Mark
Legend
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2012
- Messages
- 13,961
http://www.eccauk.org/index.php/news-and-blog/an-e-cigarette-vapour-analysis-attempt-from-korea.html
An e-cigarette vapour analysis attempt from Korea
Vapers Network has an FB post asking for a commentary on a vapour analysis coming from Korea. There isn't enough space on an FB comment to the job properly, so I posted it here. One reason for that is because this analysis is typical of most we see: very poor quality. The reasons why need to be flagged up, so that perhaps someone can point out the common errors to the next set of 'researchers' who attempt it.
Vapers Network on Facebook
Request for comment on the analysis, on the VN FB page
___________________________________________
It's not a bad analysis as far as these things go, I'd give it 2 out of 10 for effort if nothing else. The only things you can derive from it are the relative amounts of PG, VG and nicotine (relative to each other, that is), and the lack of any toxins. Because of the general lack of scientific accuracy here I would also question the lack of any contaminants, as this seems highly unlikely to me (they are always present in very small amounts).
It lists 99.54% of the ecig vapor ingredients, which at first glance looks just fine - until you notice there is no water listed. This is a major problem because unfortunately e-cigarette vapour is about 66% water; and if you leave out two-thirds of the ingredients then any percentage figure you quote for other ingredients is meaningless drivel.
PG for example is listed here as 66%, which is simply ridiculous - at most it's 66% of the ~34% that isn't water - so it's probably about 22% according to this analysis. However, as more reliable-looking analyses give the PG content as about 3 to 5% typically (overall of course, including all ingredients such as the rather important water), I don't have any faith in this assessment.
The lack of any other compound apart from 3 basic ones is worrying; I'd say it was impossible even in unflavoured base.
Another interesting point is nicotine given at 5%, as it would need 100mg strength liquid (100mg/ml or 10% strength) to get a figure like that, as the typical amount in vapour is about 1.5%. Of course, we need to adjust for the missing ~66% of ingredients; so the 5% goes down to about 1.7%, a far more likely figure.
The listing of the chemical's effects or use is the usual quick bodge-up, with any nasty effect locatable in the MSDS used for dramatic effect. Nicotine is listed as 'paralyzes the nerves'; this is interesting as it is a normal ingredient in my diet, and my blood contains measurable amounts of it and would do so even if I was not a vaper (as everyone's blood does). As yet I have not noticed a nerve paralysis effect, except perhaps early on Monday mornings.
Propionic acid is listed as 'fatal poison in nervous system'. This could be a problem for those food manufacturers who use it as a common food preservative; and for all those people who have it on their skin, produced by the body as a normal process (and that's everyone). It's the component of sweat that you can smell.
Acetic acid is listed as 'an organic compound used in the manufacture of dye'. Personally, I use it on my fish and chips, and we often call it vinegar. It goes nicely with some sodium chloride grains, which would probably be listed here as 'dangerous risk for cardiac arrest'.
So this analysis has some fatal flaws, and thus is typical of many such attempts. No contaminants were found in the vapour, which presumably was the point of the exercise; but on the other hand you can't rate it as the best piece of science since they designed the CERN particle accelerator. I wouldn't disagree violently if you were to suggest that 10 or 15% of undetected compounds somehow didn't make it on to the ingredient list and the list percentages were fudged to hide the fact. A normal vapour analysis has about 15% flavouring compounds, and ~1% of odds and ends that no one can reliably identify (and which are correctly and honestly listed as 'unidentifiable compounds).
The only other analysis we have seen from Korea was an appalling piece of junk that couldn't be described as worthy of a 12 year old's chemistry class. Useless junk of the worst kind: badly inaccurate, incomplete, noticeably poorly managed, obviously badly contaminated by poor lab protocols, and entirely misrepresented in the inevitable accompanying press release - from the Korean ministry of health, you won't be surprised to learn.
An e-cigarette vapour analysis attempt from Korea
Vapers Network has an FB post asking for a commentary on a vapour analysis coming from Korea. There isn't enough space on an FB comment to the job properly, so I posted it here. One reason for that is because this analysis is typical of most we see: very poor quality. The reasons why need to be flagged up, so that perhaps someone can point out the common errors to the next set of 'researchers' who attempt it.
Vapers Network on Facebook
Request for comment on the analysis, on the VN FB page
___________________________________________
It's not a bad analysis as far as these things go, I'd give it 2 out of 10 for effort if nothing else. The only things you can derive from it are the relative amounts of PG, VG and nicotine (relative to each other, that is), and the lack of any toxins. Because of the general lack of scientific accuracy here I would also question the lack of any contaminants, as this seems highly unlikely to me (they are always present in very small amounts).
It lists 99.54% of the ecig vapor ingredients, which at first glance looks just fine - until you notice there is no water listed. This is a major problem because unfortunately e-cigarette vapour is about 66% water; and if you leave out two-thirds of the ingredients then any percentage figure you quote for other ingredients is meaningless drivel.
PG for example is listed here as 66%, which is simply ridiculous - at most it's 66% of the ~34% that isn't water - so it's probably about 22% according to this analysis. However, as more reliable-looking analyses give the PG content as about 3 to 5% typically (overall of course, including all ingredients such as the rather important water), I don't have any faith in this assessment.
The lack of any other compound apart from 3 basic ones is worrying; I'd say it was impossible even in unflavoured base.
Another interesting point is nicotine given at 5%, as it would need 100mg strength liquid (100mg/ml or 10% strength) to get a figure like that, as the typical amount in vapour is about 1.5%. Of course, we need to adjust for the missing ~66% of ingredients; so the 5% goes down to about 1.7%, a far more likely figure.
The listing of the chemical's effects or use is the usual quick bodge-up, with any nasty effect locatable in the MSDS used for dramatic effect. Nicotine is listed as 'paralyzes the nerves'; this is interesting as it is a normal ingredient in my diet, and my blood contains measurable amounts of it and would do so even if I was not a vaper (as everyone's blood does). As yet I have not noticed a nerve paralysis effect, except perhaps early on Monday mornings.
Propionic acid is listed as 'fatal poison in nervous system'. This could be a problem for those food manufacturers who use it as a common food preservative; and for all those people who have it on their skin, produced by the body as a normal process (and that's everyone). It's the component of sweat that you can smell.
Acetic acid is listed as 'an organic compound used in the manufacture of dye'. Personally, I use it on my fish and chips, and we often call it vinegar. It goes nicely with some sodium chloride grains, which would probably be listed here as 'dangerous risk for cardiac arrest'.
So this analysis has some fatal flaws, and thus is typical of many such attempts. No contaminants were found in the vapour, which presumably was the point of the exercise; but on the other hand you can't rate it as the best piece of science since they designed the CERN particle accelerator. I wouldn't disagree violently if you were to suggest that 10 or 15% of undetected compounds somehow didn't make it on to the ingredient list and the list percentages were fudged to hide the fact. A normal vapour analysis has about 15% flavouring compounds, and ~1% of odds and ends that no one can reliably identify (and which are correctly and honestly listed as 'unidentifiable compounds).
The only other analysis we have seen from Korea was an appalling piece of junk that couldn't be described as worthy of a 12 year old's chemistry class. Useless junk of the worst kind: badly inaccurate, incomplete, noticeably poorly managed, obviously badly contaminated by poor lab protocols, and entirely misrepresented in the inevitable accompanying press release - from the Korean ministry of health, you won't be surprised to learn.
Last edited:
