Study--what is in the vapor we exhale?

[shack22]

I saw this posted on another site. Thought folks would be interested!

"To those interested in what is in the vapor we exhale this is, to my knowledge, the most significant testing on that subject undertaken so far:
ClearStream Air Published! | ClearStream by FlavourArt (click on "ClearStream Air – Full Text")
http://clearstream.flavourart.it/site/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/CSA_Poster.pdf
It's not comprehensive/conclusive but it gives a very good idea the contents of exhaled vapor from ecigs."

 

[SupplyDaddy]

Going by that study, it's almost safer to vape than to breath normal air.. j/k

The details were very convincing that e-cigarettes are much safer.. and that we might have to stop telling people that the residue on their windshields isn't from the juice!!!

 

[Tajji'smom]

Nice to see some testing results. Makes me even happier that I switched to E cigarettes. We know it's a lot better than smoking, just by the way we feel, now to start seeing proof of that justifies everything. Take that FDA!! I liked the article about the effect on the heart

 

[Projectguy]

Great catch Shack. This "one pager" is the type of easy to understand, clear information that has to get into the mainstream.

 

[metropolitan]

i'm bumping this thread with another "me too" just because i think this is really really worth reading and disseminating.

 

[Ravenlunatique]

Thanks for posting this Shack

 

[Esharp]

Very good shack22. I have printed that off and will be giving it to my Health and Safety guy at work. You never know when someone at work will complain about vaping. Better to be proactive, just look at SloHand's story.

 

[zoiDman]

I saw this posted on another site. Thought folks would be interested!

"To those interested in what is in the vapor we exhale this is, to my knowledge, the most significant testing on that subject undertaken so far:
ClearStream Air Published! | ClearStream by FlavourArt (click on "ClearStream Air – Full Text")
http://clearstream.flavourart.it/site/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/CSA_Poster.pdf
It's not comprehensive/conclusive but it gives a very good idea the contents of exhaled vapor from ecigs."

One Question....

What does Table 6. in the study represent?

 

[gmypc]

Thank you shack22. Been getting some 'looks' recently from work - printing this stuff tomorrow.

 

[SloHand]

One Question....

What does Table 6. in the study represent?

Quote off of the wikis ....
"TOC detection is an important measurement because of the effects it may have on the environment, human health, and manufacturing processes. TOC is a highly sensitive, non-specific measurement of all organics present in a sample. It, therefore, can be used to regulate the organic chemical discharge to the environment in a manufacturing plant. In addition, low TOC can confirm the absence of potentially harmful organic chemicals in water used to manufacture pharmaceutical products. TOC is also of interest in the field of potable water purification due to disinfection of byproducts. Inorganic carbon poses little to no threat."

Therefore TOC's are bad.

 

[blaufisch]

*applause* This should be spread far and wide. I am MOST pleased to see this!

 

[tenshi]

Thanks for the link, nice study. There has been several studies and one of my favorites was released some time ago. Here is the link Comparison of the effects of e-cigarette vapor... [Inhal Toxicol. 2012] - PubMed - NCBI

The conclusion was "all byproducts measured, electronic cigarettes produce very small exposures relative to tobacco cigarettes. The study indicates no apparent risk to human health from e-cigarette emissions based on the compounds analyze." There was also a nice study in New Zealand that came up to similar results which showed details of their exact methods of analysis and results. I worked as a criminalist at the LA sheriff's crime lab in the toxicology section and it was very similar to how we did our analysis there. Their conclusion was there were no PAH carcinogens (below the detection limit) and no dangerous heavy metals were found in e-cig mist.

There are plenty of studies available that FDA just doesn't want to listen to. They don't care about the science, it's all politics.

 

[shack22]

If "second hand vapor" can be shown to not be the health risk to others that "second hand smoke" is to non smokers it sure removes one big arrow from ecig opponents quiver!

 

[zoiDman]

...

Therefore TOC's are bad.

That is why I was surprised to see these three Chemical Compounds at such a High Concentrations.

Methylethylketone
1-ethyl-3-methylbenzene
Longifolen

 

[praetor91313]

Population's too small for it to be a valid study.

 

[shack22]

No kidding. It's still a good thing though--hopefully larger ones to come. There's also this one
Comparison of the effects of e-cigarette vapor... [Inhal Toxicol. 2012] - PubMed - NCBI that tenshi posted. It all adds up!

 

[budynbuick]

If its not fda approved, it doesn't count. That is a fact. Just rubbing it in our face. Sorry

 

[Starrlamia]

Population's too small for it to be a valid study.

it's also done by a company that has a vested interest in it being safe.
I do believe that ecigs are safer then cigarettes, however I think people need to do some reading on how to critically analyze research so that they can understand how to determine the facts of a study.

 

[mostlyclassics]

zoiDman, what follows is from wikipedia and other informational websites, plus some figuring on my part (I'm sorry, but I have to get into the weeds here to interpret and comment on the results -- and bear in mind, I'm working right at the limits of my knowledge):

• Methylethylketone (AKA MEK, or butanone, or model "cement," is a solvent widely used in many industrial processes). In 2005, the EPA removed MEK from the list of hazardous air pollutants, concluding "potential exposures to butanone [i.e., MEK] emitted from industrial processes may not reasonably be anticipated to cause human health or environmental problems." MEK can cause lung irritation and birth defects in mice, but at concentrations of 3,000 parts per million (ppm) (or greater), with no problems reported below 1,000 ppm. The ClearStream study reported 4.2 (for regular cigarettes) or 4.4 (for e-cigarettes) micrograms per cubic meter. A cubic meter of air at sea level weighs 1.2 kg. If you do the math, the 4.2 or 4.4 micrograms per cubic meter reported work out to a concentration of 0.0035 or 0.0036 ppm (assuming I did the math right).
• 1-ethyl-3-methylbenzene (AKA benzene, comprising several percent of most gasoline blends). OSHA has set a safe limit of 1 ppm in air per 8-hour workday and 40-hour workweek. The ClearStream study reported 0.2 or 3.4 micrograms per cubic meter, which works out to 0.000167 or 0.00283 ppm (again, assuming I've done the math correctly).
• Longifolen (misspelled, it's actually spelled "longifolene," is an aromatic hydrocarbon found in pine resins and in lapsang souchong tea and used for making perfumes and flavorings, among other things). Longifolene is a tricyclic sesquiterpene, a member of the large terpene family of hydrocarbons. Many of these compounds are found in living things and appear to be necessary to properly functioning metabolisms. The only reference I could find about exposure limits was the LD50 (lethal dose for 50% of the test animals) numbers for oral ingestion by rats and dermal exposure on rabbits. In both cases, the LD50 is greater than five grams per kilogram of body weight.

These three compounds seem to be totally innocuous in the tiny concentrations reported in the ClearStream study. Hopefully, Kurt (who is a biochemist in real life) will wander by to point out any errors in my analysis.

budynbuick, the study cited by tenshi in post #12 and shack22 in post #16 came from the National Institutes of Health, which is about as good as it gets.

 

[shack22]

Well said-- mostlyclassics!