So is VG only bad for your health or what?

[nopatch]

Acrolein formation from Vg becomes important when the ecig coil runs dry causing higher temperatures.

 

[vsummer1]

For all the people that were asking where I found this information that VG vapor may turn into FormalDehyde, I am posting the link and the content:

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/health-safety-e-smoking/391973-formaldehyde-e-vapor-2.html

Dr. Mike and those suspecting PG in the formation of formaldehyde appear to be wrong. The particular study mentioned here does not specify the specific makeup (or PG versus glycerin content) of the liquids studied.

BUT, many of the same authors are presenting a paper at the SRNT meeting in Boston this week that DOES. And from the following it is pretty clear that indeed it is glycerin, and not PG, that is associated with formaldhyde (and acrolein) being found in vapor:

SUBSTANTIAL REDUCTION IN EMISSION OF SELECTED CARBONYLS
AND VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS FROM ELECTRONIC CIGARETTES
COMPARED TO tobacco CIGARETTES

Andrzej Sobczak, Ph.D.*1,2, Leon Kosmider1,2, Maciej L. Goniewicz, Ph.D.3,4, Jakub
Knysak2, Marzena Zaciera, Ph.D.5, and Jolanta Kurek5, 1Institute of Occupational
Medicine and Environmental Health, Sosnowiec, Poland; 2Medical University
of Silesia, Katowice, Poland;3Queen Mary University of London, UK; 4Roswell
Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, USA; 5Institute of Occupational Medicine and
Environmental Health, Sosnowiec, Poland

Significance: Electronic cigarettes (ECs) are purported to deliver nicotine vapor
without any toxic substances generated from tobacco combustion. However, using
ECs involves heating a nicotine solution to high temperatures. This may induce
chemical reactions which result in the possible formation of carbonyl compounds
(CCs) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Many CCs and VOCs are common
tobacco-specific toxicants with proven carcinogenic and cardiotoxic properties. Aim
of the study:The aim of the study was to quantify and compare the levels of selected
CCs (formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein, acetone, propanal, butanal) and VOCs
(benzene, toluene, etylobenzene and ortho-, meta-, para-xylene) in EC nicotine
refill solutions, vapors generated from ECs,and mainstream smoke from tobacco
cigarettes. Methods: Six commercially available nicotine refill solutions for ECs
(Chic Group Ltd. Poland) were examined. Three solutions contained a mixture of
propylene glycol and glycerin (Volish brand) as a solvent for nicotine, while the
other three contained only propylene glycol (Mild brand). Thirtypuffs were taken
using an automatic smoking machine. Mainstream smoke was generated from
a3R4F reference tobacco cigarette. CCs were extracted from vapor and smoke to
solid phase with 2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazine, and analyzed using HPLC/DAD. VOCs
were absorbed on activated carbon and analyzed with GC/MS. Results:Traces of
acetaldehyde were detected in all examined EC solutions(0.081±0.042 μg/mL).
Acetaldehyde was found in all EC vapors (0.153±0.116 μg/30 puffs), but at levels
more than a thousand-fold lower than in tobacco smoke. Formaldehyde and acrolein
were only found in vapors generated from glycerin-based solutions (0.116±0.022
and0.110±0.190μg/30 puffs) and in tobacco smoke (12 and 32-fold higher levels,
respectively). None of the examined VOCs were detected in the vapors, while all
were found in tobacco smoke. Conclusions: In contrast to tobacco smoke, the
vapors generated from ECs does not contain VOCs. Exposure to CCs from ECs is
significantly reduced compared to tobacco smoke and may be attributable to the
glycerin content in the nicotine refill solution.

That's nice, BUT it's also found in food and our own bodies make formaldehyde. If this bothers you, perhaps you should stop eating?

http://www.americanchemistry.com/Pr...-about-the-Health-Effects-of-Formaldehyde.PDF

What is formaldehyde?

Formaldehyde is a simple but ubiquitous chemical compound made of hydrogen, oxygen and carbon, with the formula CH2O. All organic life forms – bacteria, plants, fish, animals and humans – naturally produce formaldehyde as a consequence of the processes in cell metabolism.1

Formaldehyde is naturally present in fruits, vegetables, meats, fish, coffee, and alcoholic beverages. Most formaldehyde inhaled by humans is quickly exhaled. The relatively small amounts of formaldehyde that remain in the nose and upper respiratory tract are swiftly metabolized into harmless products.2 Thus, formaldehyde does not accumulate in animals or people because it is quickly broken down in the nose by the body’s natural metabolic processes. In the environment, formaldehyde is quickly broken down by sunlight in the air3 or by bacteria present in soil or water.

...
Is inhaled formaldehyde safe?
Formaldehyde is produced naturally by our bodies, is found in all cells and is a normal component of human blood. In fact, formaldehyde is an essential chemical in the body and serves as a building block for the biosynthesis of more complicated molecules. Formaldehyde is one of the most studied chemicals in use today. Studies in rats, monkeys, and humans show that inhaled formaldehyde does not change the levels of formaldehyde normally present in the blood.7

 

[nopatch]

It is not the same.Formaledyde in lungs is problematic(If indeed ecig vapor has appreciable formaldyde formation). One wouldn't make a leap that stomach has acid (Hcl) and hence it is ok to have it in lungs or blood.

That's nice, BUT it's also found in food and our own bodies make formaldehyde. If this bothers you, perhaps you should stop eating?

http://www.americanchemistry.com/Pr...-about-the-Health-Effects-of-Formaldehyde.PDF

What is formaldehyde?

Formaldehyde is a simple but ubiquitous chemical compound made of hydrogen, oxygen and carbon, with the formula CH2O. All organic life forms – bacteria, plants, fish, animals and humans – naturally produce formaldehyde as a consequence of the processes in cell metabolism.1

Formaldehyde is naturally present in fruits, vegetables, meats, fish, coffee, and alcoholic beverages. Most formaldehyde inhaled by humans is quickly exhaled. The relatively small amounts of formaldehyde that remain in the nose and upper respiratory tract are swiftly metabolized into harmless products.2 Thus, formaldehyde does not accumulate in animals or people because it is quickly broken down in the nose by the body’s natural metabolic processes. In the environment, formaldehyde is quickly broken down by sunlight in the air3 or by bacteria present in soil or water.

...
Is inhaled formaldehyde safe?
Formaldehyde is produced naturally by our bodies, is found in all cells and is a normal component of human blood. In fact, formaldehyde is an essential chemical in the body and serves as a building block for the biosynthesis of more complicated molecules. Formaldehyde is one of the most studied chemicals in use today. Studies in rats, monkeys, and humans show that inhaled formaldehyde does not change the levels of formaldehyde normally present in the blood.7

 

[vsummer1]

It is not the same.Formaledyde in lungs is problematic(If indeed ecig vapor has appreciable formaldyde formation). One wouldn't make a leap that stomach has acid (Hcl) and hence it is ok to have it in lungs or blood.

Kindly use the link and read the article rather than make a leap and talk about hydrochloric acid which is NOT found in every cell of our bodies, and is not made by every cell as a process of metabolism.

......

What happens to inhaled formaldehyde in the body?

Inhaled formaldehyde rapidly breaks down in the body from a gas into the soluble form of formaldehyde (methanediol) and then is changed into formate in the nose and upper respiratory tract. Formate is either used as a building block chemical for the body to make more complicated, larger chemical molecules or broken down into carbon dioxide, which is exhaled in breath.
Thus, there is essentially no free formaldehyde available to interact with tissues, since the inhaled formaldehyde is broken down into the soluble methanediol (>99.9%) or gaseous formaldehyde (<0.1 %).
The tiny fraction (i.e., < 0.1 %) of formaldehyde in the body that can exist in a gaseous form in small amounts (< 0.8 ppb to 8 ppb; that is 0.001 – 0.01 mg/m3) is exhaled in the breath. Consequently, formaldehyde levels in the blood do not increase as a result of inhaled formaldehyde.

 

[nopatch]

Kindly use the link and read the article rather than make a leap and talk about hydrochloric acid which is NOT found in every cell of our bodies, and is not made by every cell as a process of metabolism.

I read the article in detail and some more(Because the linked organisation represents primarily chemical industry business aspects).

Formaldehyde content in ecig vapor is considerably less than in regular cigarettes.

I was responding to your assertion and cheeky comment (reproduced below) about foods containing formaldehyde.

That's nice, BUT it's also found in food and our own bodies make formaldehyde. If this bothers you, perhaps you should stop eating?

......

What happens to inhaled formaldehyde in the body?

Inhaled formaldehyde rapidly breaks down in the body from a gas into the soluble form of formaldehyde (methanediol) and then is changed into formate in the nose and upper respiratory tract. Formate is either used as a building block chemical for the body to make more complicated, larger chemical molecules or broken down into carbon dioxide, which is exhaled in breath.
Thus, there is essentially no free formaldehyde available to interact with tissues, since the inhaled formaldehyde is broken down into the soluble methanediol (>99.9%) or gaseous formaldehyde (<0.1 %).
The tiny fraction (i.e., < 0.1 %) of formaldehyde in the body that can exist in a gaseous form in small amounts (< 0.8 ppb to 8 ppb; that is 0.001 – 0.01 mg/m3) is exhaled in the breath. Consequently, formaldehyde levels in the blood do not increase as a result of inhaled formaldehyde.

Inhaling small quantities of formaldehyde doesn't increase it's content in blood appreciably. The key is in the quantities. Regular inhalation of Formaldehyde was suspected of causing cancers but (I repeat) the quantities in ecig vapor are considerable less than in regular cigarettes.

 

[vapmex]

I have this feeling of all these articles that are not enough detailed and that are trying to mix apples with pears when they reffer to a "e-cig"..... Quantities of particles are going to depend on the amount of vapor, if we compare a basic e cig like a disposable with a more sophisticated one like an RBA with a Variable voltage battery, the amount of vapor is not comparable by no means, the advanced e cig is going to produce 3 or 4 times the vapor of the basic one.... so we cannot put all e-cigs on the same basket....

I read the article in detail and some more(Because the linked organisation represents primarily chemical industry business aspects).

Formaldehyde content in ecig vapor is considerably less than in regular cigarettes.

I was responding to your assertion and cheeky comment (reproduced below) about foods containing formaldehyde.





Inhaling small quantities of formaldehyde doesn't increase it's content in blood appreciably. The key is in the quantities. Regular inhalation of Formaldehyde was suspected of causing cancers but (I repeat) the quantities in ecig vapor are considerable less than in regular cigarettes.

 

[Kurt]

I have been researching the same thing myself- I did not do well with PG so I am using VG and also concerned about it. The only serious thing I have found for VG is that it can cause a lipoid pneumonia- being a vegetable derivative.

I think this would only be the case if the VG still had some vegetable oil in it. VG is not a lipid, and USP VG will have no veggie oils in it. It can cause some mucus production with some people. Some flavors can do this too.

 

[WidowsSon]

to OP: I don't think enough research has been done in any of these areas to definitively state that pg/vg is absolutely safe for you, although I wouldn't argue that it's infinitely better for you than smoking. (Better add that statement before someone jumps on me with... well then go back to smoking...) It does seem however that a lot of studies are surfacing in favour of PG/VG being relatively safe. That being said, there are little studies on the flavourings added and impurities found in many of the PG/VG compounds.

Havn't done much research on VG yet, but I personally think I have a bit of a reaction to the PG, so I've been researching that. Not 100% sure it's the PG, but I vape 70/30 pg/vg 99% of the time, and many have stated reactions to PG so it seemed like a good starting point.

I'll have to try vaping VG for a week to see if any symptoms go away, although I find this tough because I don't like 100% vg juices

I get dry mouth/throat (not a big deal), but also a phlegm buildup every morning that almost feels like a soar throat until I clear it... for weeks I keep thinking I'm coming down with something, but it just seems to go away late morning after clearing my throat... very thick hard to clear feeling. (anyone else get this)... not paying too much attention to this as I'm only 5-6 weeks without a cigarette, so maybe there are some symptoms of me quitting there also.

That being said I did some research into PG itself, and have found that there is a type of synthetic PG (opposed to inorganic PG which is used for ejuices) made by DOW that does not effect people who are sensitive to PG. Apparently the reason for this is that people are not sensitive to PG in general, but rather to the impurities that are found in the inorganic PG supplied to the ecig manufacturers.

The best example I can find is that users of inhalers also had dry mouth/throat and sensitivities to inorganic PG, and those same people do not have reactions with synthetic PG (chemical compound created in a lab to be the exact makeup of PG rather than inorganic which is PG derived as a by-product of a certain industry, which can also contain other byproducts and impurities.)

Looking for a supplier to test some of this out in a DIY ejuice scenario to see if it works/clears up symptoms etc...

Claims and tests can be funny things... Lets say for example we do a study on the health implications of PG when inhaled as an aerosol. Is this synthetic PG?, does it take into account the variations of impurities found in inorganic PG... maybe PG is safe, but some of the impurities are not... what about the flavouring...

Even if PG is safe, what good is a PG is safe study if what we are inhaling is a cocktail of PG/VG/Flavouring etc...

Interesting times, we're definitely going to see a lot more studies done in the near future, just make sure you know who's funding them.

Either way

TO OP:

I would steer clear of anyone who's making claims either way about PG/VG... noone knows enough to say it's safe or not without taking leaps of faith or assumptions or stating opinion. The tests I've seen although leaning positive have not been inclusive enough, measurable enough, re-producible enough. Both sides have agenda's, and most outcomes I've seen have favoured those agenda's.

Vaping should and is for me a personal decision that I've taken to stop me from smoking, and I'm happier for it. Will it cause long term effects.. I'm unsure, will Cigarettes... absolutely, there's no question. It's pretty obvious to me that its many times better for you than smoking. I just hope it's somewhat safe for me long term.

Happy vaping.

 

[rolygate]

Some tech points about the above:

All PG is synthetic as there are no organic sources (animal, vegetable). So, intolerance issues with PG might be due to impurities but not an allergy to an organic component.

VG can be made from a multitude of animal, vegetable and synthetic sources, also as a biodiesel manufacturing byproduct. As a result, intolerance to a VG product could be for a number of reasons: impurities or a source material (maybe a particular vegetable source such as palm oil).

Dow make a synthetic VG which may be what you are referring to - 'Optim'; google within ECF for <optim> to find references.

As Kurt says above, the media were fooled into creating a panic about glycerine by the antis, since it is closer to an alcohol than an oil and there are no recorded cases of it being associated with lipoid pneumonia. This would also put in jeopardy the multitude of pharmaceutical licenses for inhalation of glycerine, such as Dow's Optim, plus the fact that many inhalable medicines have moved to glycerine as the excipient for replacement of PG, due to the far lower incidence of reactions to glycerine than for PG.

We can probably be assured there is absolutely zero risk of lipoid pneumonia from glycerine for this reason alone; and in any case, if there were an elevation of risk, we would already have seen:
- Many cases within the gen pop receiving inhalable meds
- Investigation by pharmaceutical licensing authorities such as the FDA and MHRA
- Removal of MAs for the large number of glycerine-based inhalable meds
- Discussion in the press
- Warnings to patients to return their inhalable meds for exchange

Glycerine is very unlikely to be associated with lipoid pneumonia for all the above reasons. However, glycerine inhalation might, in a very small number of cases, adversely affect a patient with lungs previously severely compromised by smoking. For example, emphysema patients are known to develop pneumonia (not of the lipoid type) because they have significantly reduced resistance to it. It is not difficult to see how glycerine inhalation might increase susceptibility to this. However the regular form of pneumonia has a different pathology to the lipoid type and they are easy to differentiate at cell level.

As a generalisation, this is the current state of play with regard to PG and glycerine inhalation:

• Both PG and glycerine are safe for inhalation in the short term
• The long-term effects are not known, and cannot be known until three decades have elapsed
• It is unlikely that inhalation of either can produce disease that has serious effects without some prior warning of the issue ("If something seems wrong - such as breathing issues - then stop")
• It is extremely unlikely that inhalation of high-quality materials in e-cigarette vapour could produce morbidity of the smallest fraction of the numbers resulting from smoking tobacco
• Please note that the words ''high-quality materials" above were carefully chosen for a specific reason: inhalation of low-quality materials is an entirely different matter and we cannot know the result

Note
Inhalation of biodiesel byproduct glycerine is to be avoided as it may contain the carcinogenic esters of the jatropha plant. How this is to be avoided, we don't know at this time.

On a personal note, I use all-glycerine e-liquid. I cough up a very small amount of sputum about twice a week, and regard this as a benefit: if particulate matter is being inhaled that cannot be absorbed by the lungs, then coughing it out is beneficial. Glycerine seems to aid this, for me.

 

[StormFinch]

PG or propylene glycol is what Engine Coolant is made of. Check the label on a gallon of antifreeze. I know antifreeze is toxic over time. People and pets have been killed by PG poisoning. So how can it be safe to inhale?

Sent from my SCH-R760 using Tapatalk 2

Other people have addressed this, probably more eloquently than I could. All I can say is that if you continue to believe this, Don't Drink the Mio!

 

[WidowsSon]

Some tech points about the above:

All PG is synthetic as there are no organic sources (animal, vegetable). So, intolerance issues with PG might be due to impurities but not an allergy to an organic component.

I didn't use organic anywhere above. Inorganic meaning not organic, but not synthetic either. So like you stated, a byproduct of X rather than the compound being created in a lab like the Dow Optim line.

... yes screwed up post above re: moving from PG/VG to DOW optim glycerine as used in medical delivery. Their spec sheet stating the delivery vehicle as being superior to the inorganic products available for X number of reasons.. no need to regurgitate here.

•The long-term effects are not known, and cannot be known until three decades have elapsed.

lol, (agreed), unless your big pharma looking for approval, then two weeks without serious side effects is sufficient for publishing "no long term effects".


rolygate.. have you tried the DOW optim Glycerine?

 

[WidowsSon]

Other people have addressed this, probably more eloquently than I could. All I can say is that if you continue to believe this, Don't Drink the Mio!

PG being in coolant doesn't bother me, but I wouldn't go near Mio or any other sugar substitutes. lol

 

[rolygate]

rolygate.. have you tried the DOW optim Glycerine?

No, the smallest container size you can buy is 3 gallons. Even if that was nic base it would last me more than a thousand years.

One or more of the vendors might be using it now, who knows. If a vendor announced they used it as their base material I'd be there like a shot. Currently I mainly use a firm who would lose everything (multiple millions) if there were to be a scandal concerning their quality control, and that is the only practical measure I can think of.

Also there is a manufacturing problem here: if nic base is supplied to a large Western vendor from source, then it will not be using Optim, from the word go. Thus, any glycerine-based e-liquid from that vendor cannot be 100% Optim unless that was what they used in Asia (not just unlikely - impossible).

All liquid nicotine comes from China. Some is said to be from India as that is where the certification (and maybe shipping) comes from (even Switzerland or France in some cases), but the only proof of this that I would accept is someone touring a nicotine extraction in India and verifying it. Until that day (which I don't expect anytime soon), as far as I know all liquid nic base originates in China.

It certainly doesn't come from the USA, by the way, as there is no pharmaceutical nicotine extraction facility in the US. A firm has just been formed to start that up but they are not online yet. I expect others to follow - but that is some way down the road. Anyone who tells you that their liquid nicotine base is US-made @ Nov 2013 is an outright liar and you can quote me on that. Actually I would expect they have simply been fooled by someone further up the chain.

 

[rolygate]

For all the people that were asking where I found this information that VG vapor may turn into FormalDehyde, ............

BUT, many of the same authors are presenting a paper at the SRNT meeting in Boston this week that DOES. And from the following it is pretty clear that indeed it is glycerin, and not PG, that is associated with formaldhyde (and acrolein) being found in vapor:

SUBSTANTIAL REDUCTION IN EMISSION OF SELECTED CARBONYLS
AND VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS FROM ELECTRONIC CIGARETTES
COMPARED TO TOBACCO CIGARETTES

Unfortunately we have seen a shedload of studies where compliant researchers were funded by pharma to do a hatchet job on ecigs. We have even seen an example of this where a six-figure sum was offered to anyone in the research world who would be prepared to concoct such a study (and it is thought that the result was the Talbot study of 'nanoparticles in ecig vapor').

You can't trust these people to do honest research as that isn't what is being paid for. Also, you cannot rely on them to get it half-right even if they are doing their best to remain independent: every photo I have seen of lab testing set-ups where ecig vapor was tested shows an arrangement where the ecig would probably have melted and generated smoke. No user could possibly have continued to use the device in the situation depicted by the photos - they would have started to choke very soon.

Since you cannot rely on researchers to get it right even if they are trying their best, what chance is there that people paid to trash ecigs will produce genuinely accurate research? Zero.

Give me the funds and I will produce a study that shows ecigs can be used as a poison gas generating device in trench warfare. It will be peer-reviewed and appear in the BMJ (as long as the funder is Pfimacia etc.). It is very easy to mismanage machine ventilation of an ecig and overheat it to the point where it starts to melt internally and generate all sorts of toxic gases. The fact that a user would choke and throw it away long before it got to that stage is conveniently never mentioned in such studies.

Unless a technical study of ecig vapor has a name known to be fair (and knowledegable) about ecigs like Bullen, Laugesen, Polosa, Farsalinos - you first need to look at who the researchers are, where the funding comes from, and what the agenda might be. There is no such thing as research you can take at face value. Even when researchers try to get it right they still screw up bigtime, because they think a PV has some sort of similarity to a tobacco cigarette.

Use of glycerine in an ecig does not produce acrolein until you go way beyond any form of normal usage. The only way it can be done is to superheat glycerine, which cannot occur in any normal usage scenario. However I am not classing sub-ohm mechmod vaping as 'normal' here, people need to be aware that several aspects of that are outside normal parameters.

[edit - 2014-02-09]
One thing we do know is that PG has >70 years of inhalation use and research. It has been used for airborne pathogen management since the 1940s and has been used for decades in large building airconditioning plant*. Millions of people inhale it every day, in tiny amounts. Its history is so safe that there are no restrictions on its use for any public inhalation purposes. It is used as the base for injectable medicines that are immiscible - it is regarded for practical purposes as inert although if injected in large quantities, as it is, it will be processed as a complex carbohydrate, partially metabolysed to lactic acid, and excreted safely.

* Building air is filtered and cooled by water. You can see the plant on the roofs of large buildings. The water must be disinfected and also needs an antifreeze. Glycols are ideal for this purpose as they are very cheap to produce in industrial quality, have a super low freezing point, and can be chosen for price vs toxicity according to the application. PG has been used for a long time as the disinfectant / antifreeze in aircon plant because it is non-toxic. It has a powerful antibacterial and antiviral action especially when dispersed as an aerosol; in fact it is one of the most powerful airborne pathogen killers available. When we read of an outbreak of Legionnaire's disease affecting a group of people who visited a certain building, we know that maintenance of the aircon plant had been neglected for years and the cooling water was stagnant and untreated. Because we know that pathogens in the aircon water are well-dispersed in the building air, it is reasonable to assume that the PG in a well-maintained system will be similarly dispersed, especially considering the fact that PG is notably well dispersed as an aerosol. People in large buildings with well-maintained aircon plant will be inhaling PG in tiny amounts, though it is reasonable to assume that the concentrations will vary from floor to floor and area to area just as pathogen concentrations appear to do in poorly-maintained systems.

 

[Topfuel1997]

As with anything, there will be people for and against whatever it is.....I personally am for more concerned about Big Pharma and all the vaccines pushed on our kids today with little or no research.

 

[hazarada]

Nobody can tell you if VG is safe or not, if they do and you believe them then that makes you an idiot.

The toxicology and short term studies suggest inhaling either vg or pg is fairly harmless but same can be said for aluminum dust which some decades later turned out to clog up lungs and cause alsheimer.
I'm not saying that either vg or pg will have something like that looming over the future, in fact if you look at other things tagged safe toxicologically, very few of them turn out bad later on, but it is certainly a possibility.

If it makes you feel any better though - the chances of you dieing from vaping are much lower than you dieing from inhaling air in a city.