What the scientists and Engineers are up to

[VapingBad]

Found links to this on another forum, some interesting stuff there I have linked to 2 interesting session but there are more nationalacademies.org/hmd/Activities/PublicHealth/HealthEffectsofElectronicNicotineDeliverySystems/2017-Feb-21/Videos/Welcome/1-Welcome-Video.aspx.  They don't have any complex maths or science in, more overviews. 

All from "The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine" (US) Committee on the Review of the Health Effects of Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS): An Information-Gathering Workshop.

Mod tech, particularly helping researchers understand the parameters that are used and should be used in studies, this is the main designer of Evolv boards.


E Liquid composition, very interesting including some new things like ultra pure nic and an alternative to PG & VG.

[VapingBad]

CE4s have a lot to answer for (near end of 2nd video), well people using them for studies do.

[jevans]

Bloody hell VapingBad , they are two in depth videos!
Would love to hear them in simple terms.
Noticed the 2nd vid featured the Subtank Mini.

Jim

[VapingBad]

Mar 5, 2017 1:38:39 GMT jevans said:

Bloody hell VapingBad , they are two in depth videos!
Would love to hear them in simple terms.
Noticed the 2nd vid featured the Subtank Mini.

Jim

There are some discussions panel video there that are less techie, but even the 2 I posted have a lot of info that is not too in depth, explaining to the attendees how studies should be done, faults with lots of them and general explanation of how vaping works.  A lot of good stuff about how temp, power and coil size impact on safety, like the CE4 at 10 W puts out far far more Acrolein than a SubTank does at 35 W.

[DaveJ]

Mar 5, 2017 2:27:35 GMT VapingBad said:

...
like the CE4 at 10 W puts out far far more Acrolein than a SubTank does at 35 W.

CE4 *shudder* Dreadful things.

I remember the coupla CE4s I first started with. Even at 6 to 7 watts they could not vape reliably without regular dry hits, even with high PG juice. No way, no how would those things handle 10 watts.

Anyone using them in any sort of study needs to be slapped. Hard.

[GunJack]

Sadly, I've ploughed through all those vids, and the one thing that struck me was that, apart from a couple of speakers, is that there seems to be a push towards standardisation (even Mr Evolv came across like that, disappointingly).

If that's going to be the future, think I'm going to have to start looking at RTA-type devices and stockpile them and kanthal

[VapingBad]

Mar 7, 2017 15:29:03 GMT GunJack said:

Sadly, I've ploughed through all those vids, and the one thing that struck me was that, apart from a couple of speakers, is that there seems to be a push towards standardisation (even Mr Evolv came across like that, disappointingly).

If that's going to be the future, think I'm going to have to start looking at RTA-type devices and stockpile them and kanthal

Remember this was all about how they test ENDs for clinical studies etc, so for that repeatability is fundamental.  The Evolv take with temp protection for any atty and opt-in statistics gathering from real vapers is a good balance for the interests of both researches and vapers IMO, it is still open system (510).

[GunJack]

Mar 7, 2017 20:48:26 GMT VapingBad said:

Mar 7, 2017 15:29:03 GMT GunJack said:

Sadly, I've ploughed through all those vids, and the one thing that struck me was that, apart from a couple of speakers, is that there seems to be a push towards standardisation (even Mr Evolv came across like that, disappointingly).

If that's going to be the future, think I'm going to have to start looking at RTA-type devices and stockpile them and kanthal

Remember this was all about how they test ENDs for clinical studies etc, so for that repeatability is fundamental.  The Evolv take with temp protection for any atty and opt-in statistics gathering from real vapers is a good balance for the interests of both researches and vapers IMO, it is still open system (510).

Yes, i get that it was mainly about testing, but the under current was definitely more than that...if you listened to the guy who went through the stats about new vapers trying 20-30 flavours and several types of hardware to get going, his points about real-world use were almost rubbished in one of the q&a sessions, but surely that is what is needed, not some hypothetical "device" used for testing juice?

[GunJack]

P.s it was also blindingly obvious that most of them really dont understand the whole thing of vaping, from the misuse of terminology to the not knowing what a mod is to how, and this is crucial, is that we're all different and what works (hardware and juice combo) to get one person off fags wwill be different for the next bod...you cant use a standardised setup to prove efficacy for quitting.

Also the fact that spike whatshername (as supposedly a vaper and vendor) doesnt want people making their own juice or coils "for safety"...smacks of profit before health... She made some other decidedly dodgy comments also, but she was early on so cant remember them without going back and watching again but i remember thinking at the time, with friends like her.....

[GunJack]

Stoopid phone, hate trying to post on it...


Ritter in session 3 and Kiesker? (vb linked above) were the two who got it, not only in their presentations but in their q&a sessions also, far more real-world and not trying to standardise for the sake of trying to measure every last little detail...

Sorry if this comes over a bit ranty, but it seemed to me this should have been a golden opportunity gone begging, and it frustrates the hell out of me

[charliehorse]

Ive only watched the first video with the Evolve guy but thought it was really weird about 11 minutes in with the graph on puff time.
Apparently the peak average puff time is about 2 seconds ??
I'm probably missing something obvious here and I hope someone can point it out to me

[VapingBad]

Mar 7, 2017 23:09:12 GMT GunJack said:

Mar 7, 2017 20:48:26 GMT VapingBad said:

Remember this was all about how they test ENDs for clinical studies etc, so for that repeatability is fundamental.  The Evolv take with temp protection for any atty and opt-in statistics gathering from real vapers is a good balance for the interests of both researches and vapers IMO, it is still open system (510).

Yes, i get that it was mainly about testing, but the under current was definitely more than that...if you listened to the guy who went through the stats about new vapers trying 20-30 flavours and several types of hardware to get going, his points about real-world use were almost rubbished in one of the q&a sessions, but surely that is what is needed, not some hypothetical "device" used for testing juice?

I haven't watched the Q&A you mention, but they need a reliable way to test, that's their job so standardising on one or even a few typical set ups is a given if the results are to be comparable and provide a consistent body of easily verifiable data.  Most of the people have just seen the unrealistic testing and come from a different background and I for one don't want them to keep overpowering CE4s and calling it data (information to be more correct).  IMO it is very positive that they are getting lead in the right direction, sure it's a learning curve for them as vaping is for all of us at first.  EG the bit were it was said the standard test puff was 30 seconds, but they could go here and get stats on a large number of real vapers for well over a year showing the avg puff is around 50 W and just over 2 seconds. Only DNA users ATM, but it is an open protocol that any manufacture can submit data to or do their own version if they want to help, but it is real data on real vapers that challenges the old theoretical model and far far better than no real community data at all. We need the results from realistic testing and anything that gets them closer is a good thing IMO, sure they don't all get it yet, but there were some good speakers.

The one that made me bulk was the lady who ran a vape shop who didn't have a scobby about charging and though putting a high amp micro USB supply was dangerous, not since the old cloned egos and it has never been with stuff that uses a micro USB leads.  That level of ignorance for someone selling the kit is astounding, can we be surprised scientists that have probable never smoked let lone vaped are equally ill informed?  It's all new, it's not like we learnt this stuff while growing up from a our grand parents and until we find facts ignorance fills the void by definition.  That's not necessarily bad intent, just nature of being human we take time to learn things and most don't even bother trying if they don't have to.

[GunJack]

Mar 7, 2017 23:44:02 GMT VapingBad said:

Mar 7, 2017 23:09:12 GMT GunJack said:

Yes, i get that it was mainly about testing, but the under current was definitely more than that...if you listened to the guy who went through the stats about new vapers trying 20-30 flavours and several types of hardware to get going, his points about real-world use were almost rubbished in one of the q&a sessions, but surely that is what is needed, not some hypothetical "device" used for testing juice?

I haven't watched the Q&A you mention, but they need a reliable way to test, that's their job so standardising on one or even a few typical set ups is a given if the results are to be comparable and provide a consistent body of easily verifiable data.  Most of the people have just seen the unrealistic testing and come from a different background and I for one don't want them to keep overpowering CE4s and calling it data (information to be more correct).  IMO it is very positive that they are getting lead in the right direction, sure it's a learning curve for them as vaping is for all of us at first.  EG the bit were it was said the standard test puff was 30 seconds, but they could go here and get stats on a large number of real vapers for well over a year showing the avg puff is around 50 W and just over 2 seconds. Only DNA users ATM, but it is an open protocol that any manufacture can submit data to or do their own version if they want to help, but it is real data on real vapers that challenges the old theoretical model and far far better than no real community data at all. We need the results from realistic testing and anything that gets them closer is a good thing IMO, sure they don't all get it yet, but there were some good speakers.

The one that made me bulk was the lady who ran a vape shop who didn't have a scobby about charging and though putting a high amp micro USB supply was dangerous, not since the old cloned egos and it has never been with stuff that uses a micro USB leads.  That level of ignorance for someone selling the kit is astounding, can we be surprised scientists that have probable never smoked let lone vaped are equally ill informed?  It's all new, it's not like we learnt this stuff while growing up from a our grand parents and until we find facts ignorance fills the void by definition.  That's not necessarily bad intent, just nature of being human we take time to learn things and most don't even bother trying if they don't have to.

Some fair points in there Jon, and i'm glad its not just me about spike (i posted about her whilst you were writing this i think )

[VapingBad]

Are you actually saying an honest effort to make ecig testing more realistic is a bad thing f**k my old boots no wonder PH hates us Sorry if I got you wrong, but that is what I'm getting here.

(ETA posted before I read the last reply)

[VapingBad]

Scientists disagreeing, especially about new things is what they do and how they discover and prove things, show them good tests they can repeat and get the same results they will believe them, but they are proof orientated as a group. There have been so many poor test and a good few ridiculous ones any efforts by a scientific body to improve should be encouraged IMO,.