Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15
Like Tree30Likes

Thread: Peer Reviewed Study Finally Published Confirming Relative Chemical Safety of Vaping

  1. #1
    AVF Regular
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    2,140

    Peer Reviewed Study Finally Published Confirming Relative Chemical Safety of Vaping

    Hi, pure sciencey funtimes from me today. I know it's stuff we already know, but having the science to prove it is very important.

    BMC Public Health | Full text | Peering through the mist: systematic review of what the chemistry of contaminants in electronic cigarettes tells us about health risks

    Methods

    Both peer-reviewed and “grey” literature were accessed and more than 9,000 observations of highly variable quality were extracted. Comparisons to the most universally recognized workplace exposure standards, Threshold Limit Values (TLVs), were conducted under “worst case” assumptions about both chemical content of aerosol and liquids as well as behavior of vapers.

    Results

    There was no evidence of potential for exposures of e-cigarette users to contaminants that are associated with risk to health at a level that would warrant attention if it were an involuntary workplace exposures. The vast majority of predicted exposures are < <1% of TLV. Predicted exposures to acrolein and formaldehyde are typically <5% TLV. Considering exposure to the aerosol as a mixture of contaminants did not indicate that exceeding half of TLV for mixtures was plausible. Only exposures to the declared major ingredients -- propylene glycol and glycerin -- warrant attention because of precautionary nature of TLVs for exposures to hydrocarbons with no established toxicity.

    Conclusions

    Current state of knowledge about chemistry of liquids and aerosols associated with electronic cigarettes indicates that there is no evidence that vaping produces inhalable exposures to contaminants of the aerosol that would warrant health concerns by the standards that are used to ensure safety of workplaces. However, the aerosol generated during vaping as a whole (contaminants plus declared ingredients) creates personal exposures that would justify surveillance of health among exposed persons in conjunction with investigation of means to keep any adverse health effects as low as reasonably achievable. Exposures of bystanders are likely to be orders of magnitude less, and thus pose no apparent concern.
    CASAA blog about this:
    CASAA: New study confirms that chemicals in electronic cigarettes pose minimal health risk
    Noe, lozza 82, essiemessy and 9 others like this.
    Words are fun.
    Steam powered and smoke free since January 2013.
    Addiction is bad, let me explain it to you after I finish this coffee.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    253
    Thats good, thanks

    What we really need is something that voids the Cancer Council argument, that we have spent so much money and effort to de-normalise smoking in the eyes of the society, and now vaping threats to re-normalise it. That seems to be the basic argument against vaping in Australia. I know it makes about zero sense, but we do need some evidence that proves it wrong, in some scientific way. Not sure if possible though
    Rynxa and Bobthebuilder like this.
    DONT DRIP AND DRIVE!




  3. #3
    AVF Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    5,740
    peer-reviewed are such glorious words

    even with recent events in the PR world

    thanks for posting it
    Rynxa, Bobthebuilder and cirrus76 like this.
    "Vapers- The evangelical vegans of the smoking community"
    Quote Originally Posted by btobw View Post
    1 vote for DogMan because squonkers, dogs, chooks and brevity

  4. #4
    AVF Regular
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    3,691
    Quote Originally Posted by Spyro View Post
    Thats good, thanks

    What we really need is something that voids the Cancer Council argument, that we have spent so much money and effort to de-normalise smoking in the eyes of the society, and now vaping threats to re-normalise it. That seems to be the basic argument against vaping in Australia. I know it makes about zero sense, but we do need some evidence that proves it wrong, in some scientific way. Not sure if possible though
    if we can displace cigarettes entirely with vaping, what is there to "re-normalise" ?
    OL'54MOD likes this.




    Gaffer Tape is like The Force - it has a light side, a dark side, and it holds the universe together

    Without specific approval, No one has permission to quote me outside of AVF

  5. #5
    AVF Regular
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    5,952
    Quote Originally Posted by Spyro View Post
    Thats good, thanks

    What we really need is something that voids the Cancer Council argument, that we have spent so much money and effort to de-normalise smoking in the eyes of the society, and now vaping threats to re-normalise it. That seems to be the basic argument against vaping in Australia. I know it makes about zero sense, but we do need some evidence that proves it wrong, in some scientific way. Not sure if possible though
    I completely agree with this. The 'we don't know if it's safe' argument is easily refuted by this and multiple other studies.

    But it's the re-normalisation concerns that are harder to challenge because, in my opinion, if vaping takes off it will indeed renormalise smoking-like behaviour (or rather, normalise vaping behaviour) and possibly make nicotine addiction widespread again. Whether or not that is a valid problem for society is the debatable issue...as we know that it's not particularly concerning from a public health perspective. At least not compared to other problems like alcohol and drug abuse.

    So the re-normalisation issue becomes an ideological one, and also a freedom of choice one. Is it ok for government to try to control the non-harmful behaviour of it's citizens?

    The other problematic one is the 'gateway into smoking' issue. I think there is some validity to this because I've talked to young people who dual use and they are saying vaping is ok, but smoking is so much easier. So the only way to address this is to make vaping freely available everywhere and much cheaper than smoking. We have to wait for the technology to catch up I think so we can provide a far, far more user friendly product, while at the same time inhibiting the availability of cigarettes.

    Pipe dream.
    Last edited by JenJ; 01-05-14 at 08:02 PM. Reason: grammar
    Stomp, Fatman, Rynxa and 3 others like this.

  6. #6
    Noe
    Noe is offline
    AV Approved Manafacturer/Modder Chief Snus scientist
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    In the deep dark recesses of your mind! .. Prophet of the Vapeoligists & keeper of the sacred Bewdy.
    Posts
    13,140
    The re-normalise argument is a load of cods-wallop, it's like saying drinking De-caffeinated coffee is a gateway to no-doze.
    Nicotine is generally not harmful in safe doses, of itself, just as caffeine isn't harmful in safe doses & both have beneficial effects to many people.
    However debating the science isn't going to win the battle to have vaping accepted.

    The real issue is & has always been, the money, the revenue BT, BP & governments don't receive because vaping is cheap & effective.
    Until govt's determine how to tax vaping to their satisfaction, vaping will be unsupported by govt agencies.
    ANTZ will continue to bend the truth about vaping or outright lie about it, until such time as govt's give recognition of the benefits of vaping over smoking & that will only come AFTER they work out how to maximise taxes imposed on vaping products.
    You see it's all well & good that there are health benefits but governments don't really care about health, they only really care about the revenue.
    Fatman, maggie, lulu68 and 1 others like this.
    Officially #1 Customer and Supporter of Essiemessy's Custom made Glass Drip Tips!
    Essie's Glass DTs

    Sent from my kickass gaming PC using keyboard & fingers.

    The Dahli Lama once said, "People do not laugh enough & take life too seriously, causing stress." A good laugh can cure a build up of stress, stress is a leading cause of grey hair & early death.

    Vape Hard or go home and Vape Hard!

    I'd rather be sneezing than wheezing!

  7. #7
    AVF Regular
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    3,691
    I'd pay GST if the gear and juice was readily available. I could even possibly suck it up if there was a low "sin" tax added as well. Everyone wins.
    OL'54MOD likes this.




    Gaffer Tape is like The Force - it has a light side, a dark side, and it holds the universe together

    Without specific approval, No one has permission to quote me outside of AVF

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Perth , W.A
    Posts
    161
    working on my new rap song , if it aint peer reviewed then your opinion aint shit

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    46
    The argument of "we don't know if it's safe" is becoming untenable so the ANTZ have moved to, as Noe and others have said, the re-normalisation of smoking argument. But vaping doesn't re-normalise smoking it normalises quitting.
    Sometimes I wonder if the ANTZ won't be happy until we are all eating roots and leaves and only drinking demineralised vitamin water. I sometimes wonder if the ANTZ will EVER be happy.

    However none of this will ever get us anywhere. We can argue logic until we are blue in the face. They have an agenda born from prejudice, fueled by special interests. They won't be happy until everyone else is not.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Darwin
    Posts
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by Noe View Post
    The re-normalise argument is a load of cods-wallop, it's like saying drinking De-caffeinated coffee is a gateway to no-doze.
    Nicotine is generally not harmful in safe doses, of itself, just as caffeine isn't harmful in safe doses & both have beneficial effects to many people.
    However debating the science isn't going to win the battle to have vaping accepted.

    The real issue is & has always been, the money, the revenue BT, BP & governments don't receive because vaping is cheap & effective.
    Until govt's determine how to tax vaping to their satisfaction, vaping will be unsupported by govt agencies.
    ANTZ will continue to bend the truth about vaping or outright lie about it, until such time as govt's give recognition of the benefits of vaping over smoking & that will only come AFTER they work out how to maximise taxes imposed on vaping products.
    You see it's all well & good that there are health benefits but governments don't really care about health, they only really care about the revenue.
    There ya go ... Exactly what he said
    Smoke Free 'n Vaping Happily
    Since 1/2/2014



 

 
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.4
Copyright © 2019 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0
All times are GMT +11. The time now is 08:18 AM.