The rest of the Story, E ciggarettes ARE safer than the Stinkies..

Status
Not open for further replies.

Rnoserious

Unregistered Supplier
ECF Veteran
May 26, 2012
1,492
2,082
47
Bethlehem, Georgia
www.coast2coastvaping.com
MONDAY, MARCH 11, 2013


New Study of Electronic Cigarette Vapor Confirms that E-Cigs are Much Safer than Regular Cigarettes
A new study of the chemical constituents of the vapor produced by 12 brands of electronic cigarettes reports that these products greatly reduce exposure to the harmful chemicals in tobacco cigarettes and that e-cigarettes therefore show promise as a harm reduction strategy for tobacco control.


(See: Goniewicz ML, et al. Levels of selected carcinogens and toxicants in vapour from electronic cigarettes. Tobacco Control. Published online ahead of print on March 6, 2013. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2012-050859.)


In the study, levels of selected carbonyl compounds, volatile organic compounds, tobacco-specific nitrosamines, and metals were analyzed in the vapor of 12 brands of electronic cigarettes and compared to levels of the same compounds in a medicinal nicotine inhaler and in regular tobacco cigarettes.


The results of the study were as follows: "levels of selected toxic compounds found in the smoke from a conventional cigarette were 9-450-fold higher than levels in the vapour of an e-cigarette. ... Smoking an e-cigarette (also referred to as 'vaping') can result in exposure to carcinogenic formaldehyde comparable with that received from cigarette smoking. Formaldehyde was also found in the vapour of medicinal inhalators, at levels that overlapped with those found in e-cigarette vapour. Exposure to acrolein, an oxidant and respiratory irritant thought to be a major contributor to cardiovascular disease from smoking, is 15 times lower on average in e-cigarette vapour compared with cigarette smoke. The amounts of toxic metals and aldehydes in e-cigarettes are trace amounts and are comparable with amounts contained in an examined therapeutic product."


The abstract concludes as follows: "Our findings are consistent with the idea that substituting tobacco cigarettes with e-cigarettes may substantially reduce exposure to selected tobacco-specific toxicants. E-cigarettes as a harm reduction strategy among smokers unwilling to quit, warrants further study."


With regard to the safety of electronic cigarettes compared to real ones, the study concludes: "The results of this study support the proposition that the vapour from e-cigarettes is less injurious than the smoke from cigarettes. Thus one would expect that if a person switched from conventional cigarettes to e-cigarettes the exposure to toxic chemicals and related adverse health effects would be reduced."


The Rest of the Story


In my opinion, this study provides strong confirmation that electronic cigarettes are much safer than regular cigarettes. At this point, the totality of the scientific evidence is sufficient to conclude that switching from tobacco cigarettes to electronic cigarettes will substantially reduce the health risks associated with smoking. The FDA should allow electronic cigarette companies to make this claim, since it is sufficiently substantiated by scientific studies of the components of electronic cigarette vapor.


It is also important to emphasize that while few electronic cigarette companies are claiming that vaping reduces the hazards associated with smoking, they would not be making a fraudulent, misleading, or unsubstantiated claim if they did make such a statement in their marketing.


Likewise, any anti-smoking advocate or group that continues to claim that there is not evidence that using e-cigarettes is substantially safer than smoking is either unaware of or ignoring the evidence, and possibly making a fraudulent statement themselves.


Note also that this is an independent study which was not funded by any electronic cigarette company. The two funding sources were the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of Poland and the National Institutes of Health.This adds objectivity and credibility to the work.


Although this study demonstrates that e-cigarettes are safer than tobacco cigarettes, it also refutes the idea that e-cigarettes are safe in an absolute sense. It appears that the main risk associated with vaping is the potential inhalation of formaldehyde. Formaldehyde may result from the heating of propylene glycol or the oxidation or hydrolysis of glycerin. Of interest, the levels of formaldehyde among the 12 brands of electronic cigarettes ranged from just 3.2 micrograms per 150 puffs (about the same as a nicotine inhaler) to 56.1 micrograms per 150 puffs. This presents an opportunity to examine the reasons for these significant differences and hopefully, to find ways to produce e-cigarette liquid that does not produce high levels of formaldehyde. This should be a research priority for the FDA


The other health concern related to e-cigarette use is the risks associated with long-term inhalation of propylene glycol. If an excipient can be found which allows vaporization of nicotine but avoids propylene glycol and limits the formation of carbonyl compounds such as formaldehyde, it will be a huge advance and may lead to the development of an electronic cigarette product that is not merely safer than smoking, but is essentially safe as well (comparable to a medicinal nicotine product). The development of such a product should also be a priority for the FDA's Center for Tobacco Products.
Posted by Michael Siegel at 6:54 AM 19 Comments


See full article

The Rest of the Story: Tobacco News Analysis and Commentary: New Study of Electronic Cigarette Vapor Confirms that E-Cigs are Much Safer than Regular Cigarettes



the cited research link is

Levels of selected carcinogens and toxicants in vapour from electronic cigarettes -- Goniewicz et al. -- Tobacco Control
 

Rnoserious

Unregistered Supplier
ECF Veteran
May 26, 2012
1,492
2,082
47
Bethlehem, Georgia
www.coast2coastvaping.com
E cigs need all the good press they can get, they want to tax it BECAUSE IT WORKS.

Its a perfect example of how our government screws the little guys.


When the government thinks they can TAX THE DERIVATIVE OF A COMMODITY.. They are assuming way too much power, and wanting in your wallet!!


Its all about raising taxes, and if you dont stand your ground, they will keep taking.


Commodity: a simple good used in trade with other commoditys.

Examples..

SugarCane, wheat, corn, gold, silver, TOBBACCO, brass, rocks, trees..

So in theory, IF THE GOVERNMENT GAINS THE POWER to tax the derrivative of a commodity..

DERRIVATIVE OF A COMMODITY: Something that it created from a commodity (after being sold and processed)
Examples

Jewlery, sandblasting media, gravel, sugar, flour, pasta, lumber, furniture, ecig juice, liquid nicotine..


What controls the government from taxing ALL DERRIVATIVES. Please understand that protecting our newly discovered SAFE alternative to cigarettes does not quantify itself on the simple legality of having access to it. But the government wants to TAX IT LIKE CIGARETTES. because point blank. Just like alcohol. There is money to be extracted from the citizenship as there is a true demand for this product.


Bottom line is the nanny government does not care about you. They care about your money. Be careful whom you elect. Listen and RESEARCH THEM. And Their stances..

Its not a right or left thing.. Its a protect your money thing.
 

pmos69

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jan 19, 2011
1,750
368
Portugal
Some additional materials from the study:

testatutnesteetzpsbf53e.jpg


Interesting to notice the difference between stated and real levels of nicotine.

models.png


extraction.png


SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS – MATERIALS AND METHODS

Supplementary Table 1 - Detection and quantitation limits
 

yvilla

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Nov 18, 2008
2,063
575
Rochester, NY
I just posted this in the health section in a thread about the formaldehyde finding in the above study, but it really bears repeating here:

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 formaldehyde (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.
 
Last edited:

2coils

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Nov 29, 2012
1,504
2,500
New Jersey
It continues to amaze me that some folks think VG is safer than PG is.

I gotta tell ya, I was one of those people! I had only listened to others claims, it sounded good. Looking like its not the case. There are so so many companies advertising their All Natural and Organic Flavorings made with 100% VG. I have been using a 50 50 mix. I Might have to consider altering it.

Seems to me from we have all read, there are still some conflicting opinions on VG. Its great that we are at least seeing these studies. I'm sure eventually this will all get worked out
 
Last edited:

DC2

Tootie Puffer
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 21, 2009
24,161
40,974
San Diego
I gotta tell ya, I was one of those people! I had only listened to others claims, it sounded good.
I don't know when or where it happened, but somewhere along the way this opinion seems to have gained popularity.
And yet I have never seen any scientific evidence that would support such a belief.
 

DC2

Tootie Puffer
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 21, 2009
24,161
40,974
San Diego
There's good reasons why Blu e-cigs only uses VG
and I'm sure the number 1 reason is to avoid any
PG allergic issues.
There aren't that many people allergic to PG.
It's a very small percentage.

I think Blu uses VG because it produce a lot more vapor.
I know if I was them, that's what I'd do anyway.
:)
 

pmos69

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jan 19, 2011
1,750
368
Portugal
There's good reasons why Blu e-cigs only uses VG
and I'm sure the number 1 reason is to avoid any
PG allergic issues.

One can be allergic to PG and/or VG.
The chances of being allergic to any of them are, nonetheless, very low. Both are common components in everyday items.
 

Soundhunter

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Sep 26, 2012
270
271
Love Field


Dead on Caveman!..

This is what is really up ... I'm not worried about our ability to vape or get vaping supplies...as always.. follow the money..

Good on ya Brotha.. should be stickied..so the community can have it's eyes focused on the right issues..Forrest/Trees...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread