Monday, February 2, 2015

The Truth About the Formaldehyde Study Regarding E Cigarettes

Post Dated: 02/02/2015


A Look at Formaldehyde Levels Found in E-Cig Vapor 

Recently we reported on a story out of Japan evaluating levels of formaldehyde released through vaping. Yesterday another study on this same topic was published in the New England Journal of Medicine and has been picked up by mainstream media. In this study, researchers measured formaldehyde using a variable voltage battery set at 3.3 and 5 volts. The vapor was collected and evaluated from an unnamed atomizer after a 4 second puff. The study found that at low voltage (3.3V) no formaldehyde was detected. However, at high voltage (5.0V), levels of formaldehyde were detected at levels up to 15 times higher than cigarette smoke. 

Without further investigation on the methods and conclusion of this study, the results are very alarming. We feel it is our responsibility to dig deeper and provide the public with the whole truth. 

One glaring problem with this publication is the researchers found formaldehyde hemiacetals (a combination of formaldehyde and alcohols) not formaldehyde. It is also important to know that formaldehyde is present everywhere. It is found in every person, smokers and nonsmokers alike, and can occur anytime hydrogen, carbon, and oxygen are in the presence of each other. 

The truth is, this study is deeply flawed in many ways. In fact, it is highly irresponsible to publish a half truth and present it as science. For starters, as outlined by Dr. Konstantino Farsalinos, the authors of this study failed to mention (perhaps unknowingly) that volts do not measure thermal energy. Energy should be expressed in watts. Therefore, with the published information we do not know how many watts were applied to the atomizer. 

Fortunately, Dr. Farsalinos used the information that was provided to approximate wattage settings. According to the study, 5mg of e-liquid were consumed at 3.3 volts. Based on measurements performed by Farsalinos, “…such consumption is observed at about 6-7 watts at 4-second puffs. Thus, the atomizer resistance is probably 1.6-1.8 ohms. This means that at 5 volts the energy was around 14-16 watts.” 

So, what does this mean in terms of realistic user conditions? If the resistance was between 1.6-1.8 ohms and the wattage is somewhere between 14-16 watts, the vaporizer is being overheated and the wicking material is being burned. Essentially, these researchers are collecting data on a dry or burnt hit. 

What the authors of this study aren’t accounting for is how easily this scenario is detected by the user. An electronic cigarette user would never vape at these settings. No one continuously vapes an overheated atomizer. The taste is unpleasant, to put it mildly. Therefore, no vaper will ever be exposed to the reported levels of formaldehyde.

We can’t wait to get these in your hands! We know you’ll be quite pleased as your rDNA 40s begin to arrive in early January. All orders currently processing will ship within the next few weeks. No more backorders! 

This method of measuring aldehydes in a lab environment is deceptive and unfair. The public deserves clear and concise results from scientific studies. If researchers continue to publish misleading findings and the media continues with its sensationalism the results can be damaging. How many smokers are afraid to switch to a device that could potentially save their lives? 

For a more detailed breakdown on this study, I urge you to read Dr. Farsalinos’ response by following this link: www.ecigarette-research.com 

Sources: 

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc1413069 
http://abcn.ws/1BItJS 
http://ecigarette-research.com/web/index.php/2013-04-07-09-50-07/2015/191-form-nejm 
http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2015/01/new-study-reports-high-levels-of.html

Friday, June 27, 2014

What you need to know to REALLY research E-Cigarettes

I've been trying to find some recent news on the Electronic Cigarette industry, maybe to see whats going on with the FDA or maybe the bans in different cities, I'm sickened to the ignorance a lot of these "bloggers" have on the E-Cigarette industry.

So, to make it simple for you to do your research for yourself or a fellow loved one, here's some tips from somebody who already uses an electronic cigarette and has used for about 2 years now.
  1. If the blog says anything about "Tobacco Products," chances are they're going to be biased on the topic because they're too ignorant to realize there is no tobacco use in an electronic cigarette. It is a water vapor based flavor /w or w/o nicotine. This issue goes all the way up to congress in the way they're "regulating" Tobacco products, when the Electronic Cigarette has NOTHING to do with tobacco. Think of the nicotine patch...do you attach this patch of tobacco leaves to your body and hope the nicotine seeps through? No, there's no tobacco in the patch, there's no tobacco in the Electronic Cigarette. Don't let them fool you.
  2. Nicotine kills. This is one of the biggest misconceptions I run into, is that people think the nicotine is what kills you and gives you cancer in cigarettes. Nicotine is a stimulant drug, like caffeine, which is added to the cigarettes or E-Juice to give people that light headed feeling, the calming sensation, and of course the addiction. What kills you, and gives you cancer in cigarettes is the actual burning of the cigarette (or combustion) which activates all the other 50 some odd chemicals in the cigarette. You cannot have tar unless you set something on fire; in an electronic cigarette there is no fire, there is no combustion, there-fore there is no tar, there is no formaldehyde, these are the chemicals that can kill you or make you sick in cigarettes. Now, don't get it twisted, you can over dose on nicotine with very high levels. That's the main reason we stick with 24-30 mgs as the highest level we offer. But also take in consideration that you can also overdose on caffeine and vitamin C. Everything in moderation.
  3. "Light"-"Medium"-"Strong"-"X-Strong" -ect. Don't ever trust companies that put this on the bottle instead of the nicotine levels either in milligrams or a percentage (ie: 6mg or 0.6%). Chances are it's a higher nicotine level than you wanted. I've shopped around and there's some companies where the "Light" is at 18mg which is the amount of nicotine as a normal full flavored cigarette, the "normal" strength being at 24mg, which is higher than a normal cigarette. This is one of the big things the FDA has made sure of, and if a company is still doing the "light" and "normal" approach, they're not good for business.
  4. E-Juice has anti-freeze in it! That could kill me! Okay, this sort of makes me chuckle when people bring this up. There was one brand of e-cigs back in I think 2008 that used Dipropylene Glycol instead of just regular Propylene Glycol. They got knocked of the market and charged a huge fee for putting poison in the juice (I think it was one of those disposable e-cigarettes). Propylene Glycol is 100% safe to consume and is in normal everyday things people use like asthma inhalers, air ventilation, ice cream, and much more. It's sort of like how butane replaced aerosol because it was dangerous to people and the ecosystem, same concept. I've done some blogs on Propylene Glycol if you want more information on it.
  5. And to finish it off, "This juice down the road was only 2-3$ why would I want to pay 6-12$ for some other e-juice?" Alright this is more of an open debate, but in my experiences; if someone sells the same size bottle of juice that we have for half the price; there's a catch. Just like everything else, if something is dirt cheap, that usually speaks for it's quality. Most of the "cheaper" juices are straight out of China, which isn't always a bad thing; but the regulation could be different, the chemicals could be different, and the nicotine levels could be different. So all I'm saying about all that is be careful where you get your juices. If you can't speak to the people that made them, either in E-mail or over a phone call at least, chances are it's probably not the best brand to buy from. If they don't speak English..well that sort of speaks for itself. People will swear up and down that their juice is the best to buy, and how amazing it is that it's pennies on the dollar; I nod my head and let them boast; but they usually end up coming to O2 Easy instead because somehow they got sick, or they went back to the cigarettes.


    One last thing I wanted to mention, just more of a rant than advice. It's the whole situation on "kids and teenagers" using the electronic cigarettes. Look, I don't sell to minors, and anyone in the industry who has morals as we do will not sell to minors. It's illegal, and it's immoral. The fact that we have flavors like Mountain Dew, and Cotton Candy are NOT to attract the younger crowd; it's simply because adults like flavors as well. Do you wanna eat raw chicken or would you rather have bourbon chicken? Just because we're adults doesn't mean we don't like tasty things, true I do still love my tobacco flavors; but I like a good Cinnamon Danish Swirl flavor every now and then. And how are the kids getting them? Not me, chances are they have a friend who's 18 years old and they got them to get the pack for them. That's how I used to get cigarettes as a minor, I'm sure that's how they're doing it with electronic cigarettes. So instead of blaming the E-Cigarette companies for your child or teenager "vaping" take a closer look at their friends. As I mentioned, it is illegal to sell to minors; I would never go out of my way to sell to a minor for I love my job and plan on keeping it.

    So put that in your e-cigarette and vape it!
    ("So put that in your pipe and smoke it")

    I hope this blog has been very helpful, and hopefully it has educated you on some of the b/s you might run into when looking up different E-Cig brands.

    As always, Vape on America
    Pete@O2Easy

Friday, February 21, 2014

Cigarettes Obsolete?



ATLANTA (CBSMiami/AP) — Health officials have begun to call “end game” on cigarette-smoking in America.


They have long wished for a cigarette-free America, but shied away from calling for smoking rates to fall to zero or near zero by any particular year. The power of tobacco companies and popularity of their products made such a goal seem like a pipe dream.


But a confluence of changes has recently prompted public health leaders to start throwing around phrases like “endgame” and “tobacco-free generation.” Now, they talk about the slowly-declining adult smoking rate dropping to 10 percent in the next decade and to 5 percent or lower by 2050.


Acting U.S. Surgeon General Boris Lushniak last month released a 980-page report on smoking that pushed for stepped-up tobacco-control measures. His news conference was an unusually animated showing of anti-smoking bravado, with Lushniak nearly yelling, repeatedly, “Enough is enough!”


“I can’t accept that we’re just allowing these numbers to trickle down,” he said, in a recent interview with the AP. “We believe we have the public health tools to get us to the zero level.”


This is not the first time a federal health official has spoken so boldly. In 1984, Surgeon General C. Everett Koop called for a “smoke-free society” by the year 2000. However, Koop — a bold talker on many issues — didn’t offer specifics on how to achieve such a goal.


“What’s different today is that we have policies and programs that have been proven to drive down tobacco use,” said Matthew Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. “We couldn’t say that in 1984.”


Among the things that have changed:


—Cigarette taxes have increased around the country, making smokes more expensive. Though prices vary from state to state, on average a pack of cigarettes that would have sold for about $1.75 20 years ago would cost more than triple that now.


—Laws banning smoking in restaurants, bars and workplaces have popped up all over the country. Airline flights have long been off-limits for smoking.


—Polls show that cigarette smoking is no longer considered normal behavior, and is now less popular among teens than marijuana.


—Federal officials are increasingly aggressive about anti-smoking advertising. The Food and Drug Administration launched a new youth tobacco prevention campaign last week. At about the same time, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention debuted a third, $60-million round of its successful anti-tobacco ad campaign — this one featuring poignant, deathbed images of a woman featured in earlier ads.


—Tobacco companies, once considered impervious to legal attack, have suffered some huge defeats in court. Perhaps the biggest was the 1998 settlement of a case brought by more than 40 states demanding compensation for the costs of treating smoking-related illnesses. Big Tobacco agreed to pay about $200 billion and curtail marketing of cigarettes to youths.


—Retailing of cigarettes is changing, too. CVS Caremark, the nation’s second-largest pharmacy chain, announced last week it will stop selling tobacco products at its more than 7,600 drugstores. The company said it made the decision in a bid to focus more on providing health care, but medical and public health leaders predicted pressure will increase on companies like Walgreen Co. and Wal-Mart Stores Inc. to follow suit.


“I do think, in another few years, that pharmacies selling cigarettes will look as anachronistic” as old cigarette ads featuring physician endorsements look today, said CDC Director Dr. Tom Frieden.


These developments have made many in public health dream bigger. It’s caused Myers’ organization and others to recently tout the goal of bringing the adult smoking rate down to 10 percent by 2024, from the current 18 percent. That would mean dropping it at twice the speed it declined over the last 10 years.


The bigger goal is to reduce U.S. smoking-related deaths to fewer than 10,000, from the current level of 480,000. But even if smoking rates dropped to zero immediately, it would take decades to see that benefit, since smoking-triggered cancers can take decades to develop.


But while some experts and advocates are swinging for the fences, others are more pessimistic. They say the key to reaching such goals is not simply more taxes and more local smoking bans, but action by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to regulate smoking.


A 2009 federal law gave the FDA the authority to regulate tobacco products. The law barred FDA from outright blocking the sale of cigarettes, but the agency was free to take such pivotal steps as prohibiting the use of appealing menthol flavoring in cigarettes and requiring cigarette makers to ratchet down the amount of addictive nicotine in each smoke.


But nearly five years after gaining power over cigarettes, FDA has yet to even propose such regulations. Agency officials say they’re working on it.


Many believe FDA’s delay is driven by defense preparations for an anticipated battery of legal and political challenges.


A spokesman for Altria Group Inc., the maker of Marlboro, said the company supports FDA exercising its regulatory authority over tobacco products. But as a whole, the industry has tended to fight regulation. Some of the nation’s largest tobacco companies — though not Altria — sued to stop FDA-proposed graphic warning labels on cigarette packs. A federal court blocked the ads.


“The industry makes money as long as they can delay regulation,” said Kenneth Warner, a University of Michigan public health professor who is a leading authority on smoking and health.


Warner and Michigan colleague David Mendez estimate that, barring any major new tobacco control victories, the adult smoking rate will drop from its current 18 percent only to about 12 percent by 2050. If health officials do make huge strides, the rate could drop as low as 6 percent, they think.


But Lushniak said zero. Will that ever happen?


Some experts doubt it. As long as cigarettes and other combustible tobacco products are legal, it’s likely some people will smoke them. Efforts to prohibit them are likely to fail, they say. (Remember Prohibition?)


“It’s hard to do a ban on cigarettes because you’re taking something away from people they have and are using. Once you have something, you hold tight,” said Richard Daynard, a Northeastern University law professor who focuses on tobacco issues.


Better, he said, to bar people from having a product in the first place. He is intrigued by legal efforts in Singapore and a handful of other countries to ban sales of tobacco to anyone born after a certain year — 2000, say. That would be constitutional, he said. The question is: Would our culture accept it?


Probably not, said Ruth Malone, editor-in-chief of the scientific journal Tobacco Control.


“In our culture, we tend to think we have a right to things even if they’re terrible for us,” she said.


A growing number of experts believe the most promising option is to get people to switch voluntarily to something else, like electronic cigarettes.


Electronic cigarettes are battery-powered devices that provide users with aerosol puffs that typically contain nicotine, and sometimes flavorings like fruit, mint or chocolate. They’ve often been described as a less dangerous alternative to regular cigarettes. But there are few studies exploring exactly what chemicals are in them, and in what concentrations, and whether those levels are harmful.


They’re controversial: Some experts believe that at a time when cigarette smoking has finally become passe in popular culture, e-cigarettes may re-glamorize puffing away in public places. Cigarette sales could surge.


“It could go in either direction,” said John Seffrin, the American Cancer Society’s chief executive officer.


But if the FDA can ratchet down nicotine in conventional cigarettes to levels below what’s in e-cigarettes, perhaps everyone who clings to smoking will switch to the higher-nicotine new products. That could achieve the end of smoking, at least of combustible, carcinogen-filled cigarettes — or so the thinking goes.


In the past, “the country really wasn’t ready” to walk away from cigarettes,” Daynard said. “I think the country’s ready now.”
TM and © Copyright 2014 CBS Radio Inc. and its relevant subsidiaries. CBS RADIO and EYE Logo TM and Copyright 2014 CBS Broadcasting Inc. Used under license. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Saturday, January 18, 2014

Celebrities Promoting Electronic Cigarettes?

I don't know how well everyone keeps up with the media and the politics (yes politics) in the electronic cigarette community, but there's turmoil this week over the golden globes. Just a few days ago on Wednesday the Golden Globe Awards was on television as it always is, but this time around there was some controversy.

"Senators Fuming over E-Cigarettes at Golden Globes."



And watching these puppets talk reminds me of the 90's with the war on drugs, but these are the new "drugs" from how they manipulate the topic with scary words and the use of "protecting their children" from such a dangerous thing. Now I'm not going to get all political for I haven't done enough research on any of these senators, but precedence shows us that this is used to gain trust by antagonizing the "unknown."

"Marijuana Legalization proposed in New Mexico Senate.."

"Tax it! Maryland Lawmakers try to Legalize Marijuana Again.."

"US-OH Medical Marijuana: Will Ohio be Next to Legalize?"




Back to the Point at Hand..


Well it's kinda obvious we're not so worried about the war on drugs anymore, so who else can we point fingers at and make them look beneath us?


People like you and me who are just trying to kick a deadly habit by switching to electronic cigarette instead of analog cigarettes. This INCLUDES celebrities! Yeah some celebrities are trying to kick the habit as well, let's take Leonardo DiCaprio for an example..



Chain smoking like a chimney, but now we see him at the Golden Globe Awards using an electronic cigarette? More power to him! He's making the switch just like the rest of us...I don't see him advertising for us, or any other electronic cigarette company (though I wish he would) so how is he promoting the electronic cigarette?

Okay, that's fine and dandy but what about the children? The population of electronic cigarettes used by teenagers in high school has doubled since 2012! Alright I'm 23, and I was one of those high school teenagers hiding in the most secretive bathroom in the entire school to smoke a cigarette and ease my mind. I smoked cigarettes at a young age but it's not because I could but it at the store because I obviously couldn't. It was because it was what I was around, and the people I surrounded myself with. Don't blame the electronic cigarette company for your kid picking up a smoking habit, either blame your parenting or their friends and the society that surrounds them. 

With that said, I'm not condoning the sale to minors, at O2 Easy we won't sell them any of our products unless they're 18 and over with a valid drivers license. What I'm saying is it's going to happen whether the electronic cigarette exists or not. So why not the healthier alternative?

You wanna play that game Big Brother?



Well there's the older generation, now let's look at the "Kids,"



This young man is 21-22 so he's shortly out of high school and he's recommending these to anyone. He has a heart murmur and was still smoking "analog" cigarettes, not only that but menthol New Port 100's. So this touches up on what I mentioned before. 

So to summarize everything I just mentioned, it's always the same conclusion. The "big corporations" are misleading and misguiding people with either false or old information so they can keep people on the analog cigarettes. Here's a link to another blog touching up on such thing. http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/legislation-news/363710-us-senators-ties-big-pharma-anti-smoking-legislation.html


They really make it seem like we're some drugdealers when we're just trying to help people get off the things that have ruined our lives, our wallets, and above all our health.


Vape On Fellow Vapers!


Friday, January 17, 2014

Medical Doctor Promotes the Use of Electronic Cigarettes



Did a little surfing on Youtube and found this wonderful video of Dr. David Baron explaining the science of the Electronic Cigarette. He touches up on the science of how it works, why it's different from tobacco smoke, how it cannot cause any harm to anyone around you, and why the smoking ban makes no sense for the use of Electronic Cigarettes.

Here's the two part Video:






Hope you enjoyed!

Wednesday, January 8, 2014

New Study Shows E-Cigarettes are Safe to Bystanders

People standing near someone using an e-cigarette will be exposed to nicotine, but not to other chemicals found in tobacco cigarette smoke, according to a new study. E-cigarettes, or electronic cigarettes, create a nicotine-rich vapor that can be inhaled, or 'vaped.'
Researchers and regulators have questioned whether e-cigarettes are a smoking cessation aid or may lure more young people toward smoking, as well as what effects they have on health."There is ongoing public debate whether e-cigarettes should be allowed or prohibited in public spaces," study co-author Maciej Goniewicz told Reuters Health in an email.
Goniewicz is a cancer researcher in the Department of Health Behavior at the Roswell Park Cancer Institute in Buffalo, New York.
"E-cigarettes contain variable amounts of nicotine and some traces of toxicants. But very little is known to what extent non-users can be exposed to nicotine and other chemicals in situations when they are present in the same room with users of e-cigarettes," Goniewicz said.
He and his colleagues conducted two studies of secondhand exposure to e-cigarette vapors in a laboratory. Their results were published in Nicotine and Tobacco Research. In the first study, the researchers used an electronic smoking machine to generate vapor in an enclosed space. They measured the amount of nicotine as well as carbon monoxide and other potentially harmful gases and particles in the chamber.
The second study included five men who regularly smoked both tobacco cigarettes and e-cigarettes. Each man entered a room and smoked his usual brand of e-cigarette for two five-minute intervals over an hour while the researchers measured air quality. The room was cleaned and ventilated and the experiment was repeated with tobacco cigarettes.
The researchers measured nicotine levels of 2.5 micrograms per cubic meter of air in the first study. Nicotine levels from e-cigarettes in the second study were slightly higher at about 3.3 micrograms per cubic meter. But tobacco cigarette smoking resulted in nicotine levels ten times higher at almost 32 micrograms per cubic meter.
"The exposure to nicotine is lower when compared to exposure from tobacco smoke. And we also know that nicotine is relatively safer when compared to other dangerous toxicants in tobacco smoke," Goniewicz said E-cigarettes also produced some particulate matter, but regular cigarettes produced about seven times more. E-cigarettes didn't change the amount of carbon monoxide or other gases in the air.
"What we found is that non-users of e-cigarettes might be exposed to nicotine but not to many toxicants when they are in close proximity to e-cigarette users," said Goniewicz."It is currently very hard to predict what would be the health impact of such exposure," he added. He said more research is needed to find out how the current findings correspond to "real-life" situations, when many people might be using e-cigarettes in a room with restricted ventilation.
"This is an interesting piece and points in the direction that a number of other studies are pointing, though it begins to expand the evidence on the potential effects to others," Amy Fairchild told Reuters Health in an email.
Fairchild was not involved in the new research, but has studied how e-cigarette use might impact views on regular cigarettes at the Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health in New York. She said the study suggests e-cigarettes are far safer, both in terms of toxins and nicotine, than tobacco cigarettes when it comes to the health effects on bystanders - although more research is needed to know for sure.
"In locales considering extending smoking bans to e-cigarettes, I think that these data weaken the case for more sweeping bans," Fairchild said. "And so this begins to answer the question about why e-cigarettes are considered better: they reduce risks to both the user and to the bystander when compared to tobacco cigarettes."
Fairfield said the concern about vaping ultimately revolves around whether e-cigarettes are going to change broader patterns of smoking at the population level.
"There are potential harms, including promoting continued smoking of cigarettes and renormalizing cigarette smoking behaviors," Goniewicz said. "Regulatory agencies around the world will need to make a number of regulatory decisions about product safety that could have major effects on public health."
Goniewicz has received funding from a drug company that makes medications to aid smoking cessation. Another study author has received funds from an e-cigarette manufacturer.

Pete @ o2Easy

Sunday, January 5, 2014

What is Steeping?

There's so many flavors of E-Juice  to choose from when using an Electronic Cigarette or E-Hookah if you will, and with so many different flavors comes different ways of created such E-Juice  and certain things you can do to get the most out of your flavor.

To "steep" an E-Juice is to simply store it in a dark, cool area for a given amount of time. In a sense, it's almost for the same reason of letting wine age. People "steep" their E-Juice  to get better flavor and better aroma out of the E-Juice they recently purchased.

For the most part, if you're getting a E-Juice  through O2 Easy then there should be no need to steep your E-Juice . Though it is suggested you let your TOBACCO flavors steep to get the full taste out of it. I good amount of time to let a 12ml bottle to steep is 3-5 days. If you get a larger bottle it can steep for weeks at a time.

Here's a quick video from Shan Burkholder on steeping and DIY juices so you can see the process behind what we sell you: 



Below is an example of the visual difference you get with steeping. The one on the left has been steeped for about a week while the one on the right was not steeped and made fresh.




And that's it for now everyone, I hope this quick guide updated you with the term "steeping" and now if you have a flavor that's not quite what you expected; give this a try and see if the flavor hits the point of expectation you had for it.

As Always, Vape On!