The California Department of Public Health has been making efforts to put to rest whether vaping produces harmful vapors that can affect the health of passerbys. Known as “secondhand smoke” when referring to cigarettes, the Department of Public Health went on to do a study to determine whether vapor from vape pens, e-cigs, and vaporizers produce a similarly harmful vapor.
Dr. Michael Siegel is a public health expert and assisted in disseminating the results of the study. In his blog, he stated that, “conducted under very high exposure conditions in a small, non-ventilated vape shop with many employees and customers vaping and clouds of vapor visible, [they] did not document any dangerous levels of exposure to any hazardous chemical.”
As the California Department of Public Health have been carrying air sampling inside of numerous California vape shops, their initiative to determine the health effects of any secondhand vapor exposure, the results of their study are exactly as we believed — the results show that the amount of toxic substances that are present in the air where a lot of vaping is taking place, are of insignificant levels.
These results were obtained from an air sample of a vape shop that was not ventilated. This is even better than simply collecting a sample from next to a vaper indoors or outdoors — by collecting air samples from a non-ventilated vape shop itself, this sample is the best way to prove that no matter the amount of vapor in the air and no matter how enclosed the space, that unlike cigarettes, there is no such thing as secondhand vaping. In fact, the results have proven that vapor is harmless. Imagine that being a room full of smokers? It would be a death trap.
The results for this report were based on the air samples from a small and non-ventilated vape shop, where 13 customers and many of the vape shop employees were vaping as the samples were being taken.
This sample meant that this was a situation that one would be considered a situation that presents a high level of exposure to vapor, secondhand. Despite the unfavorable conditions, the results still proved that there were no dangerous levels of exposure to any hazardous chemicals.
Main Results of Air Samples
The following bullet points show how much of each chemical were captured in the non-ventilated vape shop as individuals vaped actively — the results are impressive.
- 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
Dr. Siegel pointed out that formaldehyde was detected — but the amount detected was consistent with levels found in outdoor and indoor air levels under regular, baseline conditions. Ethanol (alcohol) and isopropyl alcohol were found in non-significant numbers as well.
Even nicotine exposure was scientifically non-existent!
Will This Finally Put to Rest the Fears About Vaping?
One thing is certain — there is no justification for the U.S. government’s continuing regulations and bans on vaping in public. The study just shows that under real-life conditions, that “secondhand vaping” doesn’t exist and does not pose any health risks.
While smoking traditional tobacco cigarettes in a non-ventilated room with well over a dozen smokers actively smoking while an air sample is taken would be full of hundreds or thousands of deadly chemicals, this does not appear to be true at all for vapor. In fact, vapor is completely harmless.
Since vaping has been proven not to pose any significant health hazard to bystanders, why does the government (FDA, public health officials, and politicians) continue to demonize this harm reduction tool? As we have contended, it’s all about money changing hands and politics.
It is with hope that the more scientific studies are released, the more that politicians, the legislature, and government eases up on their demonization of vaping — the public’s perception of vaping is based on their opinions, so it is crucial for the truth to be revealed on an unbiased, scientific platform.
For now, the U.S. will not be as enlightened as Canada, the U.K., and other developed nations across Europe and Asia, regarding the much-safer alternative of vaping.