Study Shows There’s Less Toxins In E-Liquid Vapour Than The Air You Breathe In Your Home
Attacking e-cigarettes and vaping has seemingly been the flavour of the month for many scientists and the mainstream media from the start and now there appears to be another move to go after e-liquid flavourings.
I don’t need to tell you just how many scare stories seem to flood the public’s psyche on an almost daily basis.
Those of us tasked with rebutting them seem to be fighting a constant rearguard action with droves of sexed up scientific claims that vaping is as bad for you as smoking.
It really isn’t and neither are the flavours found in the vast majority of e-liquids dangerous either.
Sometimes it’s like tilting at windmills trust me lol.
As to why I’m covering this now – I’ll go into shortly but the old and rebutted claim that e-liquid flavourings can ‘break down’ when heated and release what’s called aldehyde or formaldehyde which is a known carcinogen – has reared its ugly head again.
Trust me you’ll want to stay to the end because if I told you there’s less of the nasties in e-liquid vapour than the air in your own home – you might not believe me 😉
As I said more in a moment but first a little background on the state of e-liquid flavourings and their safety.
Big Tobacco Attacks Flavoured E-Liquids and Manufacturers
For quite some time now e-liquids – particularly the sweeter variety – have been targeted by ignorant politicians in particular – mostly with the theory than flavours such as bubblegum and cotton candy for instance are designed to attract children.
As preposterous as that sounds and no matter how many times experts far more qualified than me rebut the ridiculous theory – those politicians wont let it go.
Just last week at another sitting of the Science and Technology Committee UK MPs discussed ‘concerns’ around short fills and flavoured e-liquids with none other than a panel of Big Tobacco scientists.
That’s like discussing the care of foxes with the local master of the hunt if you think about it.
However in all fairness – I try to be lol – the Big Tobacco scientists at the meeting were pretty upbeat about the majority of flavourings and felt the current legislation with the TPD and the need here in the UK to disclose to the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency [MHRA].
However…there’s always an however when dealing with Big Tobacco lol.
Darren Jones MP asked the Big Tobacco scientists this curious question:
Am I right in assuming that there is a market of providers outside the tobacco companies that are producing the non-nicotine versions of these flavouring liquids? If so…do you have concerns around the toxicological assessment of the flavourings by those companies when they are making those liquids?
Now if that isn’t putting Big Tobacco in the driving seat as ‘experts’ in the field of e-liquids then I don’t know what is – and of course this was picked up almost gleefully.
Dr Chris Proctor, Chief Scientific Officer, British American Tobacco – those behind the Vype e-cigarette brand slammed ‘smaller’ e-liquid manufacturers:
In my labs, I have professional toxicologists who spend their lives looking at these things, but I am sure that a lot of the manufacturers do not have access to that.
That is why I think that declaration of ingredients was important in TPD2.
We need to move a step forward, to make sure not only that that is being checked and that declarations are accurate, but that we start to weed out some of the things that may be of toxicological concern.
A case of ignore the rest we’re Big Tobacco and we know best…the bare faced cheek of these people…
This was a point quickly picked up by Dr Ian Jones, Vice-President, Reduced-Risk Products, Japan Tobacco International the company behind the Logic Pro e-cigarette brand.
He again took a swipe at smaller independent e-liquid manufacturers:
In my experience, when I have spoken to some of the SMEs in the area, there is a misunderstanding about what a flavour is.
Some think that, when they buy cherry flavour from their supplier, that is the ingredient.
In fact, there may be 10 or 20 ingredients that make up that cherry flavour.
Therefore, there also needs to be a bit of education about what flavours are. That means coming back to each single ingredient, to understand what it is and whether it is suitable for purpose.
Yup he really did say that some of the smaller e-liquid manufacturers out there don’t know what a flavour is!
OK I’m being a bit snippy and I take his point that if we were to break down every single millionth of a whatever goes into your average e-liquid we could be here until the next millennia until we found out any of them were 100% safe.
But as I’ve said time and time again NOTHING is 100% safe not even water!
And to have the peddlers of toxic poison telling the blossoming and up till recently self regulating e-liquid manufacturers they know best just shows the arrogance of Big Tobacco.
Remind me again who’s responsible for umpteen millions of death past present and future?
OK I’ll say it – they are utter bastards.
There’s Less Toxins In E-liquid Vapour Than The Air In Your Home
And once more unto the breach dear vapers – NO…e-liquids do NOT contain Formaldehyde – despite what that scientific study from last year ‘found’.
This study with the grand title of: Flavoring Compounds Dominate Toxic Aldehyde Production during E-Cigarette Vaping was once again gleefully pounced on the mainstream media and blown out of all proportion.
First thought that pops into your mind when hearing the word formaldehyde is embalming fluid and dead bodies.
Secondly and thanks to a stupid media the second thought is carcinogen – as in cancer giving.
Even a year or so on that is still doing the rounds despite the fact it has been consistently and brilliantly rebuffed.
To say I was surprised to see world renowned e-cigarette expert Dr Konstantinos Farsalinos M.D have to write another blog post rebutting this ridiculous theory is an understatement.
As to whether they’ll listen to his truth behind the claim is anyone’s business – I mean have you seen a headline saying E-Liquid Doesn’t Contain Carcinogens recently?
Nope didn’t think so.
The study claimed it :
…found non-detectable levels of aldehydes in unflavored liquids, but up to 10,000-fold higher levels of aldehydes in flavored samples.
Sounds impressive if a little worrying.
So what does Dr Farsalinos say about this and why is he stoking the coal on what should be a dead no story?
It’s quite simple – he’s like a dog with a bone and thank God for that.
On first hearing the results of this study he asked a simple question – what brand of e-liquid was used to test this theory so he could replicate the experiment.
The lead author of the study got a bit snippy himself suggesting Dr Farsalinos was not up to date on the facts and had not studied the research ‘carefully enough’.
And despite a number of private and public requests from both him and Prof Peter Hajek they were reluctant to say the least.
They finally released the info and it turned out to be a sealed cig-a-like – branding unknown!
Don’t you just wish it was one from Big Tobacco!
Dr Farsalinos said:
…the main authors referred us to the cigalike brand they tested, which was useless because we could not use unflavored liquid in the prefilled cartomizers of the cigalike and thus could not compare flavored with unflavored liquids.
Additionally, prefilled cartomizers are known for their inconsistent performance, making such comparisons difficult.
In my opinion, this was an unprofessional behavior.
Additionally, the main author NEVER responded to any of my emails requesting for such information. I have never experienced in the past such a behavior, and unfortunately I must say that this was unprofessional.
Ouch – love your style Doc!
Through a bit of their own research Dr Farsalinos and his team were able to track down what may be one of the flavourings used in the sealed cig-a-likes ‘Dragon’s Café’.
Using that and two other flavours from the same brand they were able to use the same methods to test the theory.
Dr Farsalinos said:
For start, we found that no dry puffs were detected with any of the liquids.
This verified my original assessment as documented in my first comment and the letter to the editor.
Our results were revealing in identifying a very small contribution of flavorings on aldehyde emissions.
In fact, aldehyde levels were so low that consumption of 5 grams liquid per day would expose vapers to less formaldehyde and acetaldehyde than just staying at home and breathing air.
Vaping on flavoured e-liquids has less formaldehyde and acetaldehyde than the air we breath at home?
Steady Creep Of Big Tobacco Into Vaping Needs Action
So NO flavoured e-liquids are NOT riddled with cancer giving ingredients now can we please put that to bed!
Though somehow I doubt we’ve heard the last of it especially as Darren Jones MP so graciously gave the Big Tobacco scientists the chance to belittle independent e-liquid manufacturers.
You must remember the onset of the TPD means that ALL e-liquids on sale in Europe MUST pass stringent independent testing before being approved.
What Big Tobacco is doing here once again is muddying the waters with a underhand claim that only their scientists and therefore their e-liquids [in sealed e-cigs or otherwise] are safe because they and they alone have the ‘proper research’.
I said it earlier this week – Big Tobacco is literally muscling in on the vape scene and it’s quickly becoming a case of no clear water between Big Tobacco funded e-cigarettes and the vaping manufacturers as a whole.
And at each and every opportunity Big Tobacco is taking swipes at OUR industry in a bid to take the higher ground both morally and financially.
Don’t forget in that same meeting they also slammed short-fills as being ‘of concern to health’…I can’t help thinking these are just the opening salvos in what’s going to be a battle for smokers and the public’s perception that they know best…
Don’t get me wrong I’m all for the free market but as the vaping industry seems strangely quiet on the slow nasty creep of Big Tobacco onto the scene and they really should start fighting back before it’s too late.