The Elephant In The Room ...

Status
Not open for further replies.
NickO'Teen - thanks for your thoughts. It's really hard to work out in what ways tocopherols (or tocotrienols) might be able to work; but should certainly help with the tobacco oils. While in storage anyway; to what extent it can help at the point of being heated to vapor remains to be seen.

SurbitonPete - I'm sure you will have some ideas at some point; something overlooked; something outside the box ...
 

scyllabub

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Oct 27, 2008
474
1
London, UK
While it's all very interesting, after 35 years of cigarettes and other substances smoking up my lungs I'm not altogether concerned. Some substance could be bed in there, but I'm betting not as bad as treated tobacco and paper smoke.

I can't contribute, with my 30% for O-level Science over 50 years ago, but I gather that our fab scientists here are not "merely" concerned with producing a healthy vape for us users, but with producing a healthy vape that the authorities can have no excuse to ban, which they are on the point of doing :(

scylla
 
I have been following this thread with interest but it's all really above my head when it comes to the science so I can't join in with anything useful to say.
At the risk of adding to the superfluous "chatter," I must say I'm with you. Just reading these posts gives me a big warm fuzzy inside, knowing there are some really smart people out there working very hard to make sure our beloved e-ciggies are safe and reliable.

Thanks all! Now, I'll go back to my corner and be quiet... :nun:

~~Cheryl
 
I can't contribute, with my 30% for O-level Science over 50 years ago, but I gather that our fab scientists here are not "merely" concerned with producing a healthy vape for us users, but with producing a healthy vape that the authorities can have no excuse to ban, which they are on the point of doing :(

scylla

That's right.

:) Say that vaping is significantly less harmful - that gains interest. When they look into figures and see 100-1000 times less toxins - excited.

:( Say that vaping is toxin free - that gets an incredulous interest. Test show minute traces of toxins - seen to have exagerrated; lose credibility and interest wanes.

So I think it is important to underplay our case, because even that is an excellent one. Let the tests show better than we said, not worse.

Cheryl - thanks!
 

Nick O'Teen

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Mar 28, 2009
510
10
58
Swansea, Wales
www.decadentvapours.com
I can't contribute, with my 30% for O-level Science over 50 years ago, but I gather that our fab scientists here are not "merely" concerned with producing a healthy vape for us users, but with producing a healthy vape that the authorities can have no excuse to ban, which they are on the point of doing :(

scylla

Sadly it's not even about the health - it's sheer fascist intolerance, and an ingrained impulse to ban people doing stuff they enjoy. Plus protection of the enormous profits they make out of farming us for taxes and overpriced, ineffective NRT. I've long suspected it, but now with the advent of vaping, they've come right out and given the game away for all to see. They don't need an excuse - they just claim black is white.

The health fascists will only tolerate you using nicotine if it's via an uncomfortable, ineffective, and grossly overpriced patch, horrid gum, or a crappy plastic inhaler that looks like a tampon and tastes of stale tic tacs, but as soon as you look like you're actually enjoying it, they'll froth at the mouth demanding it should be banned, and be smugly condescending about how they're helping us poor addicts - saving us from ourselves (while making a fat, juicy profit from tobacco taxes and overpriced NRT that all the evidence shows doesn't work.)

Any evidence that doesn't support their position will be ignored or flatly denied, and they'll just keep parroting "there's no evidence it's safe/safer" (utter bull****, as Spikey's excellent recent post demonstrates.)

Even if we could pack our juice full of vitamins and prove that vapers lived longer, healtheir lives than non-vapers, they'd still want it banned. Even if they manage to ban nicotine juice, they'll still want to ban no-nic juice (the no-nic Canadian suppliers are still being hassled.) It looks like we're enjoying it, so it must be banned - that's the bottom line.

There really aren't words to describe the contempt I hold for the cynical anti-vaping coalition that now sees Big Pharma and supposed Public "Health" groups allying themselves with Big Tobacco, happy to stand shoulder to shoulder to ensure they can keep on grabbing a fat slice of our money while treating us like vermin.

They don't want you to give up smoking - there's no profit in that for anyone. They want you to pay extortionate taxes all your life, accept being treated like a leper to gratify their own bullying instincts, and then die a painful, lingering death while they gleefully tell you that it's all your own fault, and for good measure that you've spent your life damaging the health of everyone around you with second (and now third)-hand smoke.
These scum have blood on their hands.
 

Nick O'Teen

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Mar 28, 2009
510
10
58
Swansea, Wales
www.decadentvapours.com
Interesting link: SpringerLink - Journal Article Resins and asphaltenes in severely oxidized oils

A bit over my head I'm afraid, but I must say - I've been thinking about this quite a bit, and looking stuff up over the last few days... and despite my inherent feeling that antioxidants wouldn't be that useful (or at least that they'd offset any health/flavour advantages by adding to the coil-gunging tendencies of the juice,) I can't actually find a solid objection to the tocopherol idea.
I'm in the process of sorting out the necessary business references to open an account with a couple of chemical supply companies, and I think I'll look into this once I can order some properly pure (not merely edible pharma grade,) vitamin E complex tocopherols/tocotrienols to experiment with.
 

surbitonPete

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Jan 25, 2009
2,915
5
North Yorkshire UK
Sadly it's not even about the health - it's sheer fascist intolerance, and an ingrained impulse to ban people doing stuff they enjoy. Plus protection of the enormous profits they make out of farming us for taxes and overpriced, ineffective NRT. I've long suspected it, but now with the advent of vaping, they've come right out and given the game away for all to see. They don't need an excuse - they just claim black is white.

The health fascists will only tolerate you using nicotine if it's via an uncomfortable, ineffective, and grossly overpriced patch, horrid gum, or a crappy plastic inhaler that looks like a tampon and tastes of stale tic tacs, but as soon as you look like you're actually enjoying it, they'll froth at the mouth demanding it should be banned, and be smugly condescending about how they're helping us poor addicts - saving us from ourselves (while making a fat, juicy profit from tobacco taxes and overpriced NRT that all the evidence shows doesn't work.)

Any evidence that doesn't support their position will be ignored or flatly denied, and they'll just keep parroting "there's no evidence it's safe/safer" (utter bull****, as Spikey's excellent recent post demonstrates.)

Even if we could pack our juice full of vitamins and prove that vapers lived longer, healtheir lives than non-vapers, they'd still want it banned. Even if they manage to ban nicotine juice, they'll still want to ban no-nic juice (the no-nic Canadian suppliers are still being hassled.) It looks like we're enjoying it, so it must be banned - that's the bottom line.

There really aren't words to describe the contempt I hold for the cynical anti-vaping coalition that now sees Big Pharma and supposed Public "Health" groups allying themselves with Big Tobacco, happy to stand shoulder to shoulder to ensure they can keep on grabbing a fat slice of our money while treating us like vermin.

They don't want you to give up smoking - there's no profit in that for anyone. They want you to pay extortionate taxes all your life, accept being treated like a leper to gratify their own bullying instincts, and then die a painful, lingering death while they gleefully tell you that it's all your own fault, and for good measure that you've spent your life damaging the health of everyone around you with second (and now third)-hand smoke.
These scum have blood on their hands.

Hear hear Nick.....if I was good at ranting.....that's exactly what I would say as well.
 

sherid

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
May 25, 2008
2,266
493
USA
Sadly it's not even about the health - it's sheer fascist intolerance, and an ingrained impulse to ban people doing stuff they enjoy. Plus protection of the enormous profits they make out of farming us for taxes and overpriced, ineffective NRT. I've long suspected it, but now with the advent of vaping, they've come right out and given the game away for all to see. They don't need an excuse - they just claim black is white.

The health fascists will only tolerate you using nicotine if it's via an uncomfortable, ineffective, and grossly overpriced patch, horrid gum, or a crappy plastic inhaler that looks like a tampon and tastes of stale tic tacs, but as soon as you look like you're actually enjoying it, they'll froth at the mouth demanding it should be banned, and be smugly condescending about how they're helping us poor addicts - saving us from ourselves (while making a fat, juicy profit from tobacco taxes and overpriced NRT that all the evidence shows doesn't work.)

Any evidence that doesn't support their position will be ignored or flatly denied, and they'll just keep parroting "there's no evidence it's safe/safer" (utter bull****, as Spikey's excellent recent post demonstrates.)

Even if we could pack our juice full of vitamins and prove that vapers lived longer, healtheir lives than non-vapers, they'd still want it banned. Even if they manage to ban nicotine juice, they'll still want to ban no-nic juice (the no-nic Canadian suppliers are still being hassled.) It looks like we're enjoying it, so it must be banned - that's the bottom line.

There really aren't words to describe the contempt I hold for the cynical anti-vaping coalition that now sees Big Pharma and supposed Public "Health" groups allying themselves with Big Tobacco, happy to stand shoulder to shoulder to ensure they can keep on grabbing a fat slice of our money while treating us like vermin.

They don't want you to give up smoking - there's no profit in that for anyone. They want you to pay extortionate taxes all your life, accept being treated like a leper to gratify their own bullying instincts, and then die a painful, lingering death while they gleefully tell you that it's all your own fault, and for good measure that you've spent your life damaging the health of everyone around you with second (and now third)-hand smoke.
These scum have blood on their hands.

I am with you all the way. Thank God there are at least a few of us with our thinking skills still functioning.
 
A bit over my head I'm afraid, but I must say - I've been thinking about this quite a bit, and looking stuff up over the last few days... and despite my inherent feeling that antioxidants wouldn't be that useful (or at least that they'd offset any health/flavour advantages by adding to the coil-gunging tendencies of the juice,) I can't actually find a solid objection to the tocopherol idea.
I'm in the process of sorting out the necessary business references to open an account with a couple of chemical supply companies, and I think I'll look into this once I can order some properly pure (not merely edible pharma grade,) vitamin E complex tocopherols/tocotrienols to experiment with.

Although that article was about engine oil rather than tobacco oils and other scent oils, it does show that the final product of heat degradation and oxidation is, well - tarmac !

Yes, the vitamin E looks very promising.

~~~

On another note, why do so-called health authorities keep pushing polyunsaturate cooking oils and spreads when the science says clearly that these are harmful?! Sure, polyunsaturates are welcome when part of food but once extracted, are highly unstable, oxidise extremely easily and are quite possibly the reason for the modern epidemic of heart disease. Could it be that BP and government health agencies are more or less one and the same and that cholesterol control drugs are big money-spinners?

This, fluoridating drinking water and saying that 'you get enough vitamins from food' are an affront to science and a monstrous scandal.
 

Palmetto

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 21, 2009
174
0
USA
There really aren't words to describe the contempt I hold for the cynical anti-vaping coalition that now sees Big Pharma and supposed Public "Health" groups allying themselves with Big Tobacco, happy to stand shoulder to shoulder to ensure they can keep on grabbing a fat slice of our money while treating us like vermin.

They don't want you to give up smoking - there's no profit in that for anyone. They want you to pay extortionate taxes all your life, accept being treated like a leper to gratify their own bullying instincts, and then die a painful, lingering death while they gleefully tell you that it's all your own fault, and for good measure that you've spent your life damaging the health of everyone around you with second (and now third)-hand smoke.
These scum have blood on their hands.

Add the know-nothing politicians posturing for the media in the name of "the children," and looming denial of treatment to chronic cigarette smokers (while cigarettes remain legal, of course), and you have the perfect storm, or scam.
 
Although that article was about engine oil rather than tobacco oils and other scent oils, it does show that the final product of heat degradation and oxidation is, well - tarmac !

Yes, the vitamin E looks very promising.

~~~

On another note, why do so-called health authorities keep pushing polyunsaturate cooking oils and spreads when the science says clearly that these are harmful?! Sure, polyunsaturates are welcome when part of food but once extracted, are highly unstable, oxidise extremely easily and are quite possibly the reason for the modern epidemic of heart disease. Could it be that BP and government health agencies are more or less one and the same and that cholesterol control drugs are big money-spinners?

This, fluoridating drinking water and saying that 'you get enough vitamins from food' are an affront to science and a monstrous scandal.

It took some 30 years for the harmfulness of transfats (the staple of the original margarines) to be admitted as harmful.

Interesting news stories from the last few days:

Publicity to say that taking aspirin to prevent heart attacks and strokes is not recommended - could this be because aspirin is basically a natural substance. generic and dirt cheap?

The power of natural lycopene (primarily from tomatos) for preventing heart disease has been harnessed in a capsule form. What's the betting that this will be sidelined by BP?
 

Nick O'Teen

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Mar 28, 2009
510
10
58
Swansea, Wales
www.decadentvapours.com
Add the know-nothing politicians posturing for the media in the name of "the children," and looming denial of treatment to chronic cigarette smokers (while cigarettes remain legal, of course)

and, more to the point, while cigarette smokers subsidize everyone else - we pay a damn sight more in tax than we cost the Health Service for smoking-related illnesses.
But I bet they won't cut the taxes on tobacco when they lock us out of the hospitals to die in the gutter.
 

Palmetto

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 21, 2009
174
0
USA
Even with private insurance here in the US, for years I paid a premium for being a smoker -- higher even than those with serious pre-existing conditions, such as heart disease or diabetes -- with never a claim for anything approaching a smoking-related illness. With the the advent of "universal health care" I'm sure that will count for something -- not!

Ah, but it does no good to rail, for we are now the outcasts of societies that have more sympathy for animals, plants and murderous psychosis than it does for humans addicted to nicotine.
 

justchkn

Full Member
Jun 7, 2009
39
1
new jersey
i would just like to say that i have been reading this entire thread for the past few hours and I appreciate everybodys efforts for trying to make vaping a healthier experience. I have been reading threads on this forum for quite some time and do sincerely believe that it does start and end with the juice having to be produced to a higher standard so it does not carbonize on the coils.

thanks again to all who contribute to this forum
 
Update.

New source found re decomposition of PEG-400: untitled

Bad news, decomp begins at only 150C, reaching something like 20% by 275C

Time to look at Di and Tri forms of PG and EG as I have suggested before. These have not been used before - 2 of these seem stable and non-poisonous.
 
Just curious, I’m not experienced in organic chemistry. There appears to exist some non-PG fluid based on PEG (Sedansa). Kinabaloo, would you discourage PEG usage - on what you have been reading so far?

I am not currently discouraging anything. Having said that, and although I do use VG myself, I am certain that VG is a major contributor to deposit formation and early atty death; and that some toxic acrolein will be in the vapor. But I estimate the relative danger as 1/100 that of smoking analogs; note that this is only a best guess. PEG is likely in this bracket (though possibly worse than VG).

So if the choice is between vaping VG and burning tobacco, there's no contest in my view; though it's impossible to be absolutely certain.

I have so far only found two mentions of decomp for PEG. PEG-400 was looking the most promising for being well tolerated. So it is disappointing to see the decomp issue. I'd like to get some more opinions and more references.

PG is very heat stable - but has the allergy issue for some and is very thin (too runny).

I have found 2 other possibilities that are intriguing because they are said to produce a more dense and longer-lasting fog and I have in my research so far found them to be safe:

* DiPropylene Glycol (DPG) BP 230C http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dipropylene_glycol
Might not share allergy issue with PG. Another possibility likely to produce fog is TriPropylene Glycol (TPG) BP265C http://www.dow.com/propyleneglycol/prod/tpg.htm though DPG looks the better of the two

and

* TriEthylene Glycol (TEG) BP 285C http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triethylene_glycol (Although DiEthylene Glycol is safer than Ethylene Glycol it is not a safe choice.)

The question is: will DPG avoid the allergy issue of PG ?

Need now a juice manufacturer (most likely) to test DPG - perhaps by comparing skin test for allergy response with PG with both general population and those sensitive to PG.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread