Posted on

Public health, e-cigs and heat not burn. Why all the hatred?

Public health

Keep smoking we need the money.

We have been monitoring the entire public health movement since 2015 and we have decided to impart our thoughts on what we think about the cult of public health.

Firstly it is fairly obvious that public health stop-smoking groups do not want people to stop smoking, because if everyone stopped smoking they would all be out of a job. But it is much more complex than that. Public health have to be *seen* actively trying to get people to stop smoking so that they can continue to get rewarded with enormous grants, usual funded by public money.

Until e-cigarettes came along the options on the market were truly dire, it mainly consisted of patches, gums and tablets. The patches and gums were truly woeful with around a 6% success rate. The tablets were more successful but had some shocking side effects including suicidal thoughts, leading to some people actually committing suicide. The classic scenario was the old “quit, relapse, quit, relapse” cycle with the patches and gums, people would try to quit using them then fail and go back to smoking for a while, then try again and fail again with the patches and gums, and so the dreadful cycle continued. Public health groups like the UK’s ASH (Action on Smoking and Health) wasted millions of pounds of public money for nothing, the smoking rate remained stubborn and refused to move…..then along came e-cigarettes and much more recently heat not burn.

By crikey these work!

The main reason that e-cigs and HnB work is because they both mimic the action of smoking perfectly, this is the reason they have been phenomenally successful, to be honest they are both brilliant inventions and in just a few short years we have seen the smoking rate start to fall after years of flat-lining. The smoking ban of 2007 we were told would vastly reduce the smoking rates, the smoking rate barely moved in the UK the preceding years. All the smoking ban did was shut down thousands of pubs and bingo halls, decimating communities and pit smokers against non-smokers, and generally make smokers feel like social pariahs.

E-cigs and heat not burn have really put the cat among the pigeons for the public health racket though, in the case of e-cigarettes it has basically been a grass roots movement and thousands have managed to quit smoking without any help from either the government or public health. It hasn’t cost the government a penny either, people are actually buying the equipment out of THEIR OWN MONEY. Even though they can get a prescription for traditional NRT such as the patches and gums for free, they don’t bother, they actually pay for e-cigarettes and heat not burn devices out of their own money. How can that be? Are these people crazy? They’re not crazy at all, the reason they are paying for e-cigarettes and heat not burn devices is because THEY WORK. It really is as simple as that. Not everyone will get on with e-cigs, some prefer the actual taste of the smoke that they’re used to and that is where heat not burn comes in. That is why there is a market for both e-cigarettes and heat not burn devices and why both will thrive despite all the fake news and cherry picked studies.

“Not enough evidence”/”We don’t know what’s in them” etc. etc.

So, back to public health, what do they do about these new modern devices? At first there was a kind of twitchy knee-jerk reaction and they immediately condemned them, seeing the possibility of hundreds of thousands of pounds of grant money going down the drain. It would have been a massive shock to them to see e-cigs doing what their NRT had manifestly failed to do for years (decades?) and that was to get people to actually stop smoking. First of all there was the old “we need more evidence” line, naturally as each year goes by with nobody dropping dead from vaping that argument weakens pretty quickly. You will still hear some of the more crazy people in public health trotting that line out in 2018 even though some early adopters have been vaping now for over 10 years. Another classic line trotted out is the famous “we don’t know what’s in them” with regards to the e-liquid, even though all e-liquid bottles are now required to list the ingredients.

The manufactured diacetyl scare.

They absolutely love to mention the study that found some diacetyl in certain e-liquids even though most e-liquids have completely removed diacetyl from their e-liquids and the amount of diacetyl found in the e-liquid was FAR LOWER than the diacetyl levels found in traditional cigarettes. These crackpots will clutch onto any straw that they can find. Diacetyl is thought to be responsible for a disease called “popcorn lung” a disease that popcorn factory workers used to get from years of breathing in the dust of this flavouring agent. It is also worth noting that there have been no cases of popcorn lung directly attributed to regular cigarette smokers, let alone vapers. This was another manufactured scare story bought to you by people that absolutely hate e-cigarettes.

Among many reasons that public health hate e-cigarettes is because public health didn’t invent them, if public health did invent them then they would be the best thing since sliced bread. The same goes for heat not burn, but heat not burn is even worse because they are primarily an invention of those EVIL BIG TOBACCO COMPANY BASTARDS.

Now we are seeing some public health orgs actually getting behind vaping, there’s a good chance that they are doing this so that they can take some credit for the drop in the smoking rate in the last couple of years. It’s very cheeky and dishonest but that’s what modern day public health do. They will do anything and everything that is required to keep the grant money rolling in.

How’s that MSA looking?

We have primarily been talking about UK public health organisations but over in the USA the rise of e-cigarettes and heat not burn are even more acute. There is something called the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement (MSA) where tobacco companies have done a deal with individual US states. It’s basically a massive bribe whereby the state allows tobacco products to be sold so long as the tobacco companies pay that particular state vast amounts of money. Now e-cigs and heat not burn are starting to affect the MSA future projections because the payments are calculated in advance on projected cigarette sales, the more people that stop smoking traditional cigarettes the worse it is for those cosy MSA deals. This is why e-cigs are under constant attack in the USA including a de-facto ban by 2022 unless things change markedly. Heat Not Burn is currently going through a similar struggle, this is all part of the plan. Basically the “wrong” people are making money out of e-cigarettes and heat not burn.

There are going to be some massive battles ahead that much we can be sure of, but at the end of the day it always boils down to one thing and one thing only: money.

Posted on

Wikipedia – encyclopaedic or idiotic?

Wikipedia

Everyone’s familiar with Wikipedia – “the encyclopedia that anyone can edit”. It sounds like a great idea, doesn’t it? A vast, sprawling reference work that everyone in the world can add their knowledge to, with administrators and fact-checking mechanisms to make sure nobody’s contaminating it with nonsense. In theory at least, it should end up containing all the open-source information in the world and be constantly checked for accuracy by thousands of dedicated users.

The trouble is that’s not exactly how it works. If the topic of an article isn’t controversial, Wikipedia is generally pretty reliable. Apart from the odd intentional vandalism or clumsy editing by a well-meaning newcomer, both of which usually get removed pretty quickly, articles about places, objects or anything else straightforward tend to be accurate and informative. I do research every day and I regularly use Wikipedia; the articles themselves give a good overview, and there’s a handy list of references at the bottom so you can dig deeper and verify facts.

Where it gets complicated is when you start dealing with any subject that’s at all controversial. That’s when special interests slither out of the woodwork, whether it’s creationists, IRA supporters or political extremists, and start gaming Wikipedia’s tortuous rules to push their point of view.

The whole idea of Wikipedia is that everyone can edit, but in practice that’s not how it works. Apart from a few basic principles the rules for resolving disagreements are made by committee, and we all know the sort of person who likes to join unpaid committees. Unsurprisingly there’s now a mass of rules, guidelines, essays and procedures that would take a lifetime to read, so of course nobody reads them. That means nobody understands them except a hard core of dedicated fanatics, and this brings us neatly to the subject of tobacco harm reduction.

Meet the Medics

I used to be a pretty active Wikipedia editor, until I got banned a couple of years ago. Officially I got banned because I was paid to edit an article, but this isn’t actually against Wikipedia’s rules. The real reason was that I upset the key people in Wikiproject Medicine, a group that’s supposedly responsible for ensuring the accuracy of medical articles on Wikipedia. Because e-cigarettes can potentially have an impact on health, WikiMed has ruled that any articles on them have to obey the stringent rules they’ve created for medical content, and who gets to decide whether they obey those rules or not? Wikiproject Medicine, of course!

This is where the problems begin, because all the leading figures in WikiMed are fanatical opponents of tobacco harm reduction. The project is led by “Doc James” – Dr James Heilman – a socially inept GP from the wilds of rural Canada. Heilman is notable for his poor grasp of logic, even poorer grasp of the English language and a stubborn inability to admit that he might ever be wrong about anything. We’re talking about a guy who thought “A cup of coffee is drug” was a winning argument. Heilman is a complete idiot.

And, like any complete idiot who finds himself in charge of a committee, he’s assembled a collection of even worse idiots to help him out. There’s a Norwegian medical student who can’t spell “cigarette” – I am not making this up – and a few other people who’ve only escaped having personality disorders because they don’t have personalities. However the worst of the lot, by a long way, is the individual known as QuackGuru.

I don’t know what, if any, medical expertise QuackGuru has. He seems to have started on Wikipedia as an opponent of “alternative medicines,” an objective that I’m fine with, but somewhere along the way he became Doc James’s most devoted follower and, just to round off his uselessness, an anti-vaping zealot. On top of that he’s terrible at actually editing. His logic and English are both even worse than Heilman’s, and he has a maddening habit of just repeating the same obviously wrong statements over and over again. He also violates Wikipedia’s rules with monotonous regularity, and although he does get the occasional short suspension – usually just from specific topics – Heilman’s influence has protected him from the permanent ban he richly deserves.

A couple of years ago, until I was banned, I and a few others fought a long battle against the WikiMed clique to try to add some semblance of reality to the article on electronic cigarettes. This is unrelentingly negative; at one point a single paper by notorious Californian aircraft mechanic Stanton Glantz was referenced more than all the other sources put together. QuackGuru was a major source of the problems on the page, blindly applying simplistic definitions of Wiki rules to exclude any references that were positive about vaping. In the end even Heilman couldn’t protect him anymore, and he was banned from editing the page for a few months, but by that time most of the pro-vaping editors had been banned or given up in disgust.

Now it’s all happening again at the Heat not Burn page. Nobody in their right mind would say that an iQOS is a medical device, but WikiMed have claimed authority over it on the basis that it can have health effects. Well, so can a bunch of other things WikiMed doesn’t bother with – guns, for example, or cars. Both of these kill a lot more people every year than HnB ever will, but for some reason they’re not seen as medical subjects. Vaping and HnB are still just about niche enough that Heilman and his little bunch of cranks can take over, though, and that’s exactly what they’ve done.

Looking at the edit history for the HnB page, two names dominate the list – Doc James and, even more so, QuackGuru. For example, on 2 February there were eight edits made to the page; one by Doc James, one by a bot and six by Quack. Out of the last 50 edits, Quack as made 21 – often in rapid strings of minor edits, aimed at correcting the one before but actually making things worse with every attempt.

The Idiots’ Playground

About the only good thing about Quack’s atrocious sentence structure is that it obscures some of the terrible information in the article itself. The lead section says “There is no reliable evidence that (HnB) products are any less harmful than other cigarettes,” so I was already boiling with rage by the second line of the article – because HnB products are not cigarettes (got that yet, Vic?).

The first section in the body of the article is called “Health Effects”, and in the best WikiMed tradition it starts with an ad hominem smear attack on anyone who disagrees with Doc James – “Claims of lowered risk or health benefits for heat-not-burn tobacco products are based on industry-funded research”. Well so what? Why does it matter who funded the research? What matters is that it’s been peer-reviewed (it has) and the experimental methods and analysis have been found to be reliable (they are). Every medicine on the shelf at your local chemist’s was certified as safe thanks to “industry-funded research”, but you never hear anyone complaining about that.

Moving on, another of Quack’s trademarks starts to show up – his touching belief that “a scientist stated” is the same thing as evidence. It doesn’t matter what some Spanish doctor believes; what matters is what the research shows, and all the research on Heat not Burn shows that users are exposed to vastly lower levels of toxic substances. The first rule of toxicology is “the dose makes the poison”, so reduced exposure to toxins means less risk of harm.

The final section is titled “Regulation”, but as there are few regulations in place for HnB yet WikiMed have padded it with quotes from anti-harm reduction extremists. They even shoehorned in Stan Glantz’s lunatic suggestion that safer tobacco products be banned until tobacco companies stopped selling actual cigarettes. It seems none of these idiots have learned the lessons of Prohibition and what happens when you ban something a significant percentage of your population enjoys. As for Glantz himself, the suggestion that the safer products should be banned has to raise serious questions about his mental health.

 

Wikipedia can be a great resource, but it’s also a flawed one. The way it’s run creates immense problems for anyone who disagrees with the self-appointed cliques that dominate many areas of the site. Unfortunately tobacco harm reduction is one of those areas, so the world’s most popular encyclopaedia is also one of its most dangerous sources of anti-THR propaganda.

Posted on

XMAX Vital- Cheapest gateway to HnB

Xmax Vital

XMAX VITAL

One of the best and one of the cheapest.

Even though we specialize in and sell the Philip Morris iQOS we are essentially a global heat not burn resource so we will also review other heat not burn products too, so on to the review.

When you buy a loose leaf vapouriser it’s very easy to fall into the trap marked ‘PAY MORE, GET MORE’. Though you often discover the rule that scientists have known for years. It’s called the law of diminishing returns.

Explained in simple terms, let us assume that you need a wristwatch. Well, you can go to Poundland and buy a perfectly functional watch for £1.00, or you can go to Geneva and buy a Hublot Big Bang Ayrton Senna Foudroyante for £25,000.00.

The point is that both watches will tell the time. Beyond that, it’s all downhill for the Hublot. The law of diminishing returns kicks in the minute you bore the arse off everyone by demonstrating how the Hublot can calculate F1 lap times to 100th of a second.

Anyway, I digress. So let’s get back to the review of the XMAX VITAL. This is an old piece of kit, first released in 2015. I bought mine in January 2017 for 35 euros. My usual HnB kits are the IQOS and a PAX2. I didn’t get around to opening the XMAX until January this year.

The XMAX comes in a metallic grey box. When you open the box you get your first view of the vapouriser. Below that is another section of the box which contains

  • The instruction manual
  • Replacement metal mesh screens
  • O ring seals
  • A cleaning brush
  • A micro USB cable and a pair of tweezers

Like a true man, I immediately threw the instruction manual in the bin and set about fetching the thing apart. This was easy. The whole of the insides are held together with 4 Philips head screws. And here’s where it got interesting.

First thing I noticed was the battery. A standard 18650 rated at 3.7V 2600mah battery is more than enough for almost 2 hours solid vaping at full charge and at 240˚C/464˚ F. Impressive for its time.

The Second thing is the size of the ceramic bowl. 1.6cm deep and 1.1cm wide. That’s a hefty load of tobacco. The air feed is from shark gill openings on each side of the vaporiser and then fed into the bottom of the bowl. All of the electronics are in a separate compartment. I will explain why this is so important at the end of this article.

Heat is via a heating element built into the ceramic bowl. This arrangement practically rules out the possibility of electronic shorts ruining your new toy. Very clever.

To start heating, you hold down the power button for 3 seconds and the OLED screen says ‘WELCOME’. It then starts to heat the bowl to the desired temperature.

Temperature control is in Centigrade or Fahrenheit, so it’s BREXIT ready. The temperature is simply selected, after you switch on the power, using the + or - button. The range of temperatures is from 100˚ C to 240˚C which is 212˚ F to 464˚F. You can also increase or decrease the temperature whilst the unit is functioning. You can also choose between a 5 minute and 10 minute heat session.

Heat up time from 15˚C to 180˚ C/356˚ F with a full bowl of tobacco is about 20 seconds. The unit then happily ticks away for 5 or 10 minutes, dependent on the duration you have pre selected.

The heat spread is consistent throughout the bowl, meaning there are no cold spots. I measured a 4˚C difference at 240˚C between the bowl wall and bowl centre. Again this is most impressive. My PAX 2 is far less accurate than the XMAX and has considerable variations in bowl temperature, sometimes in excess of 7˚C.

Getting the most from your Xmax

There are 4 main factors which you need to take into account here. They are as applicable to the Xmax as to other HnB loose leaf vaporisers. So we´ll look at each in some detail.

 

1.Choice of tobacco

The PH level of tobacco smoke is a determining factor in its acute toxicity. Cigarette tobaccos all vary, but a rise above 6.2 results in increased levels of Tobacco Specific Nitrosamines, Benzene, Cadmium and all of the other nasties contained in tobacco smoke.

Bright, Flue Cured and Virginia tobaccos produce a lower PH value of between 5.2 and 6.00. However, these levels increase as the cigarette is smoked. In any case, and apart from the carcinogens present in tobacco smoke, the main culprit is carbon monoxide. Any combustion of a carbon based substance will produce carbon monoxide.

Pipe tobacco on the other hand with both high and lower sugar content is less acidic than cigarette tobacco, and becomes progressively more alkaline during the course of smoking. This reduces the quantity of ´nasties` produced In the burn process. Apart, that is, from carbon monoxide.

As every smoker knows, pipe tobaccos are simply too irritating to be inhaled when burned. This is mainly due to the high alkaline content of the smoke. It also probably explains why pipe and cigar smokers suffer lower levels of lung cancer than cigarette smokers.

HnB circumvents almost all of these issues because the tobacco isn´t burned. There is no carbon monoxide and the levels of all known carcinogens are reduced either to practically zero or a figure so low that it is insignificant. As an example PMI have published open data science which concludes that their IQOS reduces toxic and carcinogenic produce by 90% to 95% when compared with the CR34 standard test cigarette. Those figures are about the same as e cigs.

So, you load up your XMAX with some Marlboro Red or Aromatic pipe tobacco, switch on your heating chamber and start to inhale. The first two or three puffs are OK, but suddenly the quantity of vape is reduced to a whisp and the flavour disappears.

 

2. In order to use any watch you need to be able to tell the time

Your first reaction to the above scenario is to turn up the heat. The XMAX in this regard is like some early Magnox Nuclear Reactor. So you crank up the heat to 464˚ F/ 240˚C and normal service is restored. Success? No. Why? Because tobacco combusts at 451˚F/232˚C.

You have to remember that temperature is the average energy of molecules in a system. If you need to know more about this have a look at the Maxwell Boltzmann Distribution Theory. Or get a life.

On the other hand, all that you really need to know is that even at 430˚ F/ 221˚C some tobacco will start to combust and you do not want that to happen, because once combustion starts you will be inhaling all of the same carcinogens found in a regular cigarette.

So stay away from high temperatures.

 

3. This is too complicated for me….

Bring on the Propylene Glycol PG. If you you use an ecig, or HEETS you are inhaling PG. It’s safe.

Most Vape shops sell PG and 500ml is less than a fiver. PG is used in ecigs and HEETS to replicate the “throat hit” you get when you smoke a normal cigarette.

Vape grade PG is about 80%PG and 20% water. It has a boiling point of about 250˚F or 121˚C .

If you like clouds of vapour, then bring on the Vegetable Glycerin VG which has the same boiling point as PG. Most good vape shops will sell this too, for about the same price as PG.

The only drawback to to VG is that it is used as a sweetener, so I recommend using more PG than VG. If you can’t get your PG / VG from your vape shop, then go to a chemist and get the Pharma grade stuff. Just remember to dilute it with water. Distilled is best.

4. Important.

Pharma grade PG and VG have a boiling point of 290˚C/554˚F. Such heat will burn all of your tobacco, your vaporiser, your house, you and the entire neighbourhood. And in the present political climate, should you have the misfortune to survive, you can expect to spend the rest of your days at GTMO in Cuba, learning advanced Arabic. So add 20% water.

You might want to increase the nicotine yield in your HnB aerosol. If so, splash out on a bottle of 50%VG 50% nicotine solution.

Oh, finally you will need a pipette or a syringe used for refilling ink cartridges. You can carefully discard the blunt needle.

None of this stuff is expensive and you are only going to be using small quantities anyway.

The Recipe

  1. Open your 30g pouch of tobacco.
  2. Extract 30ml of PG using your pipette or syringe.
  3. Layer the PG evenly across the top of your tobacco.
  4. Extract 20ml of VG using your pipette or syringe.
  5. Layer the VG evenly across the top of your tobacco.
  6. Wait 5 minutes, then finger mix the tobacco, PG and VG together for about 2 minutes.
  7. If adding nicotine do so in 5ml stages. Wait 5mins then finger mix.
  8. Wash your hands.

The first thing you will notice is that your tobacco pouch will be bulging at the seams. You are now ready to go. Half fill your bowl with the mixture. Switch on your XMAX, set your temperature and inhale.

The quantity of aerosol is more than adequate. The flavour of the tobacco is pronounced and well satisfying. Oh, the shark gills.Yes I nearly forgot. Any crud that has fallen out of the bottom of the bowl can be cleaned out by just blowing through the shark gills.

And this is where the XMAX scores. It scores because:

  • It is cheap, really cheap.
  • Whilst it doesn’t produce the same volume of aerosol as a PAX 2, its enough.
  • There is no connection between the electronic gizzards and the airflow.
  • Any excess moisture or dribble will not touch the delicate electronics.
  • It is easy and simple to use.
  • It produces better results than loose leaf vapourisers costing 10 times more than the XMAX

 

Posted on

PAX3 – A better life through science

Pax3

PAX3 IT IS GOOD, BUT CAN YOU MAKE IT BETTER?

Los cojones del perro

When I bought my PAX3 I really didn’t know what to expect. Every review I’d read rated it as the best thing since, since……anything ever invented by man since the wheel.

I have always tried to dismissed hype. After all, advertising is just propaganda by another name. There are good advertisements and rubbish advertisements. There is great propaganda and bloody awful propaganda.

So, I eyed the contents of my PAX3 box with a great deal of scepticism. Is this really going to better than my PAX2? After all, 250 quid is a lot to spend on a vapouriser.

Ah well, in for a penny….And when I did open the box and emptied its contents over my table I was totally puzzled. I have never seen so many bits and pieces all together on one box. This is what I found.

  • The battery and heating unit.
  • Two mouthpieces (one raised and one flat).
  • A base plate (to seal the heating bowl)
  • A base plate combined with a half bowl space
  • A wax oven which fits on the base plate
  • A case
  • A magnetic charger
  • A manual

First of all I should explain that the PAX3 comes in two versions. I bought the most expensive one, and so far as I know, you don’t get all of the accessories with the base model which costs about £200.

 

RTFM

As most of my readers know, I usually throw the manual in the bin and immediately start to disassemble the kit inside the box. However, I didn’t do this on this occasion. Two reasons. First, my bin isn’t big enough to hold the manual. Secondly, the contents of the manual were written in plain and simple English. How many times have you bought something made in China and opened the manual to read something like this….

 

BENCH DRILL

OPERATE INSTRUCTION

PRODUCT INFORMATIC

It is of novel design. Small and exquisite bulk, handy carry. It adopts single phase series motor with high rotable speed. The cent of the product has no class to adjust soon with single kind soon two kinds. The operation please before the manual read……….and so on.

Well, you know how it is. So I was well pleased to be able to make sense of the manual. What´s more, you really should read the PAX3 manual, because to get the best out of a PAX3 you have to make some effort. If you are already the owner of a PAX3, then read on. If you want to read a full review then click here to read Fergus’s review. Then come back later.

 

A BETTER LIFE THROUGH SCIENCE

You have probably forgotten the difference between conduction and convection heating. There is no reason why you should have had to remember it after leaving school. But, to get the best out of your PAX 3 we are going to take you back in time. Way back. You are a 14 year old kid. Last two periods on a Friday afternoon. You are looking forward to getting home and watching the tele. Trouble is, there`s this old fart banging on about convection and conduction and you can hardly keep your eyes open.

Conduction and convection describe heat transfer. Conduction is motionless, like a hot dry iron. Convection needs liquid or gas to move the energy, like a steam iron, or a steam train.

All I´m going to say about this is that the PAX3 is a conduction vapouriser. That is to say, it heats your tobacco with radiant heat from the hot oven walls. Other Vapourisers heat your tobacco with super heated air and that is convection heating.

Both methods have their plus and minus points, but so far as we are concerned there are only 2 issues that matter.

  • Heat up time
  • Even temperature throughout the oven.

The heat up time with the PAX3 is fast for a conduction vapouriser, so that’s not a problem.

The variations in temperature inside the oven are miniscule. The PAX3 is outstanding in this regard. The older PAX2 was not so good. Temperature variations were above 5C, meaning you were forever having to stir your tobacco to get a decent vape. It also meant that there were hotspots inside the oven causing some of the tobacco to start combusting, whilst some remained “cold”. The PAX3 has sorted this out. This makes the PAX3 ideal for what follows.

 

A veces el remedio es peor que la dolencia 

However, sometimes the remedy is worse than the ailment. And in the case of the PAX3 the only problem is the size of the oven. It holds 0.3g which is not very much, and although the quantity is small it does produce a good vape, for a short while. So, how can we make it better?

If we could slow down the vapourising process, without affecting the flavour that would be perfect and it can be done. Here´s how.

PG and VG

Bring on the Propylene Glycol PG. If you you use an ecig, or HEETS you are inhaling PG. It’s safe.

Most Vape shops sell PG and 500ml is less than a fiver. PG is used in ecigs and HEETS to replicate the “throat hit” you get when you smoke a normal cigarette.

Vape grade PG is about 80%PG and 20% water. It has a boiling point of about 250˚F or 121˚C .

If you like clouds of vapour, then bring on the Vegetable Glycerin VG which has the same boiling point as PG. Most good vape shops will sell this too, for about the same price as PG.

The only drawback to to VG is that it is used as a sweetener, so I recommend using more PG than VG. If you can’t get your PG / VG from your vape shop, then go to a chemist and get the Pharma grade stuff. Just remember to dilute it with water. Distilled is best.

 

Important.

Pharma grade PG and VG have a boiling point of 290˚C/554˚F. Such heat will burn all of your tobacco, your vaporiser, your house, you and the entire neighbourhood. And in the present political climate, should you have the misfortune to survive, you can expect to spend the rest of your days at GITMO in Cuba, learning advanced Arabic. So add 20% water.

You might want to increase the nicotine yield in your HnB aerosol. If so, splash out on a bottle of 50%VG 50% nicotine solution.

Oh, finally you will need a pipette or a syringe used for refilling ink cartridges. You can carefully discard the blunt needle.

None of this stuff is expensive and you are only going to be using small quantities anyway.

The Recipe

  1. Open your 30g pouch of tobacco.
  2. Extract 30ml of PG using your pipette or syringe.
  3. Layer the PG evenly across the top of your tobacco.
  4. Extract 20ml of VG using your pipette or syringe.
  5. Layer the VG evenly across the top of your tobacco.
  6. Wait 5 minutes, then finger mix the tobacco, PG and VG together for about 2 minutes.
  7. If adding nicotine do so in 5ml stages. Wait 5mins then finger mix.
  8. Wash your hands.

The first thing you will notice is that your tobacco pouch will be bulging at the seams. You are now ready to go. Half fill your bowl with the mixture. Switch on your PAX3, set your temperature and inhale.

Let us know what you think.

 

Posted on

IQOS – The view of a vaper

iQOS logo

Back in 2015, I had the opportunity to try an early iteration of a heat-not-burn device. It wasn’t particularly good, but the technology intrigued me. Being a vaper, I wasn’t sure how I would view the product itself, but I know that vaping isn’t for everyone so having another alternative can only be a good thing, right?

Nifty box

I’m not entirely sure if PMI chose the name (IQOS) out of deference to Apple but, they did make sure that the presentation was good.

The IQOS all snug inside its box

What’s in the Box?

All the handy bits and pieces

Tucked under the product tray containing the IQOS pocket charger and the holder are the accessories. Mains adaptor for the USB charging cable, a cleaning device and a bunch of cleaning sticks. Oh, and a manual; which isn’t particularly clear on certain points which I’ll come back to.

Out of the box the pocket charger has approximately 50% charge which means you can get cracking immediately – if, like me, you’re the impatient sort.

Unfortunately, my very first try wasn’t all that successful. Partly because I’m impatient, but mostly because I was an idiot bloke that didn’t read the manual. You see I popped the HEET stick into the holder, pressed the button and waited for it to be ready. I took a few puffs and accidentally hit the button again essentially turning the device off.

This caused a minor problem as the device wouldn’t turn on again. I then didn’t take the HEET out correctly which left the plug of tobacco impaled on the heating blade. I later learned – through ‘reading’ the manual – that removal of a HEET requires the upper part of the holder to be pulled up, thereby lifting the entire HEET (tobacco plug included) off the heating blade.

The sleek IQOS holder and a HEET

The HEETS are, essentially, mini cigarettes. Unlike cigarettes, they don’t contain a lot of tobacco, which is, in fact, entirely the point. Unlike a cigarette, HEETS aren’t meant to be set on fire. The whole idea is that the special tobacco plug is heated to a specific temperature to give the user the taste and sensation of smoking, but without all the other stuff that comes from setting tobacco on fire.

IQOS in all its glory. Covered with grubby fingerprints too.

Using the device felt a little strange at first as I was inclined to try and hold it like a traditional cigarette; which you can’t. Not quite anyway.

Is it any good?

IQOS HEETS, Amber and Turquoise

I was lucky enough to be able to sample two of the HEETS ‘flavours’ – Yellow (roughly equivalent to Marlboro Light) and Turquoise (Menthol) and both tasted as I expected. The Yellow HEETS were smooth and full flavoured, while the Turquoise HEETS weren’t overpoweringly menthol (like some traditional cigarettes can be).

Both offered a warm tobacco taste which left a mild ‘just smoked’ aftertaste which wasn’t unpleasant.

During use, there is a mild tobacco scent which I found to be rather agreeable. However, I did notice a one thing missing. When smoking, there is a faintly audible cue when taking a puff, this isn’t present when using the IQOS. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing, it is just something I noticed. After all, IQOS isn’t meant to be an exact like-for-like to smoking, it is an alternative to smoking.

Final Thoughts

A few points to make here. During use, the flavour of the HEET does diminish after half a dozen puffs (give or take), and in some cases, it did taste slightly odd towards the end of the 6 minute (or 14 puff) cycle. This sensation seemed to become more prevalent the more HEET sticks used from a single pack of 20. With a freshly cleaned (or brand new) device, the taste lasts a lot longer.

With smoking, there is a necessity to set aside time to smoke a whole cigarette. The time taken does, of course, vary between individuals. With the IQOS, there’s a set limit of 6 minutes (or 14 puffs whichever comes first). Some smokers take longer than 6 minutes; especially when smoking roll-your-own tobacco which, when left unattended in the ashtray, goes out after a while – unlike a pre-made cigarette which just burns down to the filter.

The battery life of the pocket charger is very good. I managed to get three days of continual use from mine before I had to put it on charge. Sadly, a full charge for the pocket charger takes about 90 minutes. But that is offset by the fact that a full charge can last a few days – dependant on the use pattern.

Cleaning the IQOS holder is a bit of a faff. There are two options – the cleaning brush or the cleaning solution soaked q-tip. I found that using the brush followed by a q-tip rather than one or the other, gave me a better experience post-clean. It is recommended that the holder is cleaned after 20 HEETS are used, and there is a notification LED on the pocket charger to remind you to clean it.

The IQOS does a very good job of mimicking smoking in more ways than one. The slight smell during use, the taste and the sensation all contribute to a solid experience. Some may find cleaning the holder a pain, but it is, unfortunately, necessary to maintain the experience.

A surprisingly good experience at that.

Posted on

Japan Tobacco are releasing a new heat not burn device

Japan Tobacco

Look at all these rumours, surrounding me every day

It looks like Japan Tobacco are going to be releasing a new Heat Not Burn product later this year, if news reports are to be believed. Japan Tobacco is one of the world’s leading tobacco companies, producing famous cigarette and hand rolling tobacco brands including Camel, Silk Cut, Winston, Old Holborn and Amber Leaf. Seeing global cigarette sales on a downward trajectory throughout most of the developed world they have announced that they will be bringing out a new Heat Not Burn device.

Japan Tobacco must be really concerned at the success of the iQOS in their home territory, where it has proven to be incredibly popular. Sales of HnB products in Japan are massive, leading to an analyst predicting that HnB products will account for a quite astonishing 29% of Japan’s tobacco market this year – up from 16% in 2017. Japan Tobacco did release the Ploom Tech Mevius in mid-2017, but obviously they are not putting too much faith in that or they wouldn’t be aiming to bring out another similar product so soon afterwards.

One of the reasons that Heat Not Burn products are so popular in Japan is because of Japan’s crazy attitude towards e-cigarettes, which are to all intents and purposes banned. There could be many reasons for this absolute madness, including the fact that the government owns at least one third of Japan Tobacco, and they don’t want to lose even more revenue to those pesky e-cigarettes.

Things can only get better

Here at Heat Not Burn UK we think it is great that there is potential for another HnB product to be released, because we believe that the more devices there are on the market the more this competition will drive forward innovation. Just like in the early days of e-cigarettes, when most of the products were bloody awful, the technology will only get better as time goes by, exactly as it has done in the global vaping market. Will this new Japan Tobacco device be better than the iQOS or Glo? Currently we don’t know the answer to that question, as details are extremely scant, but Japan Tobacco have said they will be investing a staggering $917 million on the development and production of reduced risk products (RRP) over the next three years, so you would expect it to be pretty good, wouldn’t you?

One thing for sure is that we are going to be in for some very interesting times, seeing the big players all bringing out new devices; it can only enhance the whole HnB experience for the consumer, which is a very good thing, and we will be here as usual bringing you all the very latest info.

Posted on

Glo safety update – good news on DNA trials

DNA trials

Anti-nicotine zealots chose safety as their main battleground on e-cigarettes, and it didn’t work out too well for them. Now they seem to be doing the same again with Heat not Burn. Will it be more effective this time? Probably not.

We’ve already seen a lot of research from PMI on the safety of their iQOS device. Now British American Tobacco have released their own work on Glo, which is currently on sale in Japan and South Korea. Glo works on the same concept as iQOS, delivering vapour from heated tobacco that’s held in a cigarette-like stick, and the only real difference in the technology is that Glo heats its sticks to a lower temperature. That means we wouldn’t expect to see a huge difference in its vapour compared to iQOS – and, sure enough, we don’t.

Science and smoking

What BAT were interested in was the potential of Glo vapour to cause DNA changes in human cells. Damage to DNA can kill a cell – but, even worse, it can also cause cancer by making the cell grow and divide abnormally. Smoking is known to cause damage to thousands of genes; the question is, how does Glo compare?

Recently there’s been a lot of criticism of studies that use human cell cultures to measure the effects of e-cigarette vapour. This criticism is well aimed, because while the cells might be the same as the ones in a real human body, they don’t benefit from all the body’s layers of defence systems and repair capabilities. In a living body, damaged cells are quickly repaired or ejected; this doesn’t happen in a petri dish.

For their own trials BAT decided they could do better than that. Instead of a simple culture they used an actual simulation of a human airway. Known as MucilAir, it’s grown in a laboratory from cloned human cells and it replicates the body’s own defence mechanisms. The culture can produce mucus, to clear away contamination, and is covered in hair-like cilia like the ones human airways use to expel dust and particulates.

With the experimental tissues set up, BAT’s scientists then programmed a smoking machine to mimic the way people actually use Glo. This is another frequent problem with research into reduced-risk tobacco products – researchers set up their equipment to work in unrealistic ways. Several studies on e-cigs have turned out worthless because the machinery took puffs that were too long and too close together, producing dry hits and high levels of toxic substances that no real vaper would ever experience.

To carry out the actual experiment the machine produced vapour from the Glo and exposed the cells to it continuously for one hour; as a control, a second sample was exposed to smoke from a standard cigarette. Then, 24 hours after the experiment, cells were harvested and broken down to extract their DNA; which was then examined for changes. The process was repeated after another 24 hours to check for damage that took longer to show up. Then the results for Glo were compared with those for the cigarette.

Does Glo cause cancer?

The difference was dramatic. After 24 hours cigarette smoke had caused observable changes in 2,206 genes; Glo vapour had affected one. By 48 hours 2,727 genes were showing a reaction to the smoke, while all genes from the Glo sample were normal. After the researchers adjusted the figures to get a worst-case scenario Glo was still only affecting two genes, while smoke affected 2.809.

It’s obvious from this that Glo’s heated tobacco vapour has much less effect on DNA than cigarette smoke does – in fact, it would be interesting to see a comparison between Glo vapour and city air. So why are BAT insisting that “these results do not necessarily mean this product is less harmful than other tobacco products”? The reality is that’s exactly what these results mean, but heat not burn is in a complicated legal position just now. Philip Morris are still hoping their iQOS will be classed as a reduced risk product by the US FDA, which would allow them to advertise it as less harmful; Glo hasn’t reached that stage yet. Until it does we can expect BAT to be very cautious about what they say, to avoid any damaging legal challenges.

The reality, however, is that this is great news for heat not burn. The gene changes caused by cigarette smoke are known to be linked to lung cancer, as well as fibrosis and inflammation of lung tissue. The new research – which has been peer reviewed, and will be published in the medical journal Scientific Reports – shows that Glo is not causing these changes.

While the health effects of cigarettes are complicated, some things are quite simple. If Glo isn’t causing the gene changes that lead to cancer, it’s not going to give you that type of cancer. That doesn’t mean there are no health risks at all – we can’t say that about anything – but what we can say is that many of the ways cigarettes cause cancer just aren’t possible with Glo.

Earlier research into Glo shows that levels of toxic substances in the vapour are between 90% and 95% lower than in cigarette smoke. That fits together well with the new study. There isn’t a simple relationship between levels of a chemical and the effects it has. Some people make wild claims, such as “There’s no safe level of cigarette smoke!”, but the truth is there’s a safe level of anything. There’s a safe level for things like cyanide and arsenic. It might be a very low safe level, but it exists.

We’re probably fine

My guess – and it is a guess, but a reasonably informed one – is that the level of toxic chemicals in Glo vapour is low enough that it’s below the threshold where it’s going to do any harm. It seems reasonable to believe, based on the evidence we have so far, that using Glo or a similar product is going to eliminate most of the risks of smoking. Common sense backs this up; it isn’t nicotine or even tobacco that kills smokers – it’s smoke. Glo isn’t producing any smoke, so it’s sensible to assume we’re not going to see the same problems.

The last thing to say about this research is that it’s going to be attacked because of who carried it out. We’ve seen that already with research on iQOS, just because PMI paid for it – they didn’t even do the work themselves. BAT have tested Glo in their own labs, but they’ve handed over the data for peer review and it’s been approved of by experts. That won’t stop people attacking it, but they’ll attack the source because they can’t attack the data itself. So far the science is looking good for heated tobacco products, and that’s what counts.

Selling iQOS and HEETS

Posted on

BAT Glo- Heat Not Burn UK gets hands on.

BAT Glo

As mentioned before we are not all about the iQOS, sure it’s a great bit of kit but there are also many others out there. Here we see our very own HnB aficionado Fergus doing a hands on video review of British American Tobacco’s entry into the heat not burn market, the BAT Glo.

As Fergus rightly points out this is currently on limited release but as soon as it becomes available here in the UK we will do our best to add it to our online web store where we are currently selling the iQOS.

Some of the team here have been trying their best to shed some new ight on when the BAT Glo is expected to be released here in the UK but so far BAT are playing their cards very close to their chests and we have no further info to share with you.

Also please see the “related” area underneath this video review for more posts related to the BAT Glo, including a very good tear down of the NeoStick, which is the name that BAT uses for its tobacco sticks.

We will be doing another video on the Vapour2 PRO Series 7 within the next couple of weeks along with an extensive blog post review so watch this space!

Update: As promised here is an extensive blog review of the Vapour 2 Pro 7