Radiation - do we need to worry about that with e-liquid?

[justsomeguy]

I'm only asking a question here - not trying to start any paranoia.


So it is a well documented fact that there is quite a danger in the amount of radiation we were getting from analog cigarettes. Some people surmise that the radiation from tobacco smoke is actually the main cause of increased cancer rates amongst smokers (just a theory, not proven).

I found a few mentions on the site here to radiation in analogs (mostly about polonium 210). I also did quite a bit of reading elsewhere.

It seems that the radiation is taken up by the tobacco plant from the dirt, it is not in fact an additive or something else that is mixed in after the fact (though certain fertilizers may also add to the issue, the point is it is absorbed by the plant itself).

So - my question is - if our nicotine liquid is being derived from tobacco plants, is there any chance that we are still ingesting some level of polonium in our liquids?

And if the nicotine we're getting is not coming from tobacco plants, then does that mean we can reasonable assume there is no radiation present in it?

I'd love to know for certain.

 

[TropicalBob]

We know for certain that radioactive elements have NOT shown up in any of liquid or carts to date -- including one test done sloppily by the FDA. Believe me, if a radioactive element had shown up, you would have a whole new set of headlines to deal with.

Tobacco does take up every element in the soil -- from toxic metals to radioactive ones. That's why I'm a little concerned about where our raw tobacco is grown. If China, I don't feel good about it.

One Web site shows that some of the tobacco processed into cart liquid originates in Cuba. That's good from a soil quality standpoint, bad from the embargo on all-things-Cuban standpoint.

I'd rest easy on this issue. Radioactivity would have reared its ugly head long before now, if it were present, in tests done over the past two years.

 

[scheherezade]

If it makes you feel any better at all, I've heard that quite a bit of tobacco is grown here in the US by individual farmers. My uncle used to grow it as a matter of fact. From what I understand, there's not a whole lot of things that like to eat it, so usually not a lot of pesticide use from the little guys growing it. I don't know how it works with some of the larger farms though. Overcrowding and soil depletion tend to lead to more pests on crops. It would be worth looking into, of course I'm a little nerdy with the research thing, so maybe its not as interesting as I think. Also, I just discovered vaping, but even if they found some of the same problems as with tobacco in cigarettes, I think I'd just try to find some ways to minimize my risk. I'm really thrilled with the changes this has made in my life. (As my credit card can attest )

 

[justsomeguy]

From what I understand the the use of 'organic' practices may only make a minimal difference in the amount of radiation found in tobacco plants. The plant takes it up from the soil. Normally these small levels of radiation would not pose an issue to us as they are moved through the digestive system, but with tobacco there is a problem due to the inhalation of the smoke. The radioactive elements can remain in the bronchial tubes and lungs with nowhere to go.... which over time can cause serious health concerns.

But - I don't want this thread to delve too far into the radiation in cigarettes topic.
I'm much more interested in the topic of whether or not the radiation found in tobacco plants finds its way into e-liquid at all.

Bob - that's a good point about the FDA study, I hadn't considered that.
I can only imagine the headlines had they found any polonium 210 in the e-liquid.
On the other hand, radioactive elements are clearly in analog cigarettes... and I somehow went over a decade as a smoker before I'd ever heard about it. I'm not saying the FDA would hide the fact with e-liquid... just saying we can't be too careful.

On the plus side - not sure if this makes a difference with vaping - but from what I read it seems the radiation is much more harmful in analogs because of the tar that we're inhaling at the same time. The tar, containing polonium, sticks to the lungs. Now I'm not sure if that means that if we have no tar we have no radioactive elements... or if without tar there isn't as much danger.... those are the things I'd like to find answers for.

 

[DVap]

Just my "feeling" on this.. but I would think that the extraction and purification process would leave behind any such material.

 

[TWISTED VICTOR]

Ok....I'm tryin' really hard not to bring up Chernobyl....stop it victor stop it....

 

[justsomeguy]

Ok....I'm tryin' really hard not to bring up Chernobyl....stop it victor stop it....

Not sure if that was a joke or not, Victor... but here you go:
Tobacco's natural radiation dose higher than after Chernobyl - health - 02 June 2007 - New Scientist

This is exactly why I'm wondering if we can reasonably assume that the nic we're getting in our e-liquid isn't bringing with it the radioactive elements found in the tobacco plant.

 

[Kurt]

I honestly do not know for sure, but I tend to agree with DVap on this one. Extraction would most probably leave it behind. I do not think pharm grade nic, which is what is used with at least the better US-made juices, contains radio nuclei. That is the same nic that eventually gets into NRTs. I do not know for sure the state of these elements in the soil, but they are almost certainly ionic, and thus would not get into even the first level of extraction with organic solvents.

Pharm grade nic is also what is used for all nicotine studies on humans and animals. I've never seen radiation as a concern with this. That said, I've also never seen a definitive statement that there is no Po in pharm grade nic, but it seems quite unlikely, and TB is probably right, if it was a concern the FDA would be very shrill about it, regardless of the level. But there are radio nuclei everywhere, always, so it would have to be shown that pharm grade nic has no more radiation than background ambient radiation. I'm not personally concerned about this issue, but I'm willing to look at other data that people may come up with.