33 replies to this topic

[PapaLazarou]

Just recently found this and haven't seen it linked to before. A worthwhile read for anyone concerned about health effects of e-cigs, and the first research I've seen focussing on the inhalation effects of flavourings. Food for thought also for those who vape e-juice with high flavouring concentrations.

http://www.flavourar...age_id=99&sl=EN

I have not read through the individual toxicity reports yet and they are not easy reading due to being written in Italian and translated, and the nature of the tests themselves are complicated. But from what I can make out so far, the results are mostly good. So far, I can see that some of the flavours ARE cytotoxic to lung cells but on the up side the cytotoxic effects of 120 puffs from an e-cig, in all cases I've looked at so far, is less than the effects of 15 drags on the regular cigarette control.

The tests are ongoing and they aim to test 50 flavours by later this year.

[Scarface]

good stuff Papa, thanks for the link

[spikeychops]

Thanks for posting, good info to have.

So really, on this basis the tests show that ecig juice + flavour is at least 800% safer / healthier than cigarettes.

(120 / 15)

[Zolabud]

Thanks Papa.

[Britannia]

Thanks for putting up the link.

IMHO the more research the better.

[PapaLazarou]

There's an update on there now, with new flavours and some feedback about the testing method. Some have questioned whether taking 120 puffs through a single 510 cartridge could be affecting the results, and also questioned the test procedure involving a 510 e-cig being puffed in the vertical (battery end up) position. I think those are valid questions, and they have taken the feedback on board and will be retesting one of the liquids using a different procedure. I've made a comment to them that I thought it would be interesting to re-test one of the liquids that showed as cyto-toxic in liquid form, to see whether the process of heating and vaporising affects it.

[szaxe]

PapaLazarou, on 21 July 2011 - 11:51 AM, said:

There's an update on there now, with new flavours and some feedback about the testing method. Some have questioned whether taking 120 puffs through a single 510 cartridge could be affecting the results, and also questioned the test procedure involving a 510 e-cig being puffed in the vertical (battery end up) position. I think those are valid questions, and they have taken the feedback on board and will be retesting one of the liquids using a different procedure. I've made a comment to them that I thought it would be interesting to re-test one of the liquids that showed as cyto-toxic in liquid form, to see whether the process of heating and vaporising affects it.

Great positive find "Papa" Thanks for the link.

[PapaLazarou]

Here are the conclusion's for each flavour tested so far. (something weird going on with the spacing between words in cutting and pasting into the forum, so bear with me)

7Leaves

did show cytotoxic effects at 1ml/ml concentrationon fibroblasts.

The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)used as a control is 4.5 times more cytotoxic than the condensed aerosol from 1 filter of electronic cigarette (120 inspiration stroke)




Vape Wizard

did show cytotoxic effects at 1ml/ml and 0.5ml/mlconcentration on fibroblasts.

The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)is 4 times more cytotoxic than the condensed aerosol from 1 filter ofelectronic cigarette (120 inspiration stroke)




DarkVapure

did not show cytotoxic effects at all tested concentrations onfibroblasts.

The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)used as a control caused at the highest tested concentration 94% plusof cell mortality if compared to the condensed aerosol from 1 filterof electronic cigarette ( 120 inspiration stroke)




CubanSupreme

did not cause cytotoxic effects at all tested concentrations onfibroblasts.

The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)used as a control caused at the highest tested concentration 80% plusof cell mortality if compared to the condensed aerosol from 1 filterof electronic cigarette (120 inspiration stroke)




Virginia

did show cytotoxic effects at 1ml/ml and 0.5ml/mlconcentration on fibroblasts.

The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)used as a control caused at the highest tested concentration 50% plusof cell mortality if compared to the condensed aerosol from 1 filterof electronic cigarette ( 120 inspiration stroke)




PeriqueBlack

did show cytotoxic effects at 1ml/ml and 1ml/ml;0.5ml/ml and 0.25ml/ml concentration onfibroblasts.

The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)is 2 times more cytotoxic than the condensed aerosol from 1 filter ofelectronic cigarette ( 120 inspiration stroke)




Menthol

did not cause cytotoxic effects at all tested concentrations onfibroblasts.

The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)used as a control caused at the highest tested concentration 68.4%plus of cell mortality if compared to the condensed aerosol from 1filter of electronic cigarette ( 120 inspiration stroke)




MaxxBlend (Maxboro)

did show cytotoxic effects at 1ml/ml concentrationon fibroblasts.

The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)used as a control caused at the highest tested concentration 50% plusof cell mortality if compared to the condensed aerosol from 1 filterof electronic cigarette ( 120 inspiration stroke)




Camtel

did not cause cytotoxic effects at all tested concentrations onfibroblasts.

The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)used as a control caused at the highest tested concentration 86.3%plus of cell mortality if compared to the condensed aerosol from 1filter of electronic cigarette ( 120 inspiration stroke)




BitterWizard

did not cause cytotoxic effects at all tested concentrations onfibroblasts.

The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)used as a control caused at the highest tested concentration 94.3%plus of cell mortality if compared to the condensed aerosol from 1filter of electronic cigarette ( 120 inspiration stroke)




Latakia

did not show cytotoxic effects at all concentrations onfibroblasts.

The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)used as a control caused at the highest tested concentration 69.8%plus of cell mortality if compared to the condensed aerosol from 1 filter of electronic cigarette (120 inspiration stroke)




MellowSunset

did not show cytotoxic effects at all concentrations on fibroblasts.

The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)used as a control caused at the highest tested concentration 94.3%plus of cell mortality if compared to the condensed aerosol from 1 filter of electronic cigarette (120 inspiration stroke)




Coffee

did show cytotoxic effects at 1ml/ml and 0.5ml/ml concentration on fibroblasts.

The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)is 3.7 times more cytotoxic than the condensed aerosol from 1 filterof electronic cigarette (120 inspiration stroke)




DesertShip

did not show cytotoxic effects at all concentrations onfibroblasts.

The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)used as a control caused at the highest tested concentration 67.3%plus of cell mortality if compared to the condensed aerosol from 1filter of electronic cigarette (120 inspiration stroke)




CowboyBlend

did not show cytotoxic effects at all concentrations on fibroblasts.

The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)used as a control caused at the highest tested concentration 80% plusof cell mortality if compared to the condensed aerosol from 1 filter of electronic cigarette (120 inspiration stroke)

Edited by PapaLazarou, 24 July 2011 - 10:58 AM.

[PapaLazarou]

Or in a graphic form, made with figures from the reports. The "Marlboro" in each of the graphs is not a flavour, it's the tobacco cigarette used as a control.

First five flavours vs. cigarette
 FA1.png   54.81K   36 downloads


Second five flavours vs. cigarette
 FA2.png   53.49K   42 downloads


Third five flavours....
 FA3.png   51.06K   22 downloads

[Christophe]

Nice find, thanks for the link!

[acousticvillage]

PapaLazarou, on 24 July 2011 - 10:54 AM, said:

Here are the conclusion's for each flavour tested so far. (something weird going on with the spacing between words in cutting and pasting into the forum, so bear with me)

7Leaves

did show cytotoxic effects at 1ml/ml concentrationon fibroblasts.

The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)used as a control is 4.5 times more cytotoxic than the condensed aerosol from 1 filter of electronic cigarette (120 inspiration stroke)




Vape Wizard

did show cytotoxic effects at 1ml/ml and 0.5ml/mlconcentration on fibroblasts.

The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)is 4 times more cytotoxic than the condensed aerosol from 1 filter ofelectronic cigarette (120 inspiration stroke)




DarkVapure

did not show cytotoxic effects at all tested concentrations onfibroblasts.

The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)used as a control caused at the highest tested concentration 94% plusof cell mortality if compared to the condensed aerosol from 1 filterof electronic cigarette ( 120 inspiration stroke)




CubanSupreme

did not cause cytotoxic effects at all tested concentrations onfibroblasts.

The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)used as a control caused at the highest tested concentration 80% plusof cell mortality if compared to the condensed aerosol from 1 filterof electronic cigarette (120 inspiration stroke)




Virginia

did show cytotoxic effects at 1ml/ml and 0.5ml/mlconcentration on fibroblasts.

The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)used as a control caused at the highest tested concentration 50% plusof cell mortality if compared to the condensed aerosol from 1 filterof electronic cigarette ( 120 inspiration stroke)




PeriqueBlack

did show cytotoxic effects at 1ml/ml and 1ml/ml;0.5ml/ml and 0.25ml/ml concentration onfibroblasts.

The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)is 2 times more cytotoxic than the condensed aerosol from 1 filter ofelectronic cigarette ( 120 inspiration stroke)




Menthol

did not cause cytotoxic effects at all tested concentrations onfibroblasts.

The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)used as a control caused at the highest tested concentration 68.4%plus of cell mortality if compared to the condensed aerosol from 1filter of electronic cigarette ( 120 inspiration stroke)




MaxxBlend (Maxboro)

did show cytotoxic effects at 1ml/ml concentrationon fibroblasts.

The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)used as a control caused at the highest tested concentration 50% plusof cell mortality if compared to the condensed aerosol from 1 filterof electronic cigarette ( 120 inspiration stroke)




Camtel

did not cause cytotoxic effects at all tested concentrations onfibroblasts.

The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)used as a control caused at the highest tested concentration 86.3%plus of cell mortality if compared to the condensed aerosol from 1filter of electronic cigarette ( 120 inspiration stroke)




BitterWizard

did not cause cytotoxic effects at all tested concentrations onfibroblasts.

The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)used as a control caused at the highest tested concentration 94.3%plus of cell mortality if compared to the condensed aerosol from 1filter of electronic cigarette ( 120 inspiration stroke)




Latakia

did not show cytotoxic effects at all concentrations onfibroblasts.

The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)used as a control caused at the highest tested concentration 69.8%plus of cell mortality if compared to the condensed aerosol from 1 filter of electronic cigarette (120 inspiration stroke)




MellowSunset

did not show cytotoxic effects at all concentrations on fibroblasts.

The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)used as a control caused at the highest tested concentration 94.3%plus of cell mortality if compared to the condensed aerosol from 1 filter of electronic cigarette (120 inspiration stroke)




Coffee

did show cytotoxic effects at 1ml/ml and 0.5ml/ml concentration on fibroblasts.

The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)is 3.7 times more cytotoxic than the condensed aerosol from 1 filterof electronic cigarette (120 inspiration stroke)




DesertShip

did not show cytotoxic effects at all concentrations onfibroblasts.

The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)used as a control caused at the highest tested concentration 67.3%plus of cell mortality if compared to the condensed aerosol from 1filter of electronic cigarette (120 inspiration stroke)




CowboyBlend

did not show cytotoxic effects at all concentrations on fibroblasts.

The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)used as a control caused at the highest tested concentration 80% plusof cell mortality if compared to the condensed aerosol from 1 filter of electronic cigarette (120 inspiration stroke)

Thank you so much for this. Really interesting. However, for idiots like me who take a long time to absorb info....

When something is stated as, for example,
"The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)is 2 times more cytotoxic than the condensed aerosol from 1 filter of electronic cigarette ( 120 inspiration stroke)" (Perique Black example) -

does this mean that smoking one fag is twice as cytotoxic than 120 vapes of Perique?

Or this:
"The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes) used as a control caused at the highest tested concentration 80% plus of cell mortality if compared to the condensed aerosol from 1 filter of electronic cigarette (120 inspiration stroke)" (Cowboy Blend example) -

does this mean that 1 fag is 80% more cytotoxic than 120 vapes of Cowboy Blend?

[PapaLazarou]

acousticvillage, on 26 July 2011 - 02:58 PM, said:

Thank you so much for this. Really interesting. However, for idiots like me who take a long time to absorb info....

When something is stated as, for example,
"The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes)is 2 times more cytotoxic than the condensed aerosol from 1 filter of electronic cigarette ( 120 inspiration stroke)" (Perique Black example) -

does this mean that smoking one fag is twice as cytotoxic than 120 vapes of Perique?

Or this:
"The condensed smoke from 1 traditional cigarette (15 inspiration strokes) used as a control caused at the highest tested concentration 80% plus of cell mortality if compared to the condensed aerosol from 1 filter of electronic cigarette (120 inspiration stroke)" (Cowboy Blend example) -

does this mean that 1 fag is 80% more cytotoxic than 120 vapes of Cowboy Blend?

As I understand it, yes according to their tests the smoke from one ciggy is twice as cytotoxic as the cartridge (120 puffs) of Perique Black. The Perique Black liquid used 2% flavouring (in fact most of them used either 1% or 2% flavouring). The Perique seems to be the most cytotoxic of the flavours tested so far.

I'm having trouble myself with the summary for Cowboy. I read it as "relative to Cowboy e-cig vapour, 80% more cells became non viable from the tobacco smoke". But that might be wrong.

My understanding is the cut off for what they call cytotoxic is 70% cell mortality. So if the compound tested leaves less than 70% of the cells they started off with 'viable', then the compound is cytotoxic. The data (and this is illustrated in the graphs made with the data) show that the condensed vapour from Cowboy blend was not considered cytotoxic - it's line did not cross below 70%.

I'd hope that at some point they will summarise it all in an easier to read format, with further analysis about what it all means for us. As it stands at least it is going some way to proving that vaping is safer than smoking, if not completely without risk.

Edited by PapaLazarou, 27 July 2011 - 03:17 PM.

[Lemzip]

jees, if thats only 2% flavouring, that means some 20% flavours would actuall ybe more toxic then smoking?

Am i on the wrong track?

[Wyx]

Lemzip, on 27 July 2011 - 06:12 PM, said:

<br />jees, if thats only 2% flavouring, that means some 20% flavours would actuall ybe more toxic then smoking?<br />
<br />
Am i on the wrong track?<br />

<br /><br /><br />

Not entirely sure but perique black is very concentrated 1% is what you would use to get the same relative flavour in other concentrates you would use at 10 to 20%.

Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk

[PapaLazarou]

Lemzip, on 27 July 2011 - 06:12 PM, said:

jees, if thats only 2% flavouring, that means some 20% flavours would actuall ybe more toxic then smoking?

Am i on the wrong track?

Yeah, that's a good point. I would say that the flavours they tested so far are all types that would be unlikely to be added at 20%. The tobacco's are really strong, as is the coffee. Some of the other flavours (fruit etc) I've seen mention of adding totals of 30-40% flavouring, and it will be interesting to see how they turn out. Interesting that Flavourart as a flavour manufacturer advocate light use of flavourings in e-liquid, as per their site:

Quote

Until more studies are performed on the thousands of flavoring molecules that might find their way into e-liquids, we might benefit from a conservative approach, namely use e-liquid that is lightly flavored. It is common sense that e-liquids that contain 25% flavoring carry potentially more risk of unexpected toxicity than those flavored at 5%. It took decades for the toxicity of butter flavorings to become better appreciated.

[Kenny]

Very interesting thread Papa and thanks for posting the link.

Flavourings do seem to be a bit of a unknown in regards to safety and its good to see some positive research going on.

I think I will continue to err on the side of caution with flavourings as all I usually add is 1 drop to 5mls.

[FlamingKaty]

Kenny, on 27 July 2011 - 07:32 PM, said:

Very interesting thread Papa and thanks for posting the link.

Flavourings do seem to be a bit of a unknown in regards to safety and its good to see some positive research going on.

I think I will continue to err on the side of caution with flavourings as all I usually add is 1 drop to 5mls.

Yeah, I'm getting a tad twitchy about by C9 RY4 now...30% is quite a lot of flavouring .

[grizwald56]

Perique Black is the strongest of all the F'art tobacco concentrate and 2% would be far to much in a mix, 1% is quite strong enough which then means 240 puffs compaired to 15 puffs of a ciggie.

Hell of a difference I think.

[Lemzip]

yes but thats the flavour, its not just super concentrated compared to the difference, the flavour is just stronger.

I still think the same that 20% of a mix when 1/5 of the actual ingredients you are vaping in the mix is flavour, surely this is much worse then 1% no matter what the actual flavour is like once its mixed, its still 20% of the final product.

Please correct me if im wrong, im more then happy to put my hands up and say i suck bad at maths

Edited by Lemzip, 27 July 2011 - 09:56 PM.

[Lisaf01]

Lemzip, on 27 July 2011 - 08:33 PM, said:

yes but thats the flavour, its not just super concentrated compared to the difference, the flavour is just stronger.

I still think the same that 20% of a mix when 1/5 of the actual ingredients you are vaping in the mix is flavour, surely this is much worse then 1% no matter what the actual flavour is like once its mixed, its still 20% of the final product.

Please correct me if im wrong, im more then happy to put my hands up and say i suck bad at maths

Exactly right. When you are talking the extremely concentrated flavourart tobacco flavourings for example, 1-2% of one of those might be exactly the same as 5-10% of another concentrate or 20% of another concentrate. With my RY4 concentrate for example - it's not strictly a concentrate in the same sense as many of the others and using it at 20% is not at all the same as using a Flavourart concentrate at that level. It's simply not possible to compare different flavourings offered by different companies and extrapolate that those that require higher concentrations could be more dangerous - it's simply that they are likely to be less concentrated in the first place.

I always recommend that you use less flavouring than you think you need and the majority of my flavour concentrates work nicely at 5-10% but the RY4 is unusual in this as it's more diluted with VG and PG and there's unfortunately nothing I can do about this one as I don't directly control the recipe of it.