Vape Shop: Safer Than a Kitchen...

So the CDC published this report on Evaluation of Chemical Exposures at a Vape Shop.

From the report...

In part it says, beginning on page #13 (underlines mine): "None of the airborne concentrations of the specific flavoring chemicals we measured were above applicable OELs although we detected low levels of two flavoring chemicals, diacetyl and 2,3-pentanedione, in the personal and area air samples. NIOSH has an action level for diacetyl of 2.6 ppb [NIOSH 2016] but our sampling method (evacuated canisters) does not measure exposures at this level. Therefore, some of the personal air sampling results for diacetyl could have been above the NIOSH action level. When diacetyl exposures are above the action level, NIOSH recommends that employers develop a medical surveillance program and implement engineering and work practice controls to keep exposures below the REL [NIOSH 2016].

Formaldehyde is a breakdown product [see Note #1] of propylene glycol, which is present in the e-liquids used in e-cigarettes. Personal air sampling results for formaldehyde were well below the OSHA PEL and OSHA action level. They were also below the NIOSH REL, which is much lower than the OSHA PEL. Area sampling results showed that background formaldehyde concentrations were similar to the personal sampling results. Low concentrations of formaldehyde exist in many indoor environments because of off gassing from furnishings, clothing, and other materials.

In addition to the specific flavoring chemicals we looked for in the air samples (diacetyl, 2,3-pentanedione, 2,3-hexanedione, acetoin, and acetaldehyde), we also identified other flavoring chemicals and VOCs in the air of the vape shop. Results from the area air samples we collected using thermal desorption tubes showed very low concentrations of 102 chemicals. These included chemicals found in cleaning products used in the shop (limonene, isopropanol), chemicals that are common ingredients in personal care products (decamethylcyclopentasiloxane), and other chemicals that could be classified as flavoring chemicals. Background concentrations of airborne nicotine, propylene glycol, and VOCs in the air of the shop were also very low.

Over the 2 days of our evaluation, we observed that very few customers vaped inside the shop. In contrast, we found that employees vaped throughout the day. Therefore, most of an employee’s exposure to vaping-related chemicals inside this vape shop was due to direct inhalation of vaping-related chemicals from their personal e-cigarette, as well as secondhand emissions from coworkers’ e-cigarettes. Our air sampling only measured vaping chemicals present in the air from the emissions of e-cigarettes and exhaled breath. ..."

Note #1: Google "propylene glycol breakdown products" and various variations.  You don't see much about formaldehyde (see this Dow publication as an example).  It probably happens but its unclear from reading through a number of similar articles and publications how or when.

In general from reading this it would seem that anything dangerous in the vape shop is there for non-vaping reasons, e.g., outgassing of furniture, cleaning products, etc.

I would say a kitchen is far, far more "dangerous" than a vape shop (see Diacetyl - What's the Real, Objective Danger?) as far as the airborne chemicals they are looking for...

Scott Gottlieb: Muddled Milk, Nicotine and Hypocrisy

I like to spend a little time over at Ars Technica now and then.

Today I found this article (What is Milk? Answer Muddled after Almond Milk Mixes with Cow Milk).  In the article FDA Commission Scott Gottleib (image left from this FDA web page) is said to note: "Just last month, Food and Drug Administration commissioner Scott Gottlieb noted that current agency standards indeed identify milk products specifically as those derived from lactating animals—which would exclude non-mammary liquids wrung from nuts, soy beans, rice, coconuts etc. from being called “milk.” Gottlieb said the agency would review the situation and soon issue a new regulatory guidance on how beverage makers should use the term in product marketing and labeling..." [ underline mine ].

So it would appear Commission Gottlieb doesn't like things to called what they are not, i.e., "milk" from almonds is not actually milk as from lactating animals.

The full FDA commentary appears to be here.

In we see Gottlieb saying: "... One area that needs greater clarity – and which has been the subject of much discussion of late – is the wide variety of plant-based foods that are being positioned in the marketplace as substitutes for standardized dairy products. Many of these plant-based foods use traditional dairy terms (e.g., milk, yogurt, cheese) in the name of the product. For instance, we’ve seen a proliferation of products made from soy, almond or rice calling themselves milk. ..."

I wonder if this also applies to calling "nicotine" a "tobacco product?"

What hypocrisy!!!

C'mon Scott...  What do you mean here?  Clearly nicotine is a chemical compound found many places in nature, not just tobacco.

The article title also makes the same point I did in this post (Schrodinger's Nicotine: Not Derived From Tobacco) about how mixing "tobacco nicotine" and "non-tobacco nicotine" wreaks havoc on your CTP's  scientifically nonsensical ideas.

Thoroughly mixing one liter of nicotine from another, non-tobacco source into a 100 liters of nicotine from tobacco by the most basic of science makes the resulting nicotine "not derived from tobacco." (Of course, at the atomic level all nicotine is just that, nicotine.  You can pretend all day long that somehow a molecule from one plant, like tobacco, is different from a molecule of the same compound from another but that would simply be false...) 

So to me it looks like even you don't believe the silly non-scientific bullshit your Center for Tobacco Products (CTP) is pushing.

Trump put you in charge of the FDA and the general consensus was you had, at least at one point, owned stock in a vaping company.  This gave us all hope you would set things straight for the vaping world.

Up until now I (and many others) have been disappointed.  Sure you extended the doomsday clock a few more years but nothing came of addressing the true nonsense.  (Doomsday is still doomsday.)

But perhaps your press release on milk means there is hope.

From my reading of the tea leaves your boss doesn't like nonsense and bullshit regulations.

Yet hear you are - directly contradicting the CTP with what I think makes perfect sense.

C'mon Scott, apply your thinking across the board.

(Oh, and BTW, your high tech pals at Juul aren't trying to poison children.  It's your lax state tobacco programs and parents of smoking children that are undermining you monthly stats.)