What's new

Second hand smoke e-cig compared to regular cigarette smoke

I'll refer everyone to the Igor Burstyn study that looked at levels of contaminants in Vapour from an Exposures at work angle - categorizing them against safe Occupational exposures, here's two appropriate extracts...

Inorganic compounds

Special attention has to be paid to the chemical form of compounds when there is detection of metals and other elements by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) [8,26]. Because the parent molecule that occurs in the aerosol is destroyed in such analysis, the results can be misleading and not interpretable for risk assessment. For example, the presence of sodium (4.18 μg/10 puffs) [26] does not mean that highly reactive and toxic sodium metal is in the aerosol, which would be impossible given its reactivity, but most likely means the presence of the ubiquitous compound that contains sodium, dissolved table salt (NaCl). If so, the corresponding daily dose of NaCl that arises from these concentrations from 150 puffs is about 10,000 times lower than allowable daily intake according to CDC (CDC Data & Statistics | Feature: Americans Consume Too Much Sodium (Salt) webcite; accessed July 4, 2013). Likewise, a result for presence of silica is meaningless for health assessment unless the crystalline form of SiO2 is known to be present. When such ambiguity exists, a TLV equivalence calculation was not performed. We compared concentrations to TLVs when it was even remotely plausible that parent molecules were present in the aqueous solution. However, even these are to be given credence only in an extremely pessimistic analyst, and further investigation by more appropriate analytical methods could clarify exactly what compounds are present, but is not a priority for risk assessment.
It should also be noted that one study that attempted to quantify metals in the liquid found none above 0.1-0.2 ppm levels [7] or above unspecified threshold [19]. Table 3 indicates that most metals that were detected were present at <1% of TLV even if we assume that the analytical results imply the presence of the most hazardous molecules containing these elements that can occur in aqueous solution. For example, when elemental chromium was measured, it is compared to TLV for insoluble chromium IV that has the lowest TLV of all chromium compounds. Analyses of metals given in [43] are not summarized here because of difficulty with translating reported units into meaningful terms for comparison with the TLV, but only mercury (again with no information on parent organic compound) was detected in trace quantities, while arsenic, beryllium, chromium, cadmium, lead and nickel were not. Taken as the whole, it can be inferred that there is no evidence of contamination of the aerosol with metals that warrants a health concern.

• Contamination by metals is shown to be at similarly trivial levels that pose no health risk, and the alarmist claims about such contamination are based on unrealistic assumptions about the molecular form of these elements.

:P

Burstyn I. Peering through the mist: systematic review of what the chemistry of contaminants in electronic cigarettes tells us about health risks. BMC Public Health 2014;14:18. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-14-18
 
I'll refer everyone to the Igor Burstyn study that looked at levels of contaminants in Vapour from an Exposures at work angle - categorizing them against safe Occupational exposures, here's two appropriate extracts...

Inorganic compounds

Special attention has to be paid to the chemical form of compounds when there is detection of metals and other elements by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) [8,26]. Because the parent molecule that occurs in the aerosol is destroyed in such analysis, the results can be misleading and not interpretable for risk assessment. For example, the presence of sodium (4.18 μg/10 puffs) [26] does not mean that highly reactive and toxic sodium metal is in the aerosol, which would be impossible given its reactivity, but most likely means the presence of the ubiquitous compound that contains sodium, dissolved table salt (NaCl). If so, the corresponding daily dose of NaCl that arises from these concentrations from 150 puffs is about 10,000 times lower than allowable daily intake according to CDC (CDC Data & Statistics | Feature: Americans Consume Too Much Sodium (Salt) webcite; accessed July 4, 2013). Likewise, a result for presence of silica is meaningless for health assessment unless the crystalline form of SiO2 is known to be present. When such ambiguity exists, a TLV equivalence calculation was not performed. We compared concentrations to TLVs when it was even remotely plausible that parent molecules were present in the aqueous solution. However, even these are to be given credence only in an extremely pessimistic analyst, and further investigation by more appropriate analytical methods could clarify exactly what compounds are present, but is not a priority for risk assessment.
It should also be noted that one study that attempted to quantify metals in the liquid found none above 0.1-0.2 ppm levels [7] or above unspecified threshold [19]. Table 3 indicates that most metals that were detected were present at <1% of TLV even if we assume that the analytical results imply the presence of the most hazardous molecules containing these elements that can occur in aqueous solution. For example, when elemental chromium was measured, it is compared to TLV for insoluble chromium IV that has the lowest TLV of all chromium compounds. Analyses of metals given in [43] are not summarized here because of difficulty with translating reported units into meaningful terms for comparison with the TLV, but only mercury (again with no information on parent organic compound) was detected in trace quantities, while arsenic, beryllium, chromium, cadmium, lead and nickel were not. Taken as the whole, it can be inferred that there is no evidence of contamination of the aerosol with metals that warrants a health concern.

• Contamination by metals is shown to be at similarly trivial levels that pose no health risk, and the alarmist claims about such contamination are based on unrealistic assumptions about the molecular form of these elements.

:P

Burstyn I. Peering through the mist: systematic review of what the chemistry of contaminants in electronic cigarettes tells us about health risks. BMC Public Health 2014;14:18. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-14-18


There is an assumption there that the elements would be in aqueous solution, I was interested in the Chromium specifically because it might be a consequence of the degradation of the kanthal in the coil due to the heating process and therefore a fine particle generated from the heating process rather than something dissolved in the liquid. I have a soft science background, so I would be interested in your take on that particular discrepancy.
I guess the TLV used kinda answers this but I would still like you to put it in slightly more laymans terms if you can.
 
There is an assumption there that the elements would be in aqueous solution, I was interested in the Chromium specifically because it might be a consequence of the degradation of the kanthal in the coil due to the heating process and therefore a fine particle generated from the heating process rather than something dissolved in the liquid. I have a soft science background, so I would be interested in your take on that particular discrepancy.
I guess the TLV used kinda answers this but I would still like you to put it in slightly more laymans terms if you can.

The process used to detect the metals destroys the actual molecule, therefore it can only indicate the presence of said metal - not what form it was in. Thus it could have been in a safe form or a highly toxic form (Like chromium IV) but for the purpose of risk assesment they used the Threshold Limit Value for the most toxic which is obviously the lowest level . Even then the result as calculated directly was just 0.3% of the TLV for Chromium IV and given the 10x multiplier they used came in at 3% of TLV I there fore refer you back to the second extract -....

• Contamination by metals is shown to be at similarly trivial levels that pose no health risk, and the alarmist claims about such contamination are based on unrealistic assumptions about the molecular form of these elements.
:grin2:
 
Unfortunately the Fine particles debate will rage on but on assumption that these people know what they are on about fine particles will have been taken into account in fact most chromium at least on a dietary basis is leached from Stainless Steel,Trivalent chromium is found in a wide range of foods, including: whole-grain products, processed meats, high-bran breakfast cereals, coffee, nuts, green beans, broccoli, spices, and some brands of wine and beer.[6] Most fruits and vegetables and dairy products only contain low amounts.[3] Most of the chromium in people's diet comes from processing or storing food in pans and cans made of stainless steel, which can contain up to 18% chromium.[3]

so it is reasonable to assume that the Stainless used in making, storing, and vaping E-liquids is at least as responsible as Kanthal...
 
Thankyou :) I think I do ok at the general principles of scientific investigation, but I lack the chemistry I really need to make this stuff easy. The only general chemistry I have is from GCSE. Now if you want to discuss the consequences of the chemical composition of Bronze Age alloys, or the finer details of Iron Age slag I have a reasonable grounding, but other than that my understanding of metallurgy is pretty basic. :)
 
Wow, I've just actually bothered to engage my brain fully in creative thinking mode and have come up with the following...
Most of the worry with Chromium is the creation of fine particles by the degredation of Kanthal and the possibility that these fine particles could be inhaled deep in to the lungs. However I would posit that during normal vaping this is close to impossible as the coil is actually more or less coated in E-liquid and would therefore transfer said particles directly into the liquid, any free particles are also going to be in close proximity to vapour and therefore have a high probability of being absorbed into the droplets of Water, PG & VG in the vapour. The only real risk of inhaling significant quantities of fine particles would seem to be from a coil that is actively glowing so vaping is fine but for fucks sake dont stand over your toaster...

PS: It turns out the original study that found chromium in E-Cigs was of a Ryuan Classic E-Cig and was conducted by British American Tobacco...:whiteflag:
 
Wow, I've just actually bothered to engage my brain fully in creative thinking mode and have come up with the following...
Most of the worry with Chromium is the creation of fine particles by the degredation of Kanthal and the possibility that these fine particles could be inhaled deep in to the lungs. However I would posit that during normal vaping this is close to impossible as the coil is actually more or less coated in E-liquid and would therefore transfer said particles directly into the liquid, any free particles are also going to be in close proximity to vapour and therefore have a high probability of being absorbed into the droplets of Water, PG & VG in the vapour. The only real risk of inhaling significant quantities of fine particles would seem to be from a coil that is actively glowing so vaping is fine but for fucks sake dont stand over your toaster...

PS: It turns out the original study that found chromium in E-Cigs was of a Ryuan Classic E-Cig and was conducted by British American Tobacco...:whiteflag:

That works well with the research on high wattage vaping that seemed to suggest that dry hits were the major concern with regards to contamination.
 
That works well with the research on high wattage vaping that seemed to suggest that dry hits were the major concern with regards to contamination.

Good to know I've not completely vegetated - I'm only couch potato from the neck down...:lol1:
 
Just over 1 billion cars, and 600,000 lorries, chucking out gunk in the world, coupled with the fact that a mere 16 super tankers are producing more pollutants than all of the preceding land based vehicles, and folks have the time and resources to worry about fag smoke and e-cig vapour? Even though indoor pollutants have been shown to have 5%-10% more of an effect on health than outdoor pollutants, it still seems very small fry to me.
 
Back
Top Bottom