Research Cinnamon Cytotoxic

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ed_C

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Oct 11, 2013
2,675
3,406
Seligman, MO
There was something posted about this on another forum and I thought it should be shared with the new members. There has been some new research done that concerns the use of cinnamon favoring in e-juice. Mt. Baker, for one, has stopped selling cinnamon e-juices because of this research. I will include links to where this information can be found.

http://.........blogspot.com/2013/11/at-your-own-risk-mtbakervapor-pulls-all.html?spref=fb

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0887233313002610
 

Uma

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Mar 4, 2010
5,991
9,998
Calif
For those too ANTZy to click on the link, here is a c/p.

Details
Created on Thursday, 21 November 2013 17:51
Cinnamon flavours in e-cigarettes: how inappropriate research can misinform the public and the (amateur) professionals

By Dr Farsalinos

Considerable debate has been focused on the issue of cinnamon flavors after a study was published in a toxicology journal declaring that such flavored liquids are cytotoxic. Just one month ago, a study published by our group also found that a cinnamon-flavored liquid was slightly cytotoxic (although still 10 times less toxic that tobacco smoke). I have already sent a letter to the editor of Toxicology in Vitro raising concerns about the latest study they published on cinnamon, however due to significant misinformation spread throughout the social media, I decided to publish this comment.

First of all, it was surprising to see a vendor removing cinnamon flavors from his sales list. According to a well-known e-cigarette activist, “When a juice maker that fills thousands of bottles a day does this - you should listen.” My response to this is: “If the juice maker who fills thousands of bottles a day knew what he was doing, he should have found out about it before any research was published”. What I mean is that makers have no idea about the cytotoxicity of their products. They are doing no research, so how would they know? But it is even worse that they are making such moves (to remove cinnamon flavors) without even reading (or understanding) the research they quote.

Let me explain. The latest study by Talbot’s group discussed about the cytotoxicity of cinnamon flavors in e-cigarette. Interestingly however, IF SOMEONE READS THE PAPER, he will find that the researchers never used any e-cigarette. Moreover, they never produced vapor! They tested the liquids in liquid form, not in vapor. How can you support that the results have implications for e-cigarette users when no e-cigarette was used and no vapor was produced? However, there is a bigger mistake. The authors mentioned that they tested 8 refill liquids with cinnamon flavor. They mention the names of the liquids and the companies they got them from. After personally searching on the internet and communicating with some companies, I found out that 4 of the samples were concentrated flavors, not refills. The authors themselves found cinnamaldehyde (the substance giving the cinnamon flavor in the liquid) at levels that differed between samples by up to 100 times. This confirms what I found: some of their samples were concentrated flavors.

Finally, there is still another problem in their study. They tested the substance itself (cinnamaldehyde) to see how toxic it is. They found it toxic at levels 400 times lower than currently approved for food use. This is a very strange result and it is hard to explain how regulatory authorities have accepted cinnamaldehyde to be available at such high levels (of course, before the approval, several tests were performed and it was not found toxic).The authors have to explain why their findings contradict previous research.

As I mentioned above, a letter to the editor has been sent and is currently evaluated for publication. In short, the results of this study have nothing to do with e-cigarette use and are more applicable to cinnamon use in food (since they tested the liquid in liquid form and they used several concentrated samples). Besides that, the reactions from manufacturers show that, unfortunately, they cannot accept their ignorance and instead of asking an expert so that they get informed, they react in a way that produces panic to vapers, does nothing to protect consumers and only results in a game of public relations tactics. This is even more unfortunate than the mistakes in the research protocol. As a final note, let's not forget that research has shown cinnamon to have anti-inflammatory, anti-oxidant and maybe anti-cancer properties...
 

DocTonyNYC

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Oct 21, 2013
5,870
6,803
San Juan, Puerto Rico (and NYC)

Traver

Ultra Member
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Oct 28, 2010
1,822
662
WV
Appears that this research might be shenanigans.. looks like The Talbot Group didn't test actual eliquid and vapor from a PV, but tested the flavoring used in e-cigarettes before dilution and not after it had been vaporized, either. Check out

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRhFEGWPIp0

One of the few things I got from this rambling video is that 4 out of the 8 samples in the study used concentrated flavors. The other main point seemed to be something about how manufacturers should do their own tests before pulling a flavor.

Unfortunately I still don't know how the results of the study relate to the real world of vaping.
 

alisa1970

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Mar 30, 2013
3,122
9,799
55
Portland, OR
In general, it's always good to remember that we are in relatively uncharted waters, here.

In another instance, custardy and buttery flavors have shown some risks as well, and I think it's up to each of us to decide how we want to approach these issues.

They come up frequently, and if in our research we find that we are uncomfortable with any number of issues related to our new-found lifestyle I think it's up to each of us to decide on our own whether the risks are worth avoiding or not.

I myself have made a decision regarding the custardy vapes, and I don't intend to stop vaping them--unless the risks are proven to be very high.

I imagine that if cinnamon flavors are still available, we'll each have to decide for ourselves whether we want to do the same with them. And that's the way I would prefer it.

If you are uncomfortable with vaping cinnamon or have reactions to it, then don't vape it. If not, then do --understanding that you are taking a higher risk in doing so. I don't think that the danger of cytotoxicity compares in any way to what damage many of us have already done to ourselves with cigarettes.
 

Boiler

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Jan 29, 2013
1,326
1,110
The land of sky blue waters
It all just points to the fact that nobody knows what's going on with these flavors. Advocates on both sides are twisting evidence to their own ends.

Would Dr. Farsalinos advocate dripping cinnamon e-juice into the eyes because as he says… it has beneficial properties and the concentration is 400 times below what is approved for consumption?

Of course not, it's all a matter of context. but using these irrelevant facts to try and debunk the testing makes him no better a source of information than ANTZ.
 

evan le'garde

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Apr 3, 2013
6,080
5,953
55
So this is just a coincidence that government departments are looking at banning flavourings for e liquids.

I don't know what the most popular flavours are in the vaping community. I mean what flavours sell the most ?. Are those the ones being singled out as toxic ?. Is this the kind of thing that will damage the industry ?. Slowly taking it apart bit by bit !.
 
Last edited:

Ed_C

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Oct 11, 2013
2,675
3,406
Seligman, MO
It's easy to jump on the band wagon of those whose research aligns with what we wish to be true. The study that brought this about was, I believe, from a peer reviewed journal (I could be wrong). This doesn't mean that there couldn't be major flaws in their methodology, but it's still something that should be looked at. I'm not the best when it comes to reading all the research, but if we want to be informed consumers we should look at all the studies. Like others have said, vaping is a relatively new game and new information is bound to come up.
 

Uma

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Mar 4, 2010
5,991
9,998
Calif
Like Dr. Farsalinos says, if you take the time to read, it depends on concentrates & other facts.
His flavor study is submitted for publication, we should see the link soon. In the meantime, knowing the mindset of the ANTZ and how they do their biased research (dry burn? What's a dry burn?), I'll stick to the scientist who KNOWS vaping and it's terms, because he's dedicated his time, curiosity and integrity to it. He knows we only want truths, even if we don't want to hear the bad News. So far, there's been zero bad News to report, except that it would be better to not vape certain Flavors 24/7. We knew that was coming, but it was easy to take coming from him. Had talbot or any of "them" like her had said it we would have rolled our eyes, because so far all they do is jump on anything they can possibly take as a negative. If Dr. Farsalinos agrees, or Ettoe or Berstyne(sp), etc, those who care about us, then we'd believe them too. Believing Talbot is like believing Glantz or the CDC. It ain't gonna happen on my watch.
 

StormFinch

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Mar 22, 2010
2,683
4,812
Arkansas
Prue Talbot is also guilty of coming here to ECF and using possible health side effect posts belonging to us to create a "study". Something that A) tends to be frowned upon in the legitimate scientific community, and B) wouldn't be scientific anyway since at least half of the side effects people bring up are also side effects of quitting cigarettes. Just my honest non-scientific opinion, but the woman is a... well... I can't say what I believe her to be as I would probably get banned. ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Digress
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread