The myth of second hand vape

[stevegmu]

Propylene glycol in e cigarettes might keep us healthy, says researchers

It just might... but of course, it hasn't been proven... yet.

There may be some truth to this. I usually get sick on long haul flights and coming back this weekend on a 10.5 hour flight, which sounded like the waiting room at a clinic- with all of the people coughing, I didn't get sick.

I really don't trust studies dating back to 1942, though...

 

[UnclePsyko]

There may be some truth to this. I usually get sick on long haul flights and coming back this weekend on a 10.5 hour flight, which sounded like the waiting room at a clinic- with all of the people coughing, I didn't get sick.

I really don't trust studies dating back to 1942, though...

I hear ya... but many hospitals and clinics do, and use PG vapor in the ventilation systems to kill bacteria, viruses and mold. These places cannot afford an outbreak of Legionnaires Disease.

 

[stevegmu]

I hear ya... but many hospitals and clinics do, and use PG vapor in the ventilation systems to kill bacteria, viruses and mold. These places cannot afford an outbreak of Legionnaires Disease.

You'd think the airlines would use it- at least in business class... I pretty much vaped the whole flight covered up by a blanket in the pod.

 

[UnclePsyko]

You'd think the airlines would use it- at least in business class... I pretty much vaped the whole flight covered up by a blanket in the pod.

Heh... if they would let us vape, we could sanitize the cabin air for them...

 

[p.opus]

You'd think the airlines would use it- at least in business class... I pretty much vaped the whole flight covered up by a blanket in the pod.

I'm sorry....I had just had this visual of a blanket tent in the middle of business class.

..."Excuse me sir"....

..."I'm fine....leave us alone.....my precious...."

 

[Diogenes]

The point of the post was this:

Several studies have been performed regarding the safety of inhaled PG in concentrations 1000's of time greater than what could be considered achievable in a social setting.

The exposure to Nicotine in second hand vape is less than the normal exposure a non smoker would be exposed to when eating 2 oz of Potato.

As a result, I have a hard time believing anyone who can say that the risk to an individual due to exposure of second hand vape is any more significant to one who is not exposed to it.

I don't need specific studies. I can use my brain and rationally think.

Studies performed on animals with exposure rates 10's of thousands times greater than what is achievable in a social setting...Check
Exposure to Nicotine on the same level as naturally occurring in common foods....Check.
Lack of known carcinogens in e-juice...Check.

I believe these arguments carry more weight that the typical straw man response of, I can see it, it might harm me, prove to me it doesn't.

I've done my part to show you it doesn't harm you. Now it's your turn to show me it does.....

So, because I didn't initially buy into your viewpoint, I'm dumb and irrational. Oh yeah, and a straw man. Well, since I am the strawman, I might as well give some examples of a typical "Straw man argument" really is....

A: We should liberalize the laws on beer.
B: No, any society with unrestricted access to intoxicants loses its work ethic and goes only for immediate gratification.

A: Sunny days are good.
B: If all days were sunny, we'd never have rain, and without rain, we'd have famine and death.

Now, the only item I did pick from your initial point was on PV, that Dow Chem advises against using it as an inhalant. People stepped up to defend a similar viewpoint of yours, and all I did was ask for proof. All I have ever asked for was proof that second-hand vapor was harmless, as everyone agrees it is. Looking back, you provided no proof, cited no studies that back up your numbers in your initial post. As far as I know, you made it up.

The problem with asking me to provide proof is that everyone here will rail on and on about how the studies are fake. If I site a FDA study, people will say it's misinformation. So honestly, my stance of skepticism is very hard to prove, due to closed-mindedness here in the forums. I'll get a response like, "Vaping is 10000000000000000% safe, and you're just an ANTZ!!"

 

[stevegmu]

I'm sorry....I had just had this visual of a blanket tent in the middle of business class.

..."Excuse me sir"....

..."I'm fine....leave us alone.....my precious...."

From the sounds of the couple next to us, the Provari wasn't the only hard spherical device in use during the flight...

Once they close the curtain to steerage, anything goes.

 

[p.opus]

Now, the only item I did pick from your initial point was on PV, that Dow Chem advises against using it as an inhalant. People stepped up to defend a similar viewpoint of yours, and all I did was ask for proof. All I have ever asked for was proof that second-hand vapor was harmless, as everyone agrees it is. Looking back, you provided no proof, cited no studies that back up your numbers in your initial post. As far as I know, you made it up.

I don't need studies to back the numbers. It's called math.

I actually made some of the assumptions ludicrous because I wanted to show how the math works.

Some of the ludicrous assumptions.

1. Vaper absorbs none of the e-cig vapor.
2. 10 x 10 x 10 room has no ventilation... Thus no dilution of concentration.
3. All suspended nicotine in mixture is turned into vapor.
4. All suspended PG is turned into vapor.
5. Vaping performed is 1ml /hour which is pretty high.

I tried to show the math. Later on, we found studies that show that inhalation on concentrations much larger than we calculated were done and no health detriment was found.

1ml of e-liquid released in 1000 cubic feet of air.....simple math
12 mg of nicotine released into 1000 cubic feet of air..... simple math.

The point is, even if these materials were more hazardous than they are, the concentrations we are talking about are insignificant.

When you start adding additional parts to the equation that you mentioned.
..
Bar's are larger than 10 x 10 x 10
Vapers rarely vape 1ml per hour
Vapers will absorb most of the vape
Bars have ventilation

Then the concentrations fall even further.

There are detectable toxins in almost any ounce of seawater, that doesn't stop us from going to the beach or into the water. The fact is they are of such low concentrations as to not be of concern.

That was my point.

I don't need studies when the math alone tells me there's nothing to worry about. We're not talking Polonium here....

And if you needed studies, we provided links to many. Many of which were done in concentrations thousands of times larger than we calculated. We provided links to how PG is actually used to sanitize air. And the only thing you could come back with is that Dow recommends you don't breathe it? Really?

So I would say, that I've made my prima facie case. It's now your job to disprove it.

 

[zoiDman]

Not going to get into another one of these...

But is Safety the ONLY Factor that goes into an e-Cigarette Use in Non-Smoking Area Ban?

 

[skoony]

I just ask because I see the majority of people touting that vaping is safer. I agree, it is safer than smoking, a lot less chemicals in it than in regular cigarette smoke. But, there have been few short-term studies done, and nothing long-term. How can we, as vapers, say with 100% certainty that vaping is safe?

we know this because a personal vaporiser is nothing more than a medical inhaler device.
these have been in use for over 20 years and been studied to death and proven safe for
the user and by stander.
the only difference ecigs use a coil to steam the liquid.you replace the medicine with nicotine and flavoring.
most all if not all of any other ingredients are the same.
they have been proven safe for use in medical devices and food.
why do we keep harping on this?
we know with nearly 100% certainty that vaping is 1000% safer than smoking tobacco.
can we move on now?

regards
mike

 

[stevegmu]

Not going to get into another one of these...

But is Safety the ONLY Factor that goes into an e-Cigarette Use in Non-Smoking Area Ban?

It looks like smoking. That's it. Can't get around it. If study after study said 2nd hand e-nic vapor were completely harmless, it would still be lumped in with smoking prohibitions, because it looks like smoking. Nothing else matters.

 

[Diogenes]

I don't need studies when the math alone tells me there's nothing to worry about. We're not talking Polonium here....

And if you needed studies, we provided links to many. Many of which were done in concentrations thousands of times larger than we calculated. We provided links to how PG is actually used to sanitize air. And the only thing you could come back with is that Dow recommends you don't breathe it? Really?

So I would say, that I've made my prima facie case. It's now your job to disprove it.

Many links to studies? Nicotine content of vegetables, the Drexel study, info on eye drops, PG tested on monkeys, a recent study on PG, an article produced by an ecig vendor regarding safety, and more studies gathered by a vapers club focusing on PG. Sir, that is not many.

I've never disputed the fact that some vegetables contain nicotine. The Drexel study only makes predictions on long-term effects. Eye drops, ...? The two studies on PG actually made me change my mind and reverse my stance on health risks. And to be honest, I haven't had the time to go through all the vapers club links, although it does look like they all deal with PG, so...

But you want links from me, huh? Here you go.

Ecigs decrease lung function
www. medicalnewstoday .com/articles/249784.php
Electronic Cigarettes Harm The Lungs - Medical News Today

Article that sites studies that ecigs really aren't the best for quitting smoking
www. livescience .com/41392-e-cigarettes-addicting-safer.html
E-Cigarettes Just More Smoke and Mirrors, Doctors Say | LiveScience

As for their merits in smoking cessation, e-cigarettes don't appear very helpful. A study published last month in the journal Addictive Behaviors found that most smokers who used them while they tried to quit either became hooked on vaping, or reverted back to smoking cigarettes. A study published Nov. 16 in the journal The Lancet found no statistically significant difference in the merits of the e-cigarette over the nicotine patch in terms of helping people quit.

You say they're 100% safe. I disagree, I don't believe that it's 100%. Safer than analogs, yes. But safer than not vaping at all, nope.

 

[zoiDman]

It looks like smoking. That's it. Can't get around it. If study after study said 2nd hand e-nic vapor were completely harmless, it would still be lumped in with smoking prohibitions, because it looks like smoking. Nothing else matters.

It does look like Smoking. No Two Ways about that.

But do you think that perhaps safety Might Not be Limited to just bystanders inhaling Passive Vapor?

 

[Baldr]

You say they're 100% safe. I disagree, I don't believe that it's 100%. Safer than analogs, yes. But safer than not vaping at all, nope.

Yet you can't show any actual evidence of them being unsafe. And, as I mentioned before, nothing else in the world is held to a "must be 100% safe" standard.

I basically agree with you that if your goal is 100% safety, the lowest possible risk, then you are better off not vaping. However, if it wasn't for vaping, I would still be smoking. So when you get in my face and start screaming about how vaping isn't safe, it just makes me think that you aren't paying any attention at all. The goal of vaping isn't to be 100% safe, it's to be much safer than cigarettes. For many of us who were hooked, that's the other option.

 

[stevegmu]

It does look like Smoking. No Two Ways about that.

But do you think that perhaps safety Might Not be Limited to just bystanders inhaling Passive Vapor?

Could be, hard to say. We're such a 'delicate' country... My recent trip abroad has shown me in a land of smokers, vapers are warmly welcomed everywhere. In a land where smokers are pariahs, vapers are treated as such. On the trip, out of all of the places I vaped where smoking was not permitted, it was an American tourist who complained. The waitress promptly told him e-nic is allowed in the non smoking section, and left it at that. The complainer knew I wasn't smoking. No one who can see would mistake a ProVari in 18650 mode with a 23mm VapeRev XL tank on it for a cigarette... The waitress apologized--- to me.

 

[MsLoud]

If you think government banning/prohibiting anything is for the betterment/protection of "the people" then your alien leaders did not do a good job educating you before they sent you here.

The only thing that drives decisions from the government is how much money they can make off "the people".

 

[zoiDman]

Could be, hard to say. We're such a 'delicate' country... My recent trip abroad has shown me in a land of smokers, vapers are warmly welcomed everywhere. In a land where smokers are pariahs, vapers are treated as such. On the trip, out of all of the places I vaped where smoking was not permitted, it was an American tourist who complained. The waitress promptly told him e-nic is allowed in the non smoking section, and left it at that. The complainer knew I wasn't smoking. No one who can see would mistake a ProVari in 18650 mode with a 23mm VapeRev XL tank on it for a cigarette... The waitress apologized--- to me.

Yeah... Values and Customs are Different when you get outside of the USA.

I remember the first time I was in Mexico and saw someone Drinking a Beer while they were shopped in a Grocery Store. They just Opened up a Beer and Drank it while they pushed their Cart around getting other things.

I asked my Buddy who had Traveled in Mexico Extensively if that was really OK to do. He told me... "Sure. In this part of Mexico it's No Big Deal. But you do have to Pay for what you Drink. And you have to bring your Own Bottle Opener. Don't ask to use Someone Else's Bottle Opener. That's considered Rude."

LOL

 

[p.opus]

Many links to studies? Nicotine content of vegetables, the Drexel study, info on eye drops, PG tested on monkeys, a recent study on PG, an article produced by an ecig vendor regarding safety, and more studies gathered by a vapers club focusing on PG. Sir, that is not many.

I've never disputed the fact that some vegetables contain nicotine. The Drexel study only makes predictions on long-term effects. Eye drops, ...? The two studies on PG actually made me change my mind and reverse my stance on health risks. And to be honest, I haven't had the time to go through all the vapers club links, although it does look like they all deal with PG, so...

But you want links from me, huh? Here you go.

Ecigs decrease lung function
Electronic Cigarettes Harm The Lungs - Medical News Today

Article that sites studies that ecigs really aren't the best for quitting smoking
E-Cigarettes Just More Smoke and Mirrors, Doctors Say | LiveScience


You say they're 100% safe. I disagree, I don't believe that it's 100%. Safer than analogs, yes. But safer than not vaping at all, nope.

I've never said that they are 100% safe. I don't believe anyone has. 100% safe is a pipe dream. Nothing is 100% safe.

Also, my original post was not about risks to the vaper. We are active participants, we look at the risks and determine our course of action. We have no one to blame but ourselves.

The post was and has always been about "second hand vape". What are the risks to the inactive participants, the person who has "chosen" not to vape?

The case I made was this. Second hand vape does not contain nicotine or any component in sufficient concentrations to cause harm.

I used math to give you an idea on how small concentration is it. I used studies on nicotine in vegetables to show you that those levels of nicotine are equal to background levels of nicotine found in nature so as the amount in second hand nic is no greater than background. I cited studies on inhaled PG to show concentrations of 1000's of times greater than amounts that can ever be achieved in a public setting showed no additional harm.

I wanted to dispel the myth that there is significant harm or potential significant harm in second hand vape.

Those who continue to dismiss this are simply holding up second hand vape to a higher standard than any other substance that is in our breathing air....Why???? Because they can see it..... That's the truth....Bottom line. And what's even more ironic, these people will willingly go into a nightclub and dance the night away in a PG created fog, or wonder at the spectacle of PG created effects at a Broadway show or rock concert, use a PG containing air freshener in their home, and never blink an eye.

 

[zoiDman]

If you think government banning/prohibiting anything is for the betterment/protection of "the people" then your alien leaders did not do a good job educating you before they sent you here.

The only thing that drives decisions from the government is how much money they can make off "the people".

If All they wanted was More Money, wouldn't they want us to Vape More instead of Less?

 

[stevegmu]

If All they wanted was More Money, would they want us to Vape More instead of Less?

Yes. It's all about perception and 'saving the children.' The party who wants restrictions on vaping isn't ignorant enough to think if they outlaw vaping, vapers will go back to smoking en masse and thus cigarette tax revenue will increase. Every time the taxes go up, revenue decreases.