Air Sampling confirms secondhand vapor is harmless

[Alex]

vapingpost.com
Air Sampling confirms secondhand vapor is harmless
By Diane Caruana-May 3, 2017


The California Department of Public Health has been carrying out air sampling in vape shops throughout the state, as part of its initiative to determine the health effects of second-hand vapor exposure.

Earlier today in his blog, Public Health Expert Dr. Michael Siegel pointed out that the results for this report were obtained from a relatively small and non-ventilated vape shop, where many of the employees and 13 customers were actively vaping while the sampling was taking place, hence what would be considered a situation presenting a high level of exposure to second-hand vapor. However, given all these unfavourable conditions, the results still reported no dangerous levels of exposure to any hazardous chemicals.

“This study, although conducted under very high exposure conditions in a small, non-ventilated vape shop with many employees and customers vaping and clouds of vapor visible, did not document any dangerous levels of exposure to any hazardous chemical.”Dr. Michael Siegel

The main results of the air sampling go as follows :

• Nicotine: Not detected
• Glycidol: Not detected
• Formaldehyde: 7.2 ppb
• Diacetyl: Not detected using standard method
• 2,3-Pentanedione: Not detected using standard method
• Acetyl butyryl: Not detected using standard method
• Acetoin: Not detected using standard method
• Acetone: Not detected
• Ethyl benzene: Not detected
• m,p-Xylene: Not detected
• o-Xylene: Not detected
• Toluene: Not detected
• Acetaldehyde: Not detected
• Acetonitrile: Not detected
• alpha-pinene: Not detected
• Benzene: Not detected
• Chloroform: Not detected
• d-Limonene: Not detected
• Methylene chloride: Not detected
• Methyl methacrylate: Not detected
• n-Hexane: Not detected
• Styrene: Not detected

Finally putting fears about formaldehyde to rest?

Dr. Siegel pointed out that the level of formaldehyde detected, is consistent with the levels normally found in indoor and outdoor air levels under baseline conditions.

Dr. Siegel pointed out that the level of formaldehyde detected, is consistent with the levels normally found in indoor and outdoor air levels under baseline conditions, adding that the only other chemicals detected were ethanol (alcohol) and isopropyl alcohol.

“This study, although conducted under very high exposure conditions in a small, non-ventilated vape shop with many employees and customers vaping and clouds of vapor visible, did not document any dangerous levels of exposure to any hazardous chemical. Nicotine exposure was essentially non-existent. Formaldehyde exposure was no different than in many indoor and outdoor environments at baseline. Acetone, acetoin, other aldehydes, toluene, benzene, and xylene were not detected. Chemicals that have been associated with “popcorn lung” were also not detected by the standard method.” stated Siegel.

No justification for governments to ban vaping

“This study adds to the evidence that under real-life conditions, ‘secondhand vaping’ does not appear to pose any significant health risks.” concluded the public health expert. He added that whilst he himself has been behind many of the smoking bans that took place, based on this current evidence he fails to see a reason as to why governments should ban vaping in public spaces. “With regards to vaping, I just don’t see any reasonable evidence at this time that it poses any significant health hazard to bystanders.”

source: http://www.vapingpost.com/2017/05/03/air-sampling-confirms-secondhand-vapor-is-harmless/

 

[craigb]

That is fantastic news. Hopefully there will be a few more independent studies that repeat these findings.

But this should not be seen as cause for holding cloud blowing contests in the forecourts of major shopping malls... While the vapor may be harmless, it is still obnoxious to non vapors.

The occasional toot outside the shops tho...

 

[SAVaper]

Great news.
Lets hope employers start allowing vaping more and more in general areas.
Or am I just hope full....

 

[hands]

Lets hope that this would get the same media attention as the fear mongering reports posted all over.

 

[ET]

Luckily vaping is allowed where i work

 

[Scott]

Luckily vaping is allowed where i work

I can say that after "educating" my employer that vaping does not in any fashion involve the use of tobacco I have been granted permission to use my vape device in my office. And this is a government building. I may just be fortunate at present but believe that the tide is turning towards the use of vaping devices as a healthier alternative to tobacco use.

 

[Silver]

Thanks for sharing @Alex
Lovely!

 

[Tair]

There's a picture that says that second hand vapor is like breathing steam from hot tomato soup... lol

 

[RichJB]

I can say that after "educating" my employer that vaping does not in any fashion involve the use of tobacco I have been granted permission to use my vape device in my office. And this is a government building. I may just be fortunate at present but believe that the tide is turning towards the use of vaping devices as a healthier alternative to tobacco use.

That is good news although I think we're dealing with two separate issues here: the right to vape in a personal work space and the right to vape in public. I think they could well soften on the right to vape in personal work space as long as you work alone in an office. But the right to vape in public areas where smoking is banned involves two issues: potential harm to bystanders and also the desire by society to not 'renormalise smoking' by having people 'smoking' (i.e. vaping) in areas where it is not allowed.

They are working on the understanding that kids emulate adults and that if kids see adults smoking (even if it's just vaping) in public the whole time, kids will be more inclined to think it socially acceptable and therefore to try it. Even if it is proven that second-hand vapour poses no risk to people in public places, I suspect the DoH will balk at allowing vaping in public. The WHO wants to make it that cigarettes and smoking become almost invisible: no smoking in public view, no advertising, no cigarettes on display in shops, you have to ask at a special counter for the brand you want and the assistant then fetches it from a back room. Also no branding on cig packs, just plain brown wrapper. "Out of sight, out of mind" is the approach. I suspect they will apply that to vaping too.

 

[Scott]

That is good news although I think we're dealing with two separate issues here: the right to vape in a personal work space and the right to vape in public. I think they could well soften on the right to vape in personal work space as long as you work alone in an office. But the right to vape in public areas where smoking is banned involves two issues: potential harm to bystanders and also the desire by society to not 'renormalise smoking' by having people 'smoking' (i.e. vaping) in areas where it is not allowed.

They are working on the understanding that kids emulate adults and that if kids see adults smoking (even if it's just vaping) in public the whole time, kids will be more inclined to think it socially acceptable and therefore to try it. Even if it is proven that second-hand vapour poses no risk to people in public places, I suspect the DoH will balk at allowing vaping in public. The WHO wants to make it that cigarettes and smoking become almost invisible: no smoking in public view, no advertising, no cigarettes on display in shops, you have to ask at a special counter for the brand you want and the assistant then fetches it from a back room. Also no branding on cig packs, just plain brown wrapper. "Out of sight, out of mind" is the approach. I suspect they will apply that to vaping too.

I was just reliably informed that two doctorate students at UCT are doing research into the health related issues regarding vaping and in particular the so-called passive risks to people exposed to vape "smoke" . I will keep hounding my source for development's.

 

[Scott]

I

vapingpost.com
Air Sampling confirms secondhand vapor is harmless
By Diane Caruana-May 3, 2017


The California Department of Public Health has been carrying out air sampling in vape shops throughout the state, as part of its initiative to determine the health effects of second-hand vapor exposure.

Earlier today in his blog, Public Health Expert Dr. Michael Siegel pointed out that the results for this report were obtained from a relatively small and non-ventilated vape shop, where many of the employees and 13 customers were actively vaping while the sampling was taking place, hence what would be considered a situation presenting a high level of exposure to second-hand vapor. However, given all these unfavourable conditions, the results still reported no dangerous levels of exposure to any hazardous chemicals.

“This study, although conducted under very high exposure conditions in a small, non-ventilated vape shop with many employees and customers vaping and clouds of vapor visible, did not document any dangerous levels of exposure to any hazardous chemical.”Dr. Michael Siegel

The main results of the air sampling go as follows :

• Nicotine: Not detected
• Glycidol: Not detected
• Formaldehyde: 7.2 ppb
• Diacetyl: Not detected using standard method
• 2,3-Pentanedione: Not detected using standard method
• Acetyl butyryl: Not detected using standard method
• Acetoin: Not detected using standard method
• Acetone: Not detected
• Ethyl benzene: Not detected
• m,p-Xylene: Not detected
• o-Xylene: Not detected
• Toluene: Not detected
• Acetaldehyde: Not detected
• Acetonitrile: Not detected
• alpha-pinene: Not detected
• Benzene: Not detected
• Chloroform: Not detected
• d-Limonene: Not detected
• Methylene chloride: Not detected
• Methyl methacrylate: Not detected
• n-Hexane: Not detected
• Styrene: Not detected

Finally putting fears about formaldehyde to rest?

Dr. Siegel pointed out that the level of formaldehyde detected, is consistent with the levels normally found in indoor and outdoor air levels under baseline conditions.

Dr. Siegel pointed out that the level of formaldehyde detected, is consistent with the levels normally found in indoor and outdoor air levels under baseline conditions, adding that the only other chemicals detected were ethanol (alcohol) and isopropyl alcohol.

“This study, although conducted under very high exposure conditions in a small, non-ventilated vape shop with many employees and customers vaping and clouds of vapor visible, did not document any dangerous levels of exposure to any hazardous chemical. Nicotine exposure was essentially non-existent. Formaldehyde exposure was no different than in many indoor and outdoor environments at baseline. Acetone, acetoin, other aldehydes, toluene, benzene, and xylene were not detected. Chemicals that have been associated with “popcorn lung” were also not detected by the standard method.” stated Siegel.

No justification for governments to ban vaping

“This study adds to the evidence that under real-life conditions, ‘secondhand vaping’ does not appear to pose any significant health risks.” concluded the public health expert. He added that whilst he himself has been behind many of the smoking bans that took place, based on this current evidence he fails to see a reason as to why governments should ban vaping in public spaces. “With regards to vaping, I just don’t see any reasonable evidence at this time that it poses any significant health hazard to bystanders.”

source: http://www.vapingpost.com/2017/05/03/air-sampling-confirms-secondhand-vapor-is-harmless/

did some research and it appears vape enthusiasts are more refraining from indulging in public places rather than being prohibited from doing so! There is no legislation prohibiting vaping in public places as it doesn't fall within the ambit of the Tobacco Control legislation. However, the "right of admission reserved" signage affords owners/managers' the privilege of forbidding vaping.