La_Tigre

A safer option? Vaping deaths from harmless THC, nicotine?

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, NSXCIGAR said:

One paper from NCBI? Come on now.

Yeah, no. 

"A computer aided search of the Medline and PubMed database was done using a combination of the keywords. All the animal and human studies investigating only the role of nicotine were included. 

There are 89 links at the bottom most of which are relevant. 

Your links - 

https://health.usnews.com/wellness/mind/articles/2018-07-12/is-nicotine-really-that-unhealthy

There's a few warnings in hrre such as - 

" Smokeless tobacco products are also associated with cancer of the mouth, esophagus and pancreas, the CDC reports." 

"I don't view any of these products as safe," Kozlowski says. "[But] if you're inclined to use any of these nicotine-delivery products, you'd be better off using a product that doesn't involve the burning of tobacco."

https://news.sky.com/story/nicotine-no-worse-than-cup-of-coffee-report-10349589

You paste links to how dangerous caffeine is, then one saying nicotine is no worse than coffee? 

And even this one has - 

"There is some evidence that shows that it may increase the risk of heart disease and also potentially increases your blood pressure." "

https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=pa0tucljwo4C&oi=fnd&pg=PR9&ots=XTpSLboldh&sig=Enz86HPMR8hnPzhTsRf2w6zN2_I#v=onepage&q&f=false

Sadly the Google preview doesn't get as far as the bits I need to read but the description on Amazon does say it covers "Among the topics covered are cardiovascular disease, cancer, reproductive toxicity (including fetal toxicity and Sudden Infant Death Syndrome), behavioral toxicity (including abuse liability and addiction to nicotine medication), and gastrointestinal disease."

And I'm betting its not all sunshine and lollipops. 

So I'm still saying nope to your original post -" Nicotine is physically harmless for adults."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Zigatoh said:

Yeah, no. 

"A computer aided search of the Medline and PubMed database was done using a combination of the keywords. All the animal and human studies investigating only the role of nicotine were included. 

There are 89 links at the bottom most of which are relevant. 

Your links - 

https://health.usnews.com/wellness/mind/articles/2018-07-12/is-nicotine-really-that-unhealthy

There's a few warnings in hrre such as - 

" Smokeless tobacco products are also associated with cancer of the mouth, esophagus and pancreas, the CDC reports." 

"I don't view any of these products as safe," Kozlowski says. "[But] if you're inclined to use any of these nicotine-delivery products, you'd be better off using a product that doesn't involve the burning of tobacco."

https://news.sky.com/story/nicotine-no-worse-than-cup-of-coffee-report-10349589

You paste links to how dangerous caffeine is, then one saying nicotine is no worse than coffee? 

And even this one has - 

"There is some evidence that shows that it may increase the risk of heart disease and also potentially increases your blood pressure." "

https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=pa0tucljwo4C&oi=fnd&pg=PR9&ots=XTpSLboldh&sig=Enz86HPMR8hnPzhTsRf2w6zN2_I#v=onepage&q&f=false

Sadly the Google preview doesn't get as far as the bits I need to read but the description on Amazon does say it covers "Among the topics covered are cardiovascular disease, cancer, reproductive toxicity (including fetal toxicity and Sudden Infant Death Syndrome), behavioral toxicity (including abuse liability and addiction to nicotine medication), and gastrointestinal disease."

And I'm betting its not all sunshine and lollipops. 

So I'm still saying nope to your original post -" Nicotine is physically harmless for adults."

Smokeless tobacco is still tobacco. Red Man has caused plenty of mouth cancers. We're talking about pure nicotine. No tobacco. 

And I never said nicotine was safe. I said it was as safe as caffeine. They both have pharmacological effects. But if you're going to start attacking caffeine I don't think you're in the realm of reasonable argument.

I've also said multiple times that youths and pregnant women shouldn't be ingesting caffeine or nicotine. It appears that there is quite a bit of evidence over a reasonable period of time that deleterious effects are substantial for those two groups. 

So we have to define harmful I guess...let's say it looks like it's less harmful than a Big Mac. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/9/2019 at 10:35 PM, NSXCIGAR said:

This belief is based on what exactly? That a big exhaled cloud of vapor created by chemicals which have been deemed harmless by themselves for decades seems unhealthy?

I'm surprised by the jumping to conclusions about a product that no one can yet show as being physically harmful in any way, particularly as a substitute for something that we know for a fact is extraordinarily harmful and kills tens of thousands of people every year.

I don't believe anything other than when faced with drinking from a bottle labeled "poison" and another bottle labeled "unknown" I'm going to drink from the "unknown" bottle.

Until this product is shown to be worse for your health than cigarettes everyone using it instead of cigarettes is better off for it.

To be clear, I'm only supporting the use of this product by adults as a substitute for cigarettes--not as anything else. Until consistent and clear evidence comes in that it is worse than cigarettes I will continue to do so.

I am not arguing that going back to cigarettes is an option. We know tried and true what that does to the lungs.

We also know tried and true what happens with experiments with additives in the form of flavorings, solvents, colorings, etc...

7081921F-3CCE-45A9-9EBA-2E27FB340F5E.thumb.jpeg.1941f4fd1f3b56debd37c54f60134de8.jpeg

This is what gave us the the FD&C act and the FDA the teeth to do something.

My point is again not directed at the nicotrol type inhalers or the like. It is about the increasing additives in the vape shop brew and the long term consequences with special focus on those who partake in excess (kids). Trivializing this concern is troubling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/7/2019 at 11:38 AM, NSXCIGAR said:

People have been vaping for years and heavily to boot. Never been any acute issues until the last 6 weeks? 

I think some tainted product made its way into stores. Or people are putting something other than OEM product into their devices. I'm very suspicious.

As an aside, my mother was able to quit smoking after 50 years using vaping. IMO, if only for that, leave it alone and keep the studies coming. 

As usual, you offer the least sensationalized and most rational comment to the conversation, in my opinion.

I'll bet my bottom dollar that this traces back to one factory or manufacturer, and some unscrupulous production practice. I likened it, in conversation, to a hatmaker accidentally mixing asbestos into one of their batches of material. A rash of cases of mesothelioma will result, all with the commonality that the sufferers wore hats. "Hats" didn't cause the cancer. Hats made of ASBESTOS caused the cancer.

Saying, as a result of these (extremely introductory and inconclusive) findings of pneumonia-like illness, that VAPING is dangerous, is a farce. Isolating a bad batch of material and labeling IT dangerous... makes sense.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The articles I've read say that it is all from thc vape pods, and that the use of vitamin e in the oil is the culprit. There's plenty of people who vape nicotine and not thc, so all the attacks against nicotine vaping doesn't even have anything to do with why these people are getting sick. Vaping nicotine has been around for a few years now and no one has shown any significant side effects, so I definitely would blame the ingredients/contamination possibilities before blaming the act itself as being harmful.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, La_Tigre said:

It is about the increasing additives in the vape shop brew and the long term consequences with special focus on those who partake in excess (kids).

The manufacturers and retailers should be held civilly and criminally liable if any product they make, distribute or sell harms anyone, period. Talking acute illness, not death in 30 years. If we go there McDonald's would have been out of business long ago.

Also, children should not be smoking cigarettes or vaping, but since we don't know how to keep cigarettes out of the hands of kids we certainly don't know how to keep vaping devices out of their hands. The best method as far as I can tell for keeping any harmful substance away from kids is parental and community involvement, education and honest communication. And of all the bad things kids can get into, I'd say vaping is probably one of the least harmful. So we have to be realistic about that. 

This is beside the point that the FDA has illegally (IMO) classified vaping as a tobacco product which it is obviously not. I guess if they can do that they can classify toasters as tobacco products. By the way, the FDA has killed many more people than it's saved. See my summation of that here: 

As far as Elixir Sulfanilamide, there should have been a far greater civil liability framework in place at that time for the sale of products such as that. Everyone should have been held liable from Massengill executives to the retailers selling it. Ultimately, I believe only Massengill's chemist was actually held liable. Additionally, the base components of E.S. were known to be toxic by themselves unlike vaping products. And keep in mind, there were only about 100 casualties. 100 too many, to be sure, but when put in perspective and considering this was by far the worst case in US history (150 years to that point) I think future issues could have been avoided without establishing a behemoth federal bureaucracy like the modern FDA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My personal opinion (right or wrong) is that vaping should be view as a tool to get off cigarettes (for the hard addicts who smoke packets of them a day) and then get off vaping altogether. 

Any drug is addictive and should be used and treat as such. People who ignore this are fools. Nicotine in its pure form has warnings for a reason. 

I am not saying that you can't use it, just know the risks and accept it if you choose to. Like all things in life. 

The problem is that some people are not using it for this purpose, companies are definitive not (cause profits). 

Vaping should be regulated like a medical drug, Vape liquids should be monitored, tested and check for quality, like pharmaceuticals. At the moment, no one is doing this. 

It is a tool for cigarette addicts if used properly but it is not being treated as one. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/8/2019 at 11:40 PM, Zigatoh said:

Here's the thing about studies that are using keywords as a search. From one of the cited sources:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12606154

They didn't test nicotine, they tested nicotine + sodium deoxycholate which is a concentration uptake additive for cigarettes.

You really have to read the studies on some of these citations as they push narratives that are not supported by the studies themselves.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Cigar Surgeon said:

Here's the thing about studies that are using keywords as a search. From one of the cited sources:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12606154

They didn't test nicotine, they tested nicotine + sodium deoxycholate which is a concentration uptake additive for cigarettes.

You really have to read the studies on some of these citations as they push narratives that are not supported by the studies themselves.

But that doesn't mean you have to throw out the baby with the bath water, other cited sources show that nicotine can increase tumour growth in various cancers, for example -

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11433349

There's a few of them around cancer growth though at the moment whether nicotine is actually cancer causing on it's own doesn't seem to be proven. (does make a lovely combination with the known carcinogens in cigarrette smoke when you think about it)

or how nicotine suppresses the immune system -

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8545837

etc

plus the argument that a study isn't relevant because the nicotine was tested in combination with a substance that " increases in concentration in the gastrointestinal tract after a high fat meal" seems a bit harsh unless people don't vape/smoke after high fat meals...

 

This seems like a relatively balanced approach to the results of one study that suggested vapiing could caues cancer last year -

https://scienceblog.cancerresearchuk.org/2018/01/30/headlines-saying-vaping-might-cause-cancer-are-wildly-misleading/

especially this bit -

" E-cigs are a relatively new technology and so we can’t be certain about any long-term effects the devices might cause to health – they haven’t been around long enough for this to be completely worked out. But compared to smoking, the evidence so far shows they are less harmful. "

I do get concerned when people say vaping has been popular for years, or around for 20 years I think someone said, hell even when it was definitevely known that smoking was bad for you it still took decades for people, even doctors, to take any notice. And before that people had been smoking tobacco for hundreds of years.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Zigatoh said:

I do get concerned when people say vaping has been popular for years, or around for 20 years I think someone said, hell even when it was definitevely known that smoking was bad for you it still took decades for people, even doctors, to take any notice. And before that people had been smoking tobacco for hundreds of years.

Vaping has been extremely popular for at least 5 years and the point is that these acute illnesses have only been an issue for less than two months, so I'm very skeptical. 

Long term--my point is we don't know. Meaning it might be bad. That's why I only support the use of it as a cigarette substitute--something we know for a fact is bad--very bad.

And as far as cigarettes, they didn't really become popular in the US until the 1920s. By the 1940s quite a bit of data was emerging that cigarettes were harmful. By the late 50s it was widely known that cigarettes were harmful. Smoking rates in the US began a steady decline from that point on until they leveled off after 1996 after the FDA got involved in regulating cigarettes (go figure).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What people tend to miss with statistical significances: Making a statement about a probability is not making a statement about the actual extent of an effect.

In this debate, folks, you are comparing apples and oranges, when trying to convince each other of what might be more dangerous - real smoke or vaping - when discussing "significances" alone.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/12/2019 at 12:17 AM, NSXCIGAR said:

By the way, the FDA has killed many more people than it's saved. See my summation of that here: 

 

I disagree. Lack of corporation oversight rings of acceptable death number calculations.

DEG was known to be a hazardous compound but not known to the chemist or company.    It proved to be a very effective solvent, though, so it was used for it’s desirable effects without testing.

So, then, you have individuals playing chemist in their back room marketing inhalation products that have no testing. (Wow! This tastes like Crunch Berries and looks like Unicorn dust!) How will you hold them accountable? That is the vape industry I see currently. These complications are not limited to THC use.

Would you also argue a lack of need for the FAA. Just let Boeing be accountable to itself by litigation?

In the difference between punishment after the fact versus prevention before the fact. I am for prevention.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Latest update:

FDA Launches Criminal Probe as Vaping-Related Illnesses Top 500

https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/918710?nlid=131642_3901&src=wnl_newsalrt_190919_MSCPEDIT&uac=228078FX&impID=2100187&faf=1

 

Couple of highlights:

“Many patients reported using multiple types of products, some containing tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), THC plus nicotine, or nicotine only.”

FDA's Law Enforcement Arm Involved

“Mitch Zeller, director, Center for Tobacco Products at the FDA, said agency scientists are now analyzing 150 vaping product samples for a broad range of chemicals, including nicotine, THC, and other cannabinoids, as well as cutting agents, diluents, additives, pesticides, opioids, poisons, and toxins.”

 

Testing...should be interesting to see what they find and hopefully concentrations.

I urge BOTL to source quality and avoid bathtub brew.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/17/2019 at 12:27 AM, La_Tigre said:
On 9/11/2019 at 10:17 PM, NSXCIGAR said:

 

I disagree. Lack of corporation oversight rings of acceptable death number calculations.

Again, I am all for criminal and civil liability for corporations, retailers and their employees who fail to practice responsible testing. This is what didn't happen in the Elixir Sulfanilimide case. Obviously most companies to that point were producing generally safe products despite very little government oversight since the E.S. case was by far the worst in US history at 100 deaths, which when considering the population is remarkably limited. 

You don't need an FDA when we can sue and jail people who distribute dangerous products.

I'm all for investigating the heck out of these recent reports but again, my common sense tells me that there's something more to it than over-the-counter vaping products since those have been in wide use for well over 5 years with few if any reports of acute illnesses until two months ago. 

And it's certainly not nicotine that's causing the problems. Even THC makes little sense unless there's some unknown chemical reaction that takes place between THC and the vaping chemicals that was previously missed by chemists. This is almost certainly a case of either bootleg devices or chemicals or perhaps tainted batches of product. I think we should all wait for the investigation to unravel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, NSXCIGAR said:

You don't need an FDA when we can sue and jail people who distribute dangerous products.

On paper, and in a utopian world, this is plausible. In real life, it's farcical façade.

I make no argument that the fda is a blessed bureau, absent of sin nor corruption. This is a matter of financial and resource inequity.

100 people who are bankrupted by medical debt (because we commodified healthcare) from some tainted food or drug, will never afford the legal fees to fight any multi-billion dollar per year firm, with a huge and very expensive team of attorneys on retainer. Slap injunctions, get continuances, babkrupt your opponent into dropping their case.

A federal bureau chartered with the legal regulation and enforcement of laws pertaining to... stuff that could easily kill people if tainted/mishandled (food and drugs), tilts the scales of justice a bit back toward the underdog. It ensures that such egregious acts atleast stand a chance of being prosecuted.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My family likes to point at the media and say "see, you need to quit"

I'm skeptical, I've been vaping for years, I know others that have Vaped for longer. Out of millions of users, you find less than 1000 hurt by the product? All at the same time? Jeez, lots of publicity, but it's also odd we don't see these stories everyday about cigarettes.

Has anyone looked at how much money big tobacco is losing? Has anyone also noticed that big tobacco and the government joined up to stop kids from smoking, and their first Target wasn't cigarettes, it was vaping.

How many are caused by China juice or thc? I don't think many 14 year olds will admit to thc but would say yes it's from vaping.

I think this all stems from a bad batch of thc cartridges or some other additive we don't actually use in the vaping world. 

Could it be nicotine vape.... Mmmmm maybe, but it just strikes me as too odd. Millions of users, no issues until now and it's a bunch at once.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, CigarScentedBeard said:

or some other additive we don't actually use in the vaping world. 

Like diacetyl? I knew in 2014 to ensure that none of the flavorings i mixed with contained any diacetyl. It was common knowledge in the DIY mixing community, that you shouldn't use diacetyl. Also popcorn lung is way oversensationalized. Now 5 years later, I'm hearing stories onthe radio about 'the dangers of diacetyl and vaping'?!? Dude we moved past that a LONG time ago. If someone were found to be using diacetyl in their flavorings NOW, it would be scandalous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, cfc1016 said:

Like diacetyl? I knew in 2014 to ensure that none of the flavorings i mixed with contained any diacetyl. It was common knowledge in the DIY mixing community, that you shouldn't use diacetyl. Also popcorn lung is way oversensationalized. Now 5 years later, I'm hearing stories onthe radio about 'the dangers of diacetyl and vaping'?!? Dude we moved past that a LONG time ago. If someone were found to be using diacetyl in their flavorings NOW, it would be scandalous.

Exactly, when you buy from unknown suppliers and back yard brewers .... You get what you get. When you buy black market thc cartridges you are risking your life that the process was done correctly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CDC just posted their findings. To no one's surprise the bulk of these cases involve THC products:

https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/basic_information/e-cigarettes/severe-lung-disease.html

What we know
  • There are 805* lung injury cases reported from 46 states and 1 U.S. territory. Twelve deaths have been confirmed in 10 states.
  • CDC has received sex and age data on 771 patients.
    • About 69% of patients are male.
    • Nearly two thirds (62%) of patients are 18 to 34 years old; with 22% of patients between 18-21.
    • 16% of patients are under 18 years.
  • All reported patients have a history of e-cigarette product use or vaping.
  • The latest findings from the investigation into lung injuries associated with e-cigarette use, or vaping, suggest products containing THC play a role in the outbreak.
    • CDC has received data on substances used in e-cigarettes or vaping products in the 30 days prior to symptom onset among 514 patients.
      • About 77% reported using THC-containing products; 36% reported exclusive use of THC-containing products.
      • About 57% reported using nicotine-containing products; 16% reported exclusive use of nicotine-containing products.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I worked in product testing for quite a few years  - meeting the folks responsible for producing vape juice (quite a few) I would be extremely careful about sourcing it if I were ingesting it.

I can only imagine what the seedier side of the business looks like (THC).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a finding that should shock no one:

https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/08/health/vaping-injury-vitamin-e-thc-bn/index.html

Breakthrough in CDC vaping illness investigation: Vitamin E acetate and THC may be to blame

By Jen Christensen, CNN

Updated 1:39 PM ET, Fri November 8, 2019

(CNN)Vitamin E acetate in combination with THC, may be to blame for a national outbreak of e-cigarette-related lung injuries that's linked to dozens of deaths, according to US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention officials.

Dr. Anne Schuchat, the principal deputy director of the CDC, said she would characterize it as a breakthrough in the agency's investigation, although more tests are necessary.
 
"These new findings are significant," Schuchat said during a press briefing on Friday. "We have a strong culprit."
There is still more work to do and the CDC said it is continuing to test for a wide range of chemicals.
 
"This does not rule out other possible ingredients," Schuchat said. "There may be more than one cause."
The CDC says its tests found vitamin E acetate in samples taken from 29 patients who were sick with vaping-related illness in 10 states. THC, or tetrahydrocannabinol, the primary psychoactive component of the cannabis plant, or its metabolites were detected in 23 of 28 patients.
During the press briefing, CDC's Dr. James Pirkle described vitamin E acetate as "enormously sticky" when it goes into the lungs, and it "does hang around." Pirkle said it wouldn't be unusual for THC to be absent from some of the samples because it leaves the lungs faster. He added finding THC in 82% of the samples from 28 patients was "noteworthy."
In September, New York health officials linked cases of severe lung illness to vitamin E acetate in cannabis-containing vaping products. At the time, investigators said it was "a key focus" of the state's investigation into the illnesses.
An investigation into the link between vaping and severe lung illnesses has yielded the discovery of extremely high levels of the chemical vitamin E acetate in nearly all cannabis-containing vaping products that were analyzed, New York health officials said Thursday.
Until the investigation is complete, the CDC suggests people refrain from using all vaping products with THC, no matter where people buy them. The investigation has found that many of these products patients used were bought online or received through friends or family, rather than through vaping shops or at licensed THC dispensaries.
Vitamin E is used in several products, such as lotions and in supplements, but the CDC said there is a "big difference" in putting vitamin E on the skin or swallowing it in pill and in inhaling the oily vitamin.
Dr. Jennifer Layden, the chief medical officer and state epidemiologist with the Illinois Department of Public Health, said in the press briefing that in her state, they found the majority of cases of the people who were sick used THC, and that their materials came from "informal sources." In Illinois, she said, they had not had any cases associated with the state's medical marijuana program.
So far, there have been 2,051 cases of vaping associated illnesses, reported in every state, except for Alaska, as of November 5. States have reported at least 40 deaths.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The governor of Massachusetts banned the sale of vape products for four months due to deaths.

But we can still buy cigarettes......

One person's vape cloud is another person's cigar smoke cloud.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Colt45 said:

The governor of Massachusetts banned the sale of vape products for four months due to deaths.

But we can still buy cigarettes......

One person's vape cloud is another person's cigar smoke cloud.

Here in New England public policy follows the Puritan principle:

We burn witches first, ask questions afterward.   😞

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Community Software by Invision Power Services, Inc.