This may be a silly question, but if you are inhaling nicotine in the vapor, isn't there nicotine in the vapor when you exhale? If someone walks through your vapor cloud, aren't they breathing nicotine?
Silly QOD: What's in the exhaled vapor?
- Thread starter Alodie
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Though I'm no PV scientist, I would imagine that if there is, it'd be very small amounts. DEFINITELY not enough to get them addicted if that's what you're thinking. It'd be much harder than getting addicted through normal secondhand smoke, that's for sure.
Small amount of nicotine, water vapor and flavorings. That's what the cards say.
look at it this way: either we absorb nicotine into our lungs, making any exhaled nicotine close to nonexistent, or else we don't, and so other people can't inhale the exhaled nicotine either!
Also, vapor falls rather than rises (which is what smoke does), so you'd pretty much have to blow it in someone's face for them to get anything.
Also, vapor falls rather than rises (which is what smoke does), so you'd pretty much have to blow it in someone's face for them to get anything.
Kinda silly, but i have had people try to suck in my xhaled vapor. They didnt notice anything.
Personally, I never bought the second-hand-smoke argument by the anti-tobacco lobby, and I really don't worry about it with vapor. I think the second-hand-smoke thing is just a way to demonize smokers... "You aren't just hurting yourself, you're hurting EVERYBODY. Therefore, we can raise taxes on tobacco and treat you like a second rate citizen."
ok... I obviously have some strong feelings about that, but anyway, I wouldn't worry about it.
ok... I obviously have some strong feelings about that, but anyway, I wouldn't worry about it.
The amount of nicotine exhaled is so small it's almost undetectable. If anyone complains, ask them why they are scared of steam. That's basically all it is. Also remind them there would be more nicotine in a tomato than your exhaled vapor.
There is some research that has been done by the more scientific minded members of ECF. My recollection is that their experiments resulted in a percent of one third exhaled if the effort of the vaper was to not lung inhale, not hold vapor long, and remove quickly. But question, I think, is a legitimate one. I would say it is less than 1/3 of what was vaped in. That the exhale "falls" doesn't totally resolve the issue. What if it falls to a surface where, let's say, a baby might be crawling and perhaps "tasting" the floor while crawling. I personally think there is some second hand there. Is it so small that it's unimportant? I don't think that is known. But hoping someone will come forward and say - "here is the proof".
I work out of my home and vape throughout the house (for over a year). When I used to smoke it was always outside. My wife is a homemaker and has never smoked in her life. I knew that the nicotine in my exhaled vape was miniscule but to ease our minds we both took a nicotine test to see if there was any nicotine in her system. Of course my test showed levels high enough to show nicotine use. Hers was zero. I'm happy.
Last edited:
That is interesting SC, I was asked the same q? when vaping in house by the wife and I did not know the answer thanks
That is very positive info. It is my understanding that it doesn't take much exposure for those tests to go positive. But it would be nice to see something more scientific on the matter. Also, the test mentioned by SC would not address the "falling" issue. Perhaps there are some who recall smoking in ones car and finding considerable brown stuff on the inside windshield and dash. Then, relative to the SC experience, would vaping higher nic liquid change the outcome? Would be nice to know that ones exhale shouldn't cause any measurable nic in air as long as X distance from others is maintained - or something like that.
@SC: That's great news. More ammo to add to the pro-vaping arsenal 
Since of the concerns the "anti-ecigs" groups like ASH US keep crowing about is that we are exposing "evil nicotine vaper to non-smokers". Looks like that's not the case...
Since of the concerns the "anti-ecigs" groups like ASH US keep crowing about is that we are exposing "evil nicotine vaper to non-smokers". Looks like that's not the case...
On a side note, I owned and ran a large sound system for many years with which fog was used .. and on indoor shows, it could get fairly thick .. from my few weeks of study on the e-cig movement, it seems to me that, other than the nic, the fluid used for fog is similar .. and, in some cases, you just could not convince folks it was harmless vapor ..
So the question becomes .. if I dumped fog juice mixed with some nic, could I vape an entire room .. ??
So the question becomes .. if I dumped fog juice mixed with some nic, could I vape an entire room .. ??
My test was certainly not a controlled scientific study and I am sure that no one will take it as such. It was just done to alleviate my concerns for my wife because she was telling me she could smell the vape. Since we are both at home 24/7/365 she is exposed to vape much more than most so if anyone could suffer from second hand nicotine she would be a pretty good case. I can only speak for myself but it shows me that what we are exhaling is harmless. I am not so sure about the falling issue but I would think that if my wife is showing no nicotine in her system from airborne exposure falling would show the same results.
The test was named “TobacAlert” and cost about $40 (for two test) over the net. It is easy to use and from my research it is very accurate. For the last nine months I have used eliquid that is a 24 mg 40% VG, 60% PG. Also I use a hi volt PV.
Last edited:
Ecigarette mist harmless, inhaled or exhaled
http://www.healthnz.co.nz/RuyanCartridgeReport30-Oct-08.pdf
This topic comes up fairly often.
Last edited:
I don't find information in the first reference satisfying. Seems like more of a statement or an opinion than evidence. "Not harmful in the quantities mentioned." How about in the quantities measured when simulated in a "smoke filled room". Second reference - I couldn't find the issue addressed directly. Exhaled CO addressed but not exhaled nicotine. Still seems reasonable there will be nicotine in the exhale and that the nicotine goes somewhere. Floating on particles for awhile and eventual settlement seems reasonable (IMO).
Then spend some time in these parts of the forum.
It gets talked about here all the time:
Electronic Cigarette News
Health, Safety and E-Smoking
Shoot a message to this member, View Profile: Vocalek - E-Cigarette Forum
she'll drown you in research links.
You could also try for yourself the exact same thing I did.
Google advanced search "exact phrase" "second hand vapor"
You can use "search within site or domain":http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/
"second hand vapor" site:http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/ - Google Search
Or not:
"second hand vapor" - Google Search
It's really not that difficult.
Attachments
Last edited:
It's my understanding the most of the nicotine while vaping is absorbed via the mucous membranes not via the lungs like analogs. Don't take that for statement of fact, but I remember reading something about that while doing research before I began vaping.
But there are tons of links in the health section with links to the few studies that have been done. There's an unknown factor here because there haven't been a lot of studies that have been funded and probably won't be with the stand that's been taken regarding ecigs. With the small percentage of people smoking, most non-smokers just want to ban the stuff and be done with it. Big pharma want's to keep their corner of the market selling all of their worthless crap that doesn't work. Even if there were studies we wouldn't hear about it for 10-20 years. I guess it's one of those things where you have to weight it out for youself and do what's comfortable for you.
Cookiebun - You may be right that the evidence is overwhelming. However, I've researched the issue some, let me say substantial IMO, and, if I have a bias it is toward e-cig, but I am not overwhelmed with what I have found. You might take a look at this thread: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/media-general-news/183533-wow-if-you-havent-read-do-now.html
There is a link at the first post to a statement of ASH. You might note what that statemnet says about second hand vape. There have also been some experiments done by exogenesis and DVap that relate. Theses members are chemists, and very sharp ones at that. In one of the experiments 2/3 of the nic in vape was accounted for and the other 1/3 was apparently exhaled. It seems plausible to me that the exhaled nic goes somewhere and does not just disappear. It is also plausible to me that the exhaled nic eventually settles and that in heavily vaped indoor areas, that nic may be more accumulated and concentrated than in other areas. It also seems plausible to me that exhaled vape contains nic. That is, IMO it is reasonable for vapers to comply with local smoking ban ordinances in the same manner as if smokers - even though vaping is not smoking.
One extract from the ASH statement follows:
But perhaps the real problem the very human problem is best expressed by letters which our organization receives about e-cigarettes. One read:
My first exposure to e-cigarettes was last year in a hospital; smokers were made to go outside but three e-smokers plus two staff were using the e-cigarettes inside . . . I have lupus and the vapor irritated my nose, eyes, throat, and chest, plus the nicotine was making me feel nauseous so there must have been significant quantities in the side-vapor. I am told I had no rights to stop the use of these cigarettes indoors. It makes a mockery of the new laws.
IMO - until there is more proof on the issue - e-cig interest is best served by not intentionally or unintentionally forcing vapor in the direction or in the vicinity of others. And if there should be some indoor vaping taking place in ordinanced areas where perhaps vaping is not specifically addressed, better that it be inconspicuously done - away from others.
There is a link at the first post to a statement of ASH. You might note what that statemnet says about second hand vape. There have also been some experiments done by exogenesis and DVap that relate. Theses members are chemists, and very sharp ones at that. In one of the experiments 2/3 of the nic in vape was accounted for and the other 1/3 was apparently exhaled. It seems plausible to me that the exhaled nic goes somewhere and does not just disappear. It is also plausible to me that the exhaled nic eventually settles and that in heavily vaped indoor areas, that nic may be more accumulated and concentrated than in other areas. It also seems plausible to me that exhaled vape contains nic. That is, IMO it is reasonable for vapers to comply with local smoking ban ordinances in the same manner as if smokers - even though vaping is not smoking.
One extract from the ASH statement follows:
But perhaps the real problem the very human problem is best expressed by letters which our organization receives about e-cigarettes. One read:
My first exposure to e-cigarettes was last year in a hospital; smokers were made to go outside but three e-smokers plus two staff were using the e-cigarettes inside . . . I have lupus and the vapor irritated my nose, eyes, throat, and chest, plus the nicotine was making me feel nauseous so there must have been significant quantities in the side-vapor. I am told I had no rights to stop the use of these cigarettes indoors. It makes a mockery of the new laws.
IMO - until there is more proof on the issue - e-cig interest is best served by not intentionally or unintentionally forcing vapor in the direction or in the vicinity of others. And if there should be some indoor vaping taking place in ordinanced areas where perhaps vaping is not specifically addressed, better that it be inconspicuously done - away from others.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
