Talk:Α-Tocopheryl acetate

It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Significance?

A significant topic?

considering the scale of the skin-product industry, and the commonality of Vitamin E Acetate in associated products, we could probably go into greater depth... Agree? Disagree? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pstanton (talk • contribs) 23:31, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly! Please go ahead! Walkerma (talk) 20:47, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hydrolyzed?

I don't understand something from the main article: "It is believed that the acetate is slowly hydrolyzed once it is absorbed into the skin,..."

How can a chemical be "slowly hydrolyzed" through the "skin"? Absorbed, yes. But, "hydrolyzed"? Please explain and support your answer with proof. Email me @ imsassafras at Yahoo and post here.

[User:IMSassafras Dated: 12.7.2013] — Preceding unsigned comment added by IMSassafras (talk • contribs) 19:28, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A form of vitamin E created in the laboratory

Ingredient Watch List: Tocopheryl Acetate, the Potentially Irritating Form of Vitamin E.

"This ingredient is basically a form of vitamin E created in the laboratory. Manufacturers take natural vitamin E and add acetic acid to it."

Various concerns and side effects are listed in the article. --Timeshifter (talk) 09:05, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Article now has a citation for topical tocopheryl acetate as potentially causing rash reactions. David notMD (talk) 13:40, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of benefit

Added paragraph with four citations documenting lack of benefit of topical vitamin E products, plus risk (slight) of rash. David notMD (talk) 13:38, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Implication in THC vaping illnesses

There no WP:MEDRS sources yet, but vitamin E acetate seems to be implicated as a contaminant in marijuana vaping products that is causing lung illness.

Sun, Lena H. (2019-09-05). "Tests show contaminant found in vaping products linked to deadly lung illnesses". NZ Herald. Retrieved 2019-09-05. {{cite web}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)

Peaceray (talk) 21:01, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

CDC says Vitamin E acetate only substance universally detected in vaping samples

CDC makes 'breakthrough' on vaping crisis, names vitamin E oil as potential culprit. By Abby Haglage. Yahoo Lifestyle. November 8, 2019. From the article (emphasis added):

While the majority of those analyzed tested positive for either THC (82 percent) or nicotine (61 percent), the only substance to be “universally detected” in every sample was vitamin E acetate. “These new findings are significant because for the first time we have detected a potential toxin of concern,” Anne Schuchat, MD, principal deputy director of the CDC said on a call with reporters Friday morning.

-- Timeshifter (talk) 13:11, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Vitamin E acetate is not found in nature. Its production can also leave toxicants in it

As always, one needs to dig down to the references used in the article.

Chemical of the Day - Q&A - Tocopherol vs. Tocopheryl Acetate. 26 April 2011. From the article (emphasis added):

the finished products can contain traces of hydroquinone. ... The best form of vitamin E when considering contamination concerns, is vacuum-distilled. ... researchers found that tocopherol acetate alone caused tumors to form when injected, but tocopherol alone did not.

See the "depigmentation" section of the hydroquinone article for its toxic effects. -- Timeshifter (talk) 13:42, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Vaping-associated lung injuries can be attributed to vitamin E acetate, CDC says

I think the lead paragraph needs to be more definitive. CDC says so.

"The very large increase in cases is attributable to what was happening in this past year in the supply, with vitamin E acetate diluting or tainting THC products," Schuchat said. In Minnesota, for example, THC-containing products from 2018 did not contain vitamin E acetate, but products from 2019 did.

Anne Schuchat is principal deputy director of the CDC. Above article quote is from:

Vaping-associated lung injuries can be attributed to vitamin E acetate, CDC says. By Nicole Wetsman. Dec 20, 2019. The Verge. "She stressed, though, that there may be more than one chemical causing these injuries. Not every patient with EVALI reported using THC-containing products, and not every tested product associated with an injury contained vitamin E acetate."

Template:Electronic cigarettes - see the many subarticles. Together they discuss the many chemicals added to e-cigs, and the toxic effects of many of them. -- Timeshifter (talk) 07:57, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Vitamin E oil" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Vitamin E oil. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 September 6#Vitamin E oil until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Mdewman6 (talk) 23:35, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 10 March 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved, per WP:CHEMPREFIX. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 08:03, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Α-Tocopheryl acetate → Alpha-Tocopheryl acetate – non-symbol use in page name Iztwoz (talk) 18:12, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a contested technical request (permalink). GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 00:03, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This should not be moved; at proper title per WP:CHEMPREFIX, already has been resolved with requester. Page was moved to this title last year, so not uncontroversial. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdewman6 (talk • contribs) 21:07, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.