How Many Blends and other Items have PG in Them?

[pantsBoots]

But I thought there are denatured spirits you can drink, formulated this way.

Denatured alcohol is ethanol with methanol added, as well as other additives. It can be drank, but only once.

Good conversation regarding PG. Topically, it is a benign substance as mentioned above, but taken internally (including via inhalation) is known to be toxic, though the degree is not yet well-studied. All of the jokers vaping are providing real-world data that will be analyzed, possibly after it's too late.

 

[Egg Shen]

Denatured alcohol is ethanol with methanol added, as well as other additives. It can be drank, but only once.

Good conversation regarding PG. Topically, it is a benign substance as mentioned above, but taken internally (including via inhalation) is known to be toxic, though the degree is not yet well-studied. All of the jokers vaping are providing real-world data that will be analyzed, possibly after it's too late.

My Aunt retired from the FDA a year or 2 back. She was like the head honcho. She used to tell my little cousins who are always vaping indeed how very bad it is. While I do not blindly trust the FDA, I can tell that vape smoke does a number on your lungs, having smoked a few. They left my lungs all caked up - it doesn’t expel easily like the tar from a natural plant. It’ll be interesting to see when the data hits, but as far as the FDA is concerned they have their data and it is no bueno. I’d imagine a pipe smoker comes into so much less PG than a vape user. And I love me some aromatics so I’m banking on that. I do not, and would not inhale them though, as I do not consider them natural and certainly not organic. A few bowls of uninhaled aromatic leaf a week seems low risk, but not no-risk. The skin is a two way street; it doesn’t simply excrete. So there is a chance for toxins to be transmitted transdermally. I’m sensitive to additives/chemical junk in processed food and I don’t eat it for that reason. I do not sense anything undesirable when I smoke my Danish Blends so I’m gonna keep smoking them without worry unless my body tells me to stop. And as a side note - from a processing standpoint honey, in large volumes may be unwieldy to apply and more expensive than PG so I can see why they use it, especially if it’s “generally recognized as safe”.

 

[bullet08]

I have no problem with PG. XXX on the other hand, needs definite improvement.

Smoked vape for handful of years. If it was gonna kill me, I would be dead already. Funny thing about toxicity and so on.. If you feed gallons/pounds of whatever to a lab rat, they will probably die. Did you know you can die from drinking too much water?

 

[craig61a]

 

[Briar Lee]

Right, we don’t know how safe something is.

I certainly don’t know and have all the facts, but when you look at the vast amount of consumer based products for external use and the vast amount of medical products for external use, the point I’m making, is that there are not a lot of things that are produced in the world, where they can be applied both externally and internally.

The best use of PG as far as I’m concerned is in winterizing water pipes in travel trailers.

Just a few tablespoons of conventional ethylene glycol antifreeze have and will continue to put the grandchildren of the stingy RV owner into the graveyard each spring when their parents take out the travel trailer or motor coach.

Propylene Glycol based RV antifreeze is food grade, harmless when accidentally consumed.

RV Antifreeze -50°F Protection Non-Toxic Potable Water Antifreeze | eBay

Details: ----50° Burst protection ---1-Gallon ---Lubricates seals and gaskets ---Safe for marine engine blocks ---Safe for drinking water systems preparing for winter storage ---Used for pools, boats, RVs, and mobile homes ---Made from materials considered non-toxic by the FDA ---Will not harm...

www.ebay.com

 

[Michigan_Bill]

Propylene Glycol is a very safe chemical. Here is how this works: Health Canada maintains a list called "Generally Accepted As Safe" or GAAS. The US FDA has a few regulations which amount to, if a product is on the list for GAAS, it does not need any safety testing. The reason is, the product is considered so safe, that it would be very difficult or impossible to test it for safety. Think of things lIke purified water, or table salt (NaCl) or glycerin. So long as they meet requirements for composition and purity, there are no safety requirements.

So GAAS ingredients are fine for products which are used externally or inhaled or injected. What about burned? That’s where it gets complicated. A glycol like PG can form all sorts of compounds when it is burned, especially when it is burned with other things at the same time, for example, tobacco. I assume that most of the PG is vaporized when the tobacco is heated, but some small proportion would inevitably be burned.

When I say that the combustion products are complicated, I mean that some combustion products are commonly considered carcinogenic, but it's not that easy. For example burning of a glycol like PG will often yield various phenols. Some phenols are irritating and my cause cancer, but others are seen as anti-carcinogenic.

I suppose one answer might be, if you are really worried about PG in tobacco, avoid blends known to be high in PG content. I myself doubt that PG is any worse than honey or sugar as a topping. Chemically, sugars are also glycols, and yield similar combustion products. And tobaccos themselves contain sugars.

 

[Michigan_Bill]

By the way, I have a theory on why aromatic tobacco blends sometimes taste "goopy." I think that most of the Propylene Glycol is vaporized as the char works it way down the chamber. By itself, PG doesn’t have much of a taste. But if you puff on the pipe too fast, the vaporized PG starts to condense on the smoke particles. These glommed-together particles of PG then stick to your mouth, creating a "goopy" taste. That's my theory.

 

[coys]

There is food-grade propylene glycol. It isn't dangerous in every circumstance. It's a question of concentration as it is with almost any chemical or substance.

 

[pantsBoots]

There is food-grade propylene glycol. It isn't dangerous in every circumstance. It's a question of concentration as it is with almost any chemical or substance.

Also route of ingestion. Until vaping became a thing, I'm not sure if there has ever been the large-scale inhalation of PG

 

[canucklehead]

Also route of ingestion. Until vaping became a thing, I'm not sure if there has ever been the large-scale inhalation of PG

There actually has been, it is what is used in most fog/smoke machines used in concerts, special effects, fire safety training, etc. I remember breathing clouds of strawberry scented fake smoke when I was a kid and taking a fire safety course, they had a little mobile house that they pumped full of "smoke" and the kids had to crawl through it.

 

[pantsBoots]

There actually has been, it is what is used in most fog/smoke machines used in concerts, special effects, fire safety training, etc. I remember breathing clouds of strawberry scented fake smoke when I was a kid and taking a fire safety course, they had a little mobile house that they pumped full of "smoke" and the kids had to crawl through it.

I wonder if there have been studies on the lights and efx people who are around it a lot. At least for establishing carcinogenicity, one of the factors in the equation is length of exposure. Surely attending one concert or rave doesn't measurably present a danger for inhaling PG

 

[PipeIT]

A lot of people are missing the point, and when you throw smoking into the mixture, most people are thinking;

Health & Smoking

Yes smoking isn’t safe, and it’s true some might care less about what is put in their tobacco, and think this is a pointless topic.

An important point to consider is having choices as consumers.

Also, people who are highly sensitive, allergies, etc., might want to also smoke as pure and natural a product as they can.

There’s also the Natural vs Artificial side of the fence.

So regardless of which side of the fence you stand on, we should have choices about the ingredients in our products, meaning, they’re listed on tobacco pouches and tins, so we can make informed choices as consumers.

How many of you actually shop for groceries and could care less about what the ingredients are, while others shop and read the labels and make choices?

This is only about one thing, ‘Listing Ingredients’, and allowing consumers to make choices.

I wish we could get every company listing the added ingredients in our tobacco, so we could pick and choose for whatever personal reasons we have, the blends we like.

Is it really such a bad thing to have tobacco companies list ingredients? hmm

 

[fireground_piper]

I do not want more regulation over a product that’s already going through the regulatory gamut.

Smoke whole leaf and enjoy.

 

[PipeIT]

I do not want more regulation over a product that’s already going through the regulatory gamut.

Smoke whole leaf and enjoy.

Yes, I agree, if we are talking government regulations here, and making things difficult, I’m not about any of this.

It would be nice if companies simply took it upon themselves and put the ingredients on the labels, without government regulation.

 

[ThermionicScott]

Yes, I agree, if we are talking government regulations here, and making things difficult, I’m not about any of this.

It would be nice if companies simply took it upon themselves and put the ingredients on the labels, without government regulation.

I'd imagine some of it falls under trade secrets. Very few people, and doubtfully anyone here, know exactly what all is in Coca-Cola either.

 

[PipeIT]

I'd imagine some of it falls under trade secrets. Very few people, and doubtfully anyone here, know exactly what all is in Coca-Cola either.

Very good point., if a company feels that divulging specifics on ingredients is giving away trade secrets.

Then...

Maybe at least we can get companies to simply list, it’s either all natural tobacco, or it has artificial ingredients.

Something along the wording like this as example;

This product is all natural, with no artificial ingredients
This product contains artificial ingredients

Maybe this is doable.. hmm

 

[ThermionicScott]

I believe the EU (or maybe just select countries within the EU, or something) requires some of that information to be published. Every so often, I'll be searching through old threads, and a link may or may not still work.

Here's one from BAT for Dunhill pipe tobaccos that had to be massaged a little to work: British American Tobacco Global Ingredients - Location Homepage - https://www.batme.com/servlet/PageMerge?usealt=i_btn4%2Ci_show&alturl=%2Fgroupms%2Fsites%2FBAT_6X3ENK.nsf%2FvwPagesWebLive%2FD23047A62F4081DB8025725E0067DFAF%3Fopendocument&mainurl=%2Fgroupms%2Fsites%2FBAT_6X3ENK.nsf%2FvwPagesWebLive%2FEEB7C53A3AC263148025728B005D9C0D%3Fopendocument&i_CTRY=Germany%2BDomestic&i_CLASS=PIPE&i_BRAND=DUNHILL&i_INGURL=

Here's a German site, looks like you can punch in a brand and it may or may not have info for them: Navigationspunkt Tabakzusatzstoffe-Datenbank - https://service.bmel.de/tabakerzeugnisse/index2.php?ssk=dd246d17bb&site_key=153

I've resigned myself to the fact that any commercial pipe tobacco I enjoy at least has some PG in it, preservatives, and probably sugar or other various flavoring agents, whether it is claimed to be "pure" tobacco or not... but this will let you have some fun digging.

 

[PipeIT]

Prune juice in Dunhill! LOL

That BAT list looks damm scary...

Well, if we can keep regulation out of it, I’m not looking to have companies give us a big list, just to simply place on the labels, telling, if it’s all natural, or it contains artificls ingredients, that’s all.

 

[Jef]

I just don't worry about PG. Being a cigarette smoker for 51 years and ingesting all of the chemicals contained in todays food. I just can't see worrying about it.
jef

 

[MattRVA]

Prune juice in Dunhill! LOL

That BAT list looks damm scary...

Well, if we can keep regulation out of it, I’m not looking to have companies give us a big list, just to simply place on the labels, telling, if it’s all natural, or it contains artificls ingredients, that’s all.

I’m with you 100% I definitely want to know what’s in my tobacco, opting for the most natural. I’m also interested in being convinced that a tobacco blender has the chemical knowledge to start messing with casings anyway. I’m a little weary about what they do to the blends and I’d love to try natural uncased tobacco to see if it’s as bad as others have stated. One day I’m going to order some whole leaf.