota. cbslocal .com/2014/03/18/poisonings-from-e-cigarette-liquid-up-sharply/

Poisonings From E-Cigarette Liquid Up Sharply « CBS Minnesota

 

[Vocalek]

Clive Bates had this to say about child poisonings. This is found within the comments section on his excellent critique of the Glantz/Dutra article published in JAMA Pediatrics that falsely claims e-cigarette use by youth causes smoking.

http://www.clivebates.com/?p=2053#more-2053

Poisons. Let me go on the record now and say that I am not in favour of poisoning children with e-liquids, or bleach, drain cleaner, cosmetics, tobacco and medicines for that matter. That’s why I support some sensible regulation of these products. In practice we already have what we need – in Europe we have the Classification, Labelling and Packaging Regulation, which provides all the necessary safeguards, if properly implemented and enforced. I also think it is important to keep the poisonings in perspective: these reflect calls to a helpline not adverse health impacts, and none of the incidents caused serious injury. In any case, what do you think should be done with products that register calls to the Minnesota poisons help line?

Top five causes of calls from Minnesota Poison Centre 2012 annual report
Non-Drug
1. Cosmetics, personal care items
2. Household cleaners
3. Foreign bodies, toys, silica gel packets
4. Alcohols
5. Pesticides

Drug
1. Analgesics
2. Sedatives
3. Antidepressants
4. Cardiovascular drugs
5. Antihistamines

 

[mn shutterbug]

This statement doesn't make a lot of sense to me. "The poisoning calls include instances where e-juice has been swallowed, inhaled or come in contact with eyes or skin." My fingers come into contact quite often when filling my cartridges. I've also rubbed my eyes with a little juice on my fingers and my eyes water a bit, but that's it. It does kind of make a person wonder what some of these imported e-juices do have in them. This is why I stick to USA ingredients. You just never know.

 

[Vocalek]

The issue has nothing to do with where the e-liquid was made. Many of us have discovered that getting liquid on our skin is fairly harmless. But the fact is that people will call the poison control center when they just don't know.... They've been told that getting nicotine on your skin can hurt you, so they're afraid (especially if a child is involved) and they call. Any call that the PCC gets is added to the total, regardless of the level of seriousness.

 

[sonicdsl]

Yep...these numbers are practically useless without context and/or level of severity.

 

[Mike Prettyman]

Well, I get ejuice on my fingers from time to time. I dont notice anything. That being said, I've beem a smoker for 35 years.

I have raised three children and I know what it's like to be responcible for a child's life. Where children are concerned, especially very young ones, you just can't be too careful - whether it's scripts, chemicals or nicotine-laden e-juice.


One sweet dream came true
Then began forever....
Mike P. With Tapatalk 2

 

[Bramble]

I saw that same article here, apparently there was some media release about it so all the news outlets picked it up (maybe the ANTZ have a list LOL)

htt p://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/health/250898471.html#mLyVRJ6j6U6ohwkM.01

What struck me was this:

Paul Allen said his 12- and 9-year-old boys wouldn’t have much trouble with safety caps — “given they open grandma’s medication for her" — so he stashes his e-cigarette materials in an old humidor in his home office in Burnsville.

First off are we making childproof caps to prevent 9 and 12 year olds from opening them? I hope not.
Secondly, the number one cause of child poisoning is pills. These kids who we are afraid will drink eLiquid, are opening pill bottles for their grandparents and having the sense not to eat them? INCONCEIVABLE!!

And finally... yes there will be a sharp increase in things associated with a new product because a few years ago it didn't exist at all. You can always know something is fishy when they talk about a relatively new product and only talk in percentage increases. Tobacco control is counting on us all to be too stupid to understand that. Sadly most people actually are.

 

[Roger_Lafayette]

Call me a cynic, but I smell a rat.

The Star-Tribune ran both its own story and the AP piece. SacBee, eat your heart out.

 

[hippiebrian]

The use of e cigarettes is up. The number of calls to the poison control center goes up. Go figure. This is a serious non-issue.

Also, most calls to poison control centers are non-threatening issues, merely precautionary.

I hate media sensationalism!

 

[Sikko]

I sense a targeted push by some ANTZ group. 2 stations here in Utah ran stories on ecig poisonings today. Seems to be coordinated with quite a few states.

It's possible that it is coincidence but all these stories are coming out around the same time which seems odd.

 

[Stosh]

From what I've read, and I may have missed reports, there has been one reported death (a 2-year old in Israel where e-cigs are banned) in the entire world. One poisoning in the world, would seem to make e-liquid the safest product ever....

Consider ....

Dogs - 30-35 people are killed each year in the U.S. Fido isn't always your best friend. BAN dogs??
Deer - 130 people killed across the U.S. by deer, almost exclusively because drivers hit the deers with their cars. That saying "a deer in the headlights" came about for a reason. BAN Driving?
Cows - 22 people are killed in the U.S. every year from these seemingly docile creatures. Ban Milk?

 

[rothenbj]

From what I've read, and I may have missed reports, there has been one reported death (a 2-year old in Israel where e-cigs are banned) in the entire world. One poisoning in the world, would seem to make e-liquid the safest product ever....

Consider ....

Dogs - 30-35 people are killed each year in the U.S. Fido isn't always your best friend. BAN dogs??
Deer - 130 people killed across the U.S. by deer, almost exclusively because drivers hit the deers with their cars. That saying "a deer in the headlights" came about for a reason. BAN Driving?
Cows - 22 people are killed in the U.S. every year from these seemingly docile creatures. Ban Milk?

But Stosh, that one reported, but un-autopsied (as far as I know), Israeli death seems to be known by every critic of e cigs and is held up like a banner. How many of those killed by deer and cows in the US get that type attention?

 

[Stosh]

But Stosh, that one reported, but un-autopsied (as far as I know), Israeli death seems to be known by every critic of e cigs and is held up like a banner. How many of those killed by deer and cows in the US get that type attention?

Considering your avatar --- sorry about the banning dogs crack.....

 

[patkin]

I wonder why there aren't (I guess) any reports on kids drinking bottles of flavoring. Consuming a bottle of cinnamon flavoring would definitely require a trip to the ER. I would imagine even a bottle of vanilla at its concentration would cause problems too.

 

[zoiDman]

Yep...these numbers are practically useless without context and/or level of severity.

I think this is Very Pertinent.

Someone spilling 3 Drops of 12mg/ml e-Liquid on their Fingers while filling a Carto may Illicit the same call to a Poison Control Center as Someone Spilling a 250ml Bottle of 100mg/ml Nicotine Base onto their Lap.

 

[NorthOfAtlanta]

I heard a public service ad on the radio yesterday with an interesting statistic, out of 1,000,000 calls to poison control in 2012 only 64,000 required a trip to the emergency room. They didn't say how many of the 64k ended up being admitted.

 

[zoiDman]

I heard a public service ad on the radio yesterday with an interesting statistic, out of 1,000,000 calls to poison control in 2012 only 64,000 required a trip to the emergency room. They didn't say how many of the 64k ended up being admitted.

A Statistical Question:

If there are 2,000,000 Calls to Poison Control Centers in 2014, would it be safe to Assume that there would be 128,000 Required trips to the ER?

The reason I ask, I don't see Calls to Poison Control Centers regarding e-Liquids being Up Sharply as any Big Mystery.

As the Amount of people using e-Liquids goes Up Sharply, wouldn't the Amount of Calls go Up Sharply Also?

 

[Anjaffm]

First off are we making childproof caps to prevent 9 and 12 year olds from opening them? I hope not.
Secondly, the number one cause of child poisoning is pills. These kids who we are afraid will drink eLiquid, are opening pill bottles for their grandparents and having the sense not to eat them? INCONCEIVABLE!!

And finally... yes there will be a sharp increase in things associated with a new product because a few years ago it didn't exist at all. You can always know something is fishy when they talk about a relatively new product and only talk in percentage increases. Tobacco control is counting on us all to be too stupid to understand that. Sadly most people actually are.

Exactly
Those percentage increases are always a great way to feed scaremongering. And they are used precisely for that purpose.

Consider the cholesterol scare.
The headlines scream "A high cholesterol level increases your chance of suffering a heart attack by 50 percent!"
And a new profitable branch of business for Big P is born, as otherwise completely healthy people start taking pills to lower their cholesterol level. Daily, and long-term, of course. Never mind that those pills can kill you (see here).

What those screaming - and often-repeated - articles fail to mention is that this oh-so-horrible and oh-so-life-threatening "50%" is relative increase. The absolute increase is two. Thank you. I'll take that chance.

And this is how they arrive at the math:

Statistically,
Out of 100 persons with normal cholesterol level (age 50 and male), 4 will get a heart attack.
Out of 100 persons with elevated cholesterol level (age 50 and male), 6 will get a heart attack.
6 minus 4 = 2
The absolute increase is 2

Relative percentages are, of course, different.
6 minus 4 is 2
2 is 50% of 4
--> a 50% increase
And that is what is reported all over the media.

I will leave it to the reader to speculate on the "why"

 

[sonicdsl]

Exactly
Those percentage increases are always a great way to feed scaremongering. And they are used precisely for that purpose.

Consider the cholesterol scare.
The headlines scream "A high cholesterol level increases your chance of suffering a heart attack by 50 percent!"
And a new profitable branch of business for Big P is born, as otherwise completely healthy people start taking pills to lower their cholesterol level. Daily, and long-term, of course. Never mind that those pills can kill you (see here).

What those screaming - and often-repeated - articles fail to mention is that this oh-so-horrible and oh-so-life-threatening "50%" is relative increase. The absolute increase is two. Thank you. I'll take that chance.

And this is how they arrive at the math:

Statistically,
Out of 100 persons with normal cholesterol level (age 50 and male), 4 will get a heart attack.
Out of 100 persons with elevated cholesterol level (age 50 and male), 6 will get a heart attack.
6 minus 4 = 2
The absolute increase is 2

Relative percentages are, of course, different.
6 minus 4 is 2
2 is 50% of 4
--> a 50% increase
And that is what is reported all over the media.

I will leave it to the reader to speculate on the "why"

And I won't even get into the the "type" of cholesterol (good/bad, type A/B - fluffy & big type vs. small hurtful type, etc.) It's off-topic (my expanded complaint on cholesterol, that is), but that's a great example nonetheless Anja.

 

[MorpheusPA]

A Statistical Question:

If there are 2,000,000 Calls to Poison Control Centers in 2014, would it be safe to Assume that there would be 128,000 Required trips to the ER?

Not necessarily. Such a drastic increase could stem from increased exposure, which may or may not track with ER visits. It could also stem from media scares, which likely wouldn't track with ER visits.

Given that I traded cigarettes for vaping, any potential exposure in this household shifted from cigarette tobacco to e-cigarette liquids. Since I'm as careful with one as I was with the other, the probability of a call being made to Poison Control would not appreciably change.

As the Amount of people using e-Liquids goes Up Sharply, wouldn't the Amount of Calls go Up Sharply Also?

Logic dictates that, yes. If one person in the country uses e-liquids, calls made would be limited. If a million do, the opportunity for something to go awry is a million times greater, all else being equal (which of course it never is).