What's new

What's the response to this article?

Laugh like a loon and point them at anything and everything By Dr Farsalinos, then at the Public Health England E-Cigarettes report...
 
Just had a pal post this article because they are concerned about my health.

What's the best response?


Studies Reveal Health Risks Of E-Cigarettes | IFLScience





Sent from my iPhone using Planet of the Vapes

This was Dr Farsalinos's response to the article

Formaldehyde release in ecigarette vapor The New York Times story explained in detail


Created on Monday, 05 May 2014 05:30
Formaldehyde release in e-cigarette vapor
The New York Times story explained in detail
Dr Farsalinos


A study to be published in Nicotine and Tobacco Research was featured in the New York Times and has generated a lot of interest. The article mentioned that e-cigarette vapor can be the source of carcinogens, depending on the heating process.


The article is true and expected. We know that thermal degradation can lead to the release of toxic chemicals. And we know that formaldehyde, acetaldehyde and acrolein have been found in vapor. There is nothing new to it. However, this study found that levels may approach those present in tobacco cigarettes.


Herein, I present with more detail the results of this study. Researchers used an EGO Twist battery (variable voltage) and a top-coil clearomizer (with unknown resistance, thus unknown wattage delivery). At 3.2 and 4.0 volts, formaldehyde levels were 13-807 times lower compared to tobacco cigarettes!! At 4.8 volts, formaldehyde levels were increased by up to 200 times, and reached to levels similar to tobacco cigarettes.


The main criticism to this study is that in my opinion it is highly unlikely that a top-coil atomizer like the one used in this study would be used at 4.8 volts. At a resistance of 2.2 Ohms that would represent 10.4 watts of energy delivery to the atomizer. I tried 10 watts with an EVIC battery in a Vivi Nova top-coil atomizer, and many vapers were unable to use it due to the dry puff phenomenon.It is very important to examine new-generation (rebuildable or bottom coil) atomizers, who are more likely to be used at higher voltages. I am certain that, due to better liquid resupply to the resistance and wick, the results will be much more favorable.


Another important point is that, although formaldehyde levels can be similar to tobacco, several other toxic chemicals are completely absent from e-cigarette vapor. For example, acrolein was completely absent although they used liquids with glycerol as the main ingredient. In fact, glycerin-based liquids had much lower formaldehyde levels in vapor compared to PG or PG/VG liquids, suggesting that they are much safer to use. As a general remark, finding few chemicals at similar levels does not mean that the risk is equivalent to tobacco cigarettes.


Concerning the remarks about dripping, we should admit that dripping does not allow the user to see how much liquid is present in the atomizer. The same happens with cartomizers. Thus, clearomizer-type atomizers seem to be the future in e-cigarette use, giving consumers the ability to know when they need to resupply the atomizer with liquid.


__________________________________________________ _______________________________________
 
Just had a pal post this article because they are concerned about my health.

What's the best response?

Studies Reveal Health Risks Of E-Cigarettes | IFLScience

The best response is that it's a complete load of bollocks. Sure they'll produce formaldehyde if you allow the coil to overheat, but it'd taste like crap and you'd stop vaping.

The morons who came up with the study on particle sizes (and Stanton Glantz who quotes it) don't have any conception of the difference in solid particles as found in smoke and liquid particles as found in vapour. When a solid particle lands it remains there and causes irritation, when a liquid particle lands it will spread out.

Nobody has ever (or should ever) claimed that e-cigs are 'safe', but they are at least 2 orders of magnitude safer. Anyone who claims otherwise is a complete charlatan
 
Back
Top Bottom