Whether you are a smoker looking for a way to quit, someone who is worried about breathing in e-cigarette vapor, or a current vaper looking for clarity on some of the negative media coverage about e cigarettes. VAEP Inc. has got all the information conveniently put together all in one website, please check them out:
Also the studies compiled in the following links should help to alleviate any of your fears regarding the use of e-cigarettes and e-juice
Common Misconceptions about Vaporizing
Myth: Electronic cigarettes are just as deadly and carcinogenic as tobacco cigarettes
Truth: Where it comes from…The FDA stated they found trace amounts of carcinogens in the nicotine cartridges and the media and health organizations used that statement to claim that electronic cigarettes are just as dangerous as tobacco cigarettes. Why it’s wrong… The FDA found trace amounts of “tobacco‐specific nitrosamines” in the samples they tested, which can cause cancer under certain conditions and in sufficient amounts. The FDA allows certain levels of nitrosamines in consumable products. For example, tests show that other nicotine products,such as nicotine gum and nicotine patches, also contain the same tobacco‐specific nitrosamines. The FDA did not release any information on the levels they found, however,the scientific definition of “trace amount”means amounts that are “detectable,” but too small to even accurately measure. An independent study by Dr. Murray Laugesen showed that, on average,the electronic cigarette contained 8.18ng nitrosamines per 1g of liquid. 8 ng in 1g = eight parts per trillion, an extremely tiny amount. By comparison, nicotine gum tested at 2ng, the nicotine patch tested at 8ng and Marlborough cigarettes tested at a staggering 11,190ng. That translates to electronic cigarettes containing 1,200 times LESS of these cancer‐causing nitrosamines than tobacco cigarettes and about the same as the FDA‐approved nicotine patch.
Myth: Second‐hand “vapor” is a threat to bystanders
Truth: As shown previously, electronic cigarettes contain a tiny, barely detectable fraction of carcinogens found in tobacco cigarettes. They also have been shown not to contain any of the toxins in the amounts found in tobacco cigarettes and that they deliver very little nicotine in the vapor. So, given that the vapor already proves little, if any, danger to the actual user, any danger to bystanders by the exhaled vapor would be negligible. Additionally,tobacco cigarettes create “side stream smoke,” which is the smoke that comes directly from the end of a lit cigarette and the smoke lingers in the air and travels a fair distance from the smoker. Electronic cigarette vapor does not behave in the same manner as tobacco smoke. There is no vapor produced from the device, until the user activates it by inhaling, so no “side streamvapor” is created and the vapor dissipates very quickly. In the event that a bystander would pass through the vapor, since it does not contain the irritating toxins of tobacco smoke, it is barely detectable beyond the faint scent of the flavor and only for a moment.
Myth: Electronic cigarettes are a risk to Teens
Truth: Legislators and anti‐smoking groups assume that children will be drawn to electronic gadgets, because of ease of access to websites and retail locations. E Cigarettes are not easy to purchase on the internet, a credit card or bank account is required. Most all Canadian online vendors have already implemented a policy of forbidding sales to minors. The opportunity for minors to purchase electronic cigarettes at any Brick and Mortar location is no better than purchasing tobacco cigarettes at a gas station (probably less). Also, the least expensive electronic cigarette starter kits run between $45 ‐ $100 This price point is considerable for the average adult, let alone a teen. Electronic cigarettes also require the additional purchases of accessories and replacement parts. A single battery costs over $30. Heating elements, which require frequent replacement, cost over $8 each. Moreover, anecdotal accounts indicate that teens view electronic cigarettes as a way for adults to quit smoking. They lack the “dangerfactor,” which reduces appeal. Additionally, surveys of electronic cigarette owners show that the average consumer is between 30‐50 years old and a smoker, indicating that even young adults do not find them particularly appealing.
Myth: Sweet flavors and flashy packaging is attractive to teens
Truth: These products are not intended to be a treatment for nicotine addiction. They are intended to be a way for current smokers to “smoke” without the dangerous toxins and carcinogens. Retailers need to differentiate themselves from stop‐smoking aids, to convince long‐time smokers that the electronic cigarette is just as appealing as the tobacco cigarette they currently use. Just as with marketing cars, televisions, cell phones, alcohol and other adult products, advertisers attempt to make the devices appealing to adults with a “coolness factor.” Studies show that “smokers are more likely than the general population to be risk‐taking, extroverted, defiant, and impulsive” so the misconception is understandable but misguided. Often overlooked by critics in these ads are the claims about the ability to “smoke anywhere” and have a safer/healthier option to smoking – a clear indication that they are targeting current smokers and smokers concerned about their health and not new/young smokers. Regarding sweet flavors, the tobacco‐flavored liquid does not have a pleasant taste for many smokers, as it is difficult to replicate the tobacco smoke taste. About 50% of adult electronic cigarette owners polled (over the age of 26) report that they primarily use these Sweet/Candy flavors and attribute them with the ability to keep from returning to tobacco cigarettes. They also testify that the sweeter flavors make tobacco cigarettes taste particularly foul and further reduce their chances of returning to smoking cigarettes.
Myth: Electronic Cigarettes contain antifreeze
Truth: Where this myth comes from…In 2009, the FDA released a press statement claiming that they tested electronic cigarettes and found diethylene glycol, an ingredient in antifreeze. Independent labs extensively tested other electronic cigarettes and found no evidence of diethylene glycol, the toxic component of anti‐freeze claimed to have been found in the brands the FDA tested. To further the confusion, electronic cigarette liquid is made of propylene glycol, an ingredient recognized as safe for human consumption by the FDA. While propylene glycol is sometimes used in anti‐freeze, it is an additive intended to make it LESS harmful if accidentally swallowed. The FDA tested just 18 cartridges, from only two companies. Out of those 18, just one tested positive for “about 1% diethylene glycol.” Because so many other tests failed to find diethylene glycol, many experts conclude that the single sample may have been contaminated in some other way. By no means is it considered a standard ingredient in electronic cigarette liquids.
Myth: If electronic cigarettes were no longer available for smokers, those smokers would simply quit smoking or use traditional stop‐smoking aids.
Truth: According to the 998 poll participants, only 18% responded that they would use traditional NRTs or attempt to quit cold turkey. Nearly 20% said they would switch to other tobacco alternatives, such as snus or snuff; and a whopping 61% indicated they would most likely resume smoking cigarettes.