Yet more detailed stuff. Dr Farsalinos.

[vereybowring]

Scientific but OK to read.

www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/10/6/2500

[lynxkat]

Same guy ?, sorry if thats what you were pointing too.

www.ecigarette-research.com/web/

[vereybowring]

Same guy but a report published in a journal for the link rather than his website (looks better if you end up linking to it if its from a journal)

[lynxkat]

Hi, I was pointing out the survey, click on survey, they do ask for email address at the end of the survey by the way. But you can see comments at the bottom of the survey page 10, he gives an update. Might make one's mind up whether to part take or not. 

[vereybowring]

I did it when he first put his site up, very worthwhile.

[lynxkat]

ok, was not sure if people knew it was there.

[vereybowring]

Oh yes, but was showing his latest report showing up flaws in evidence used to decide on nicotine levels for EU legislation. Basically they are using test methodology that is unrealistic - no surprises really.

[lynxkat]

Yes. got it, am a bit slow tonight sooory. 

[Jen]

I love that abstract, if nothing else then because of his use of the term 'interpuff interval'

[robby]

That`s an interesting read, it makes a total nonsense of the 4mg/ml suggested levels.

"Although a 9 mg/mL nicotine-containing liquid was
used, nicotine delivery to EC users was still 54% lower compared to a 1 mg-nicotine tobacco cigarette
and 59% lower compared to a nicotine inhaler. This provides a plausible explanation for the fact that
the majority of EC users consume liquids with nicotine concentration much higher than 4 mg/mL,
as reported in several internet forums and observed in surveys [12,23]. It was calculated that, in order to
deliver nicotine amount similar to one nicotine-inhaler cartridge or one tobacco cigarette, liquids of
20–24 mg/mL nicotine concentration should be used. Therefore, the reasoning for selecting 4 mg/mL
nicotine concentration as comparable to NRTs in the TPD cannot be supported by the results of this
study."