So when do we get 100/200/300 MG liquids? (since the absorbion rate is so low?)

[hyperdeficit]

I have to disagree, I have heard of and seen incidences where someone was vaping too high of a liquid and started vomiting or become ill.

I think the nicotine is pretty fairly gauged in the measuring system manufacturers use.

Someone on here ( I cant remember who) came up with a formula for figuring out how much nicotine was in one cartridge. he proved that the number on the bottle more referred to the filled cartridge than the contents in the whole bottle

to say that the nicotine content of an ecig is one tenth of an actual cigarette is inaccurate in my opinion.

 

[Stubby]

Just so you know, according to my supplier. WHo is in china, where the ecig was invented, and they have been using them for almost 20 years now. if u have a bottle of 24mg. juice, u get 24mg. of nicotine, out of every ml. in the bottle. They tell me, 18mg. high flavor, one ml. of that is equivalent to one pack of cigarettes. And to ur suggestion. My juice supplier is Dekang, in china. They produce 90% of the juice in china.
They quit making 36mg. juice about a month and half ago, claiming that it is too strong. And they will not produce anything higher than a 24mg. juice from now on. Im with ya, i use 36mg. and it feels like i could take more, but most people get dizzy and buzzed from 18 or 24.
I would not use any juice higher than the 36mg.
And i really think the people that invented the product and juice know a little more than us newbies. I dont want to scare people so I wont tell ya everything they said about the 36. Take it like a grain of salt. Just telling ya guys what im told. Ill finish my 36, and get rid of my extras, but after that, no higher than 24 for me, or my others. By, the way, we are all addicted, And me to way more things than nicotine. Most of this sh*t is all a mindf*$k. 24 is plenty.
Just to reiterate, an 18mg. bottle of 30 ml. is therefore averaged to be equivalent to at least 30 packs of smokes. I always say ull get 3 cartons out of it. Think about it, u get like what 8 to 10 drops in a ml. right. about 5 cigs per cartridge, remember most of us take these super drags all the time, and wonder why we go through so much juice. i do the same thing.
keep vaping, but safely.

This is a completely inaccurate.

There is a hugh difference between absorbed nicotine and the amount listed on the bottle. The actual absorbed nicotine in 18mg/30mm is likely around 2 1/2 to 3 packs of smokes. Not 30 packs. There certainly is some question as to how much is absorbed, but with the pathetic amount of research that's a best guess. That's just simplistic rubbish mathematics on your part.

 

[edlogic]

It's interesting for the actual nicotine concentrations, but I didn't need a study to tell me I get but a small fraction of the nicotine from an e-cig drag as I do from an analog. If I smoked as much as I vaped I'd be sick as a dog. I vape 24mg.

Is there anyone on here who smoked at least a pack a day that has gotten a buzz of an e-cig after switching?

i smoked for 35 years - and for the last 10 years or more - i smoked non filter buglar roll my owns - super high tar and high nic

i can say from reading these threads that there must be a huge difference in how much gets absorbed or how much people get affected by ejuice and nic concentrations

because i find that i am very sensitive to almost all drugs and alcohol - when i got a pain shot before i asked doc to cut it in half and it still hit me hard

so the nic juice hits me very hard also - i have to cut it way down and then be careful not to vape too much or i get a bad feeling

weird thing is - that when i go to the dentist - i have to get extra novacaine and it still hurts when they poke on my teeth

if i get the slightest amount of juice on me - i rinse it off right away

if i get carried away and don't pay attention and vape too much then i feel sick

so now i make sure i only take 8 or 10 puffs then stop and wait a while

good news is - i haven't had a single analog yet

 

[vaporich]

I had a post on this thread, it must have gotten taken down, dont know why. someone tell me what was wrong with it, so I dont do it again.
ANyway, the juice is simple. Each ml. equals the mg. of the bottle strength. As for using mg. over 36mg. I do not recommend it, seriously.
Over in china, they quit making the 36mg. cuz they thought the strength was too high for the public. They know what there doing, since we wouldnt have the ecig without them, and its been around since 88', over there. My juice comes from the supplier that makes 90% of the juice over there. I think they know what there doing.
The 36mg. is fine, but dont go any higher.
Just an opinion, but Ive talked to alot of reps from the factories.
I dont want people getting sick left and right, and keelin over. Thats all we need, we are already being looked over finely. I use the 36mg. and have no problems. but sometimes, I feel like I could take more, but thats just the addict in me trying to come out. More, more, more.
I know many, many people that cant use the 24mg. without getting extrememly dizzy.
Just be smart and keep vaping.

 

[twoshadetod]

because i find that i am very sensitive to almost all drugs and alcohol - when i got a pain shot before i asked doc to cut it in half and it still hit me hard

I am willing to take any half's not used

 

[markarich159]

Can anybody link to the New Zealand Study. I would love to read it. I know most of Nic in analogs is destroyed in the combustion process, so your only getting 1mg to 1.4mg Nic(depending on whether your smoking light or full flavor) per cigarette. Logically , one would think, since e-cigs, vaporize(not combust) at much lower temps, MORE nicotine would make it undegraded into the vapor rather then less. I'm curious to read the New Zealand study to see if there are any glaring or obvious faults in the study methodology.
Personally I smoked Camel Wides(fullFlavor) one and a half packs a day for 15 years. I currently vape 18mg liquid through a Joye510 and if I vape too much, I'll start sweating , getting lightheaded, and my blood pressure will also shoot up. This never happened to me when I smoked analogs. I do find though that some 18mg liquid will not do this to me at all. So I think it's more of a "eliquid quality and consistency" issue(i.e. some suppliers are not selling what they think they are selling, whether intentionally or unintentionally) I tried vaping 24 mg liquid from addictioneliquid.com (because they only have that or 8mg to choose from) and I had to cut it with Glycerine as it was causing the sweats and lightheadedness.

So anyone with that link to the New Zealand study, can u please post.

 

[Stubby]

So anyone with that link to the New Zealand study, can u please post.

http://www.healthnz.co.nz/DublinEcigBenchtopHandout.pdf

E-Cigarette Safety For Consumers And Bystanders Confirmed By Medical Study

The conclusion is that you need about 10 puffs on a e-cig to equal one puff off an analog.

There is a whole lot more involved in the absorption of nicotine then temperature. The ph value has much to do with it, especially products like e-cigs where the nicotine is absorbed through the mucus membrane. If my memory serves me well (and sometimes it doesn't) the ph of cigarettes is around 4.5. That's on the acidic side. You would get very little absorption of nicotine from a cigarette if you didn't inhale it. I believe 7.0 is neutral.

Pipe tobacco, swedish style snus and nasal snuff, all products where the nicotine is absorbed through the mucus membrane, are all on the high ph side (alkaline). Snus and nasal snuff can actually smell of ammonia when you first open the can. There isn't any actual ammonia in it. It's just the high ph value.

I still don't know what the ph of e-juice is. I'm guessing from the low absorption rate that it's on the low side. It could very well be that different e-liquids have different ph levels. That could explain the wide level of reactions. As usual with e-cigs, very little info to go on.

 

[markarich159]

http://www.healthnz.co.nz/DublinEcigBenchtopHandout.pdf

E-Cigarette Safety For Consumers And Bystanders Confirmed By Medical Study

The conclusion is that you need about 10 puffs on a e-cig to equal one puff off an analog.

There is a whole lot more involved in the absorption of nicotine then temperature. The ph value has much to do with it, especially products like e-cigs where the nicotine is absorbed through the mucus membrane. If my memory serves me well (and sometimes it doesn't) the ph of cigarettes is around 4.5. That's on the acidic side. You would get very little absorption of nicotine from a cigarette if you didn't inhale it. I believe 7.0 is neutral.

Pipe tobacco, swedish style snus and nasal snuff, all products where the nicotine is absorbed through the mucus membrane, are all on the high ph side (alkaline). Snus and nasal snuff can actually smell of ammonia when you first open the can. There isn't any actual ammonia in it. It's just the high ph value.

I still don't know what the ph of e-juice is. I'm guessing from the low absorption rate that it's on the low side. It could very well be that different e-liquids have different ph levels. That could explain the wide level of reactions. As usual with e-cigs, very little info to go on.

Thank you for the post.

I've read the abstract you posted(this of course is not one study , just a summation- and in fact a summation of several unrelated studies(7) based on the bibliography- done at 9 different stated laboratories) The main test was NOT to determine nicotine levels but other toxic particulate levels(which were found to be extremely low-which implies e-cigs are safe) But the problem is the actual "nicotine mist" test cited was a cascade impactor test. A cascade impactor ONLY measures particle size. So it looks like they are trying to extrapolate data from the impactor(particle size) test by mixing it with the results of the other(unrelated) studies cited. It also comes to a bizarre conclusion based on particle size when it states

"The nicotine dose and
particle size are too small to ensure deposition in
the alveoli or bronchioles and rapid nicotine​

absorption as in cigarette smoking."
But it references a particle size of 0.04micron-which is certainly small enough to be readily absorbed into the alveolar mucosa.

This, as I thought, is a horrible abstract as it's mixing results from several different studies and labs to come to its conclusions. It also does not describe, at all, how it came to those conclusions. The methodology it lists is simply a list of the labs where the "studies" were run. I would need to see what each study actually did and what each lab actually tested.

Another limitation , which they do note, is they use ONLY one ruyan V8 style e-cig and only one 16mg liquid ruyan liquid(which it goes on to state was measured at 13 and 14mg)

Also nicotine is an alkaloid, which is a basic(not acidic) plant product. All alkaloids are absorbed maximally when the are in their free base form. Placing Nicotine in an acidic medium would convert it to its salt form and thereby decrease its bioavailability. I'm assuming that is why snus is in ammonia(a base) to keep the nicotine in it's free base form.

 

[Stubby]

Thank you for the post.

I've read the abstract you posted(this of course is not one study , just a summation- and in fact a summation of several unrelated studies(7) based on the bibliography- done at 9 different stated laboratories) The main test was NOT to determine nicotine levels but other toxic particulate levels(which were found to be extremely low-which implies e-cigs are safe) But the problem is the actual "nicotine mist" test cited was a cascade impactor test. A cascade impactor ONLY measures particle size. So it looks like they are trying to extrapolate data from the impactor(particle size) test by mixing it with the results of the other(unrelated) studies cited. It also comes to a bizarre conclusion based on particle size when it states

"The nicotine dose and
particle size are too small to ensure deposition in
the alveoli or bronchioles and rapid nicotine​

absorption as in cigarette smoking."
But it references a particle size of 0.04micron-which is certainly small enough to be readily absorbed into the alveolar mucosa.

This, as I thought, is a horrible abstract as it's mixing results from several different studies and labs to come to its conclusions. It also does not describe, at all, how it came to those conclusions. The methodology it lists is simply a list of the labs where the "studies" were run. I would need to see what each study actually did and what each lab actually tested.

Another limitation , which they do note, is they use ONLY one ruyan V8 style e-cig and only one 16mg liquid ruyan liquid(which it goes on to state was measured at 13 and 14mg)

Also nicotine is an alkaloid, which is a basic(not acidic) plant product. All alkaloids are absorbed maximally when the are in their free base form. Placing Nicotine in an acidic medium would convert it to its salt form and thereby decrease its bioavailability. I'm assuming that is why snus is in ammonia(a base) to keep the nicotine in it's free base form.

Good observations. You have a better science background the I do.

It is rather frustrating to not have some basic information on nicotine absorption in e-cigs. Is it absorbed via mucus membrane, lungs. Even blood nicotine levels are hard to come by. We need a whole lot more research to figure out what is going on.

 

[KreeL]

I've seen people on these boards get freaked out about nicotine poisoning at the drop of a hat. I've seen old hands worry about spilling the juice on their hands. I've seen people talk about the dangers of overdose....

And now the new zealand study comes out, and shows that our E-cigs aren't even HALF as strong as a regular cigarette.

Now, I want a link to said study. I'm running on hearsay here, and my search for the study gave me a haystack of multipage threads.

But, if a 16mg or 18mg liquid, used for five minutes, produced 10% of the nicotine concentration in the blood that a regular cigarette produces, it is therefore logical that we should be using a 160 or 180mg liquid to produce the same effect as a regular cigarette.

THAT must be why we vape so much! BECUASE WE AREN'T GETTING MUCH NICOTINE! IF we got the same amount we get from a cigarette, we'd vape less! Our Batteries and atmoizers would see much much less use!

Gee.... TW's 36mg liquid doesn't seem so strong anymore does it? Infact, when we look at the Kiwi's math, it seems pretty danged weak. It might produce oh.... as much as 20% the effect of a real cigarette! The new 48MG mixing liquid might produce a whole third of a real cigarette! (And people were worried it might be vaped straight!)

OK, If my logic isn't working, go ahead and wack me for it. If I'm speaking in Ignorance and overlooking a key fact... wack me for that.

But the logic does suggest it.

I've read this OP again. What's the question?

I am of the mindset that we can't let stupidity dull our minds. As former smokers all, we know what a nicfit is, and how much nicotine it takes to overcome it. It's as easy as knowing how much caffeine we need to wake up in the morning.

Certain members trying to perform ludicrous analysis only adds to the mindnumbing ......ation that has been infesting this board lately.

 

[GreySaber]

I've read this OP again. What's the question?
.

The basic idea is that if we are only getting 10% of the nicotine in an analog cigarette, as supported by the recent study, then when will we:

A. Get E-liquid ten times as strong, so the E-cig is a better simulation of a real cigarette,

or

B. Find a way to make the current nicotine levels better absorbed into the body.

 

[markarich159]

The basic idea is that if we are only getting 10% of the nicotine in an analog cigarette, as supported by the recent study, then when will we:

A. Get E-liquid ten times as strong, so the E-cig is a better simulation of a real cigarette,

or

B. Find a way to make the current nicotine levels better absorbed into the body.

1st off, please don't be offended by this post, that is not my intention.

The "study" you've cited is not actually a study it is an abstract... I'm not gonna go thru the whole thing again. Read my opinion on the abstract about 3 posts ago. And before you start in with me about how I don't know what I'm talking about and we need 10000mg strength eliquid, I went to 6 years of Pharmacy School and had several courses(one VERY specific) on interpreting and critiquing methodology, data and conclusions of clinical studies(big deal I'm sure there are much more intelligent people then me). But what I do know is that we need MUCH better data and analysis(in vitro and in vivo, well designed , controlled studies) of this entire e-cig genre before we can start drawing hard conclusions about alveolar nicotine concentrations, mist concentrations and their correlation to blood levels etc... This one abstract from New Zealand proves nothing. (In fact it appears the purpose of the study was to test contaminant levels in e-cigs, the nicotine mist analysis looks like an aside they pulled from correlational data.) Just as the horrendous FDA SE cart study last week proves nothing about the safety of e-cigs in general(don't even get me started about the lack of controls and flaws in that FDA study - the FDA should be ashamed of itself). The one GOOD thing about the New Zealand study is that, it appears, to have negated the FDA claims of toxicity and carcinogen issues with e-cigs.

 

[GreySaber]

No offence taken. At most I might smack you silly for not paying enough attention. I'm not citeing the abstract, I'm siting the reported result. We've had several links, and we don't have the whole study linked YET.

If you've only seen this link, http://www.healthnz.co.nz/DublinEcigBenchtopHandout.pdf then maybe.

Take a look at this one too.. but it's also short of the whole! http://www.healthnz.co.nz/ecig_effect-2.pdf

The bit of import is the one about blood tests where they find ten percent of absorbed nicotine.

Eventaully someone will post the WHOLE study.

Take a look at this link, and tell me what Tmax and Cmax mean.

 

[twoshadetod]

I'm on the side that thinks the test is bullsht, done wrong or however you want to word it. Used for 5 minutes? You could do that and only inhale twice by triggering a 2 minute safety twice. You could just do what the man. recommend and take 3 drags and let is sit for 2-3 minutes inbetween uses.

On one of those "studies" it claimed the cart held 300 puffs of smoke (I think, may be thinking wrong, I'm using my left handed ecig right now ).

 

[KreeL]

The basic idea is that if we are only getting 10% of the nicotine in an analog cigarette, as supported by the recent study, then when will we:

A. Get E-liquid ten times as strong, so the E-cig is a better simulation of a real cigarette,

or

B. Find a way to make the current nicotine levels better absorbed into the body.

My point is made by the quoted nonsensical post.^

1. The e-cig already simulates analog smoking. Users report getting nicotine in desired amounts. So your 'A' is already pwnd.

2. Where did you arrive at the idea we need better nic absorption? What exactly is your problem? 'B' = pwnd again.

 

[trog100]

i think a good long deep drag on an ecig that works with visible vapour on the exhale will deliver plenty of nicotine.. i now find i take double drags.. a mouthful.. a part inhale then another mouthful followed by a very deep and slow inhale..

i think the less nicotine per normal drag must we correct.. i use 24 mg and certainly never used to real smoke this way..

the ruyan e cigs i have tried were wimps and a waste of space.. but that applies to most of them unless brand new..

i still have the odd roll up.. in moments of stress i would grab one.. e cigs work but in a more level delivery way... the instant effect isnt quite there like in a real cig..

so i think the less absorption factor must be correct..

trog

 

[Angela]

Well, in answer to the question posed in the title to this thread.... the answer (in the UK at least) is never, since anything above 70mg/ml would be classified as a poison here.

 

[GreySaber]

Well, in answer to the question posed in the title to this thread.... the answer (in the UK at least) is never, since anything above 70mg/ml would be classified as a poison here.

Then maybe you guys will be on the cutting edge of better absorbion.

Really, either better absorbion or kicking up the nicotine level should work.

Kicking up the nicotine level is kind of a brute force method of accomplishing it, and we might hit some kind of upper wall, either legally like you guys would, or physically.

Better absorbion is almost certainly the way to go, but requires more science.

We need more studies on this! I'd like to know if they were using people who had experince using E-cigs, since there's a significant learning period!

I'd also like to see studies where the people
A. Held in the vapor for awhile.
B. Used the 510 and the 901.
c. Were a few week or more in on using the E-cig, since they would have cleaned the tar out of the lungs by then, which would likely result in the lung tissue performing in a fashion other then that of a heavy smoker's lung tissue.


I'd like to see the experiment replicated at another location.

This study absolutely supports the use of E-cigs, but it's also kind of a punch against them on pure nicotine delievery effectiveness in comparicent to tobacco smoke.

 

[xKrazYx]

My point is made by the quoted nonsensical post.^

1. The e-cig already simulates analog smoking. Users report getting nicotine in desired amounts. So your 'A' is already pwnd.

2. Where did you arrive at the idea we need better nic absorption? What exactly is your problem? 'B' = pwnd again.

His point A is clearly not "pwned" because you haven't been comprehending this thread at all. His basic argument is that there are a lot of people out there who are not getting enough nicotine with the current liquids and devices. Yes, a lot of people have been getting enough and it is enough to curb their cravings but there are also people where even the 36/48 mg liquid doesn't do **** to them. These are the people this thread is catered to.

What exactly is his problem? What? He hasn't shown any aggression and his posts aren't inflammatory in any way, it seems like you're the one with the "problem".

Also, pwnd? Seriously? What are you, 15?

 

[markarich159]

No offence taken. At most I might smack you silly for not paying enough attention. I'm not citeing the abstract, I'm siting the reported result. We've had several links, and we don't have the whole study linked YET.

If you've only seen this link, http://www.healthnz.co.nz/DublinEcigBenchtopHandout.pdf then maybe.

Take a look at this one too.. but it's also short of the whole! http://www.healthnz.co.nz/ecig_effect-2.pdf

The bit of import is the one about blood tests where they find ten percent of absorbed nicotine.

Eventaully someone will post the WHOLE study.

Take a look at this link, and tell me what Tmax and Cmax mean.

Saw that one too, again only an abstract. Tmax is time to maximum blood concentration. Cmax is the blood concentraction AT tmax. There is DEFINITIELY something wrong with this study as well. If you look at the Nicotrol inhaler results, they are WAY, WAY, WAY below those found in a typical NRT inhaler clinical study. (So, basically they're saying that Nicorete inhaler also gave Cmax ten times lower then analog- if that were so they never would have been approved by FDA for smoking cessation as they wouldn't have done anything-Placebo would have given similar craving results in study victims). Again, since it's an abstract, there is not enough detail in the methodolgy to show WHY the results may have turned out the way they did. (i.e. how long were the draws on the inhaler's and e-cig's in comparison to a analog etc, how long were the inhales retained in the lungs, what e-cig was used, etc...) But the MAJOR thing that makes no sense is that , even though the cmax levels were supposedly 10 times less of an analog, the study participants cravings seemed to be well handled by the 16 mg e-cig if yoy look at the Mean VAS score -only a 1.44 mean difference out of 10). So the patients response doesn't seem to match up with blood concentration figures. Also, as I mentioned before, Many studies with different methodologies, in-vivo and in-vitro have to be done before anything coinclusive can be said. Finally, I said I didn't mean to offend anyone withmy last post and I meant it. But, frankly, smack me silly, 1st I'de like to see you try, but since you're in Savannah, GA and I'm in Allentown, PA YOU know that will never happen. I F**ckin hate ignorant people who threaten violence from 500 miles away on a internet forum. It's juvenile, petty, cowardly and , most of all, shows a total lack of true conviction in one's point of view or argument.