How Regulators Misunderstand The Toxicity Arguments About E-Cigarettes


The federal Food and Drug Administration (

People often assume that these e-liquids are a final product once they are mixed, but the reactions create new molecules in the e-liquids … Researchers from Yale University’s Tobacco Center of Regulatory Science, American Journal of Preventive Medicine

“People often assume that these e-liquids are a final product once they are mixed,” Erythropel argued. “But the reactions create new molecules in the e-liquids, and it doesn’t just happen in e-liquids from small vape shops, but also in those from the biggest manufacturers in the U.S.”

Erythropel certainly provides a valid point and offers another rigorous addition to the growing body of work, measuring the overall long-term harm and benefits to vaping. However, other researchers and Juul Labs noted that there several flaws to consider in this study, thus insinuating a state of misunderstanding and could predict some potential outcomes from FDA-led toxins regulation.

Juul Labs released a statement to several media outlets, including Vaping Post, that the researchers “failed to take into account real-world conditions, including realistic human exposure to vapor products like Juul.” The company spokesperson additionally noted that the machine that was used to mimic the vaping behavior wildly overestimates how much vapor a user would ingest after a puff or draw. As a result, this offers flawed depictions.

Regulatory flaws, research flaws

Michael Siegel is a prominent physician in preventive medicine from the School of Public Health at Berkeley (USA). Taking a firm stand for electronic cigarette, Michael Siegel has been personally attacked and excluded from focus groups around the tobacco issue, despite his high reputation in the United States and Europe. His positrons are clear: the electronic cigarette is at least as efficient as any other alternative treatments. He denounces the influence of the US classic cigarette manufacturers (which provide considerable assistance to help the most disadvantaged families and in terms of social security) and those he calls Big Pharma; some influences that affect the development of the electronic cigarette industry.

“>Michael Siegel, a friend of the Post and a professor of community health sciences at the Boston University School of Public Health, told me in an email that the flaws of any research like the Yale study and how they impact regulatory policy rest upon intentional or misunderstandings of the technical components of a vaping device.

“The reason why food-grade ingredients used in vapes could be problematic is that they have been approved as being generally safe when ingested,” he said. The study analyzed chemicals like propylene glycol and glycerol, which so happen to be on the list of the FDA’s request for more information regarding potential toxicity concerns. “In e-cigarettes, they are delivered via inhalation. The long-term effects of the inhalation of many of these chemicals has not been well studied. My main concern is not with the inhalation of propylene glycol or glycerin.”

He points out that it is the technical configuration of a device, the use of the device, and concerns related to overheating.

Vaping products that have careful temperature control, overcharge protection, etc., do not present a high risk of producing these unwanted chemicals.Michael Siegel, Professor of community health sciences at the Boston University School of Public Health

“My main concern is that when either propylene glycol or glycerin are heated to too high a temperature, they degrade into other chemicals that may be problematic, especially

Previous articlePublic Health Expert: E-Cig Bans Undermine Anti-Smoking Efforts
Next articleCatchie Pod Review | A Premium Prefilled Pod Vape?