Comparison of the effects of e-cigarette vapor and cigarette smoke on indoor air quality
Consulting for Health, Air, Nature, & A Greener Environment, LLC (CHANGE), Corporate Headquarters , Queensbury, NY , USA.Inhalation Toxicology (Impact Factor: 2.26). 10/2012; 24(12):850-7. DOI: 10.3109/08958378.2012.724728
Context: Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) have earned considerable attention recently as an alternative to smoking tobacco, but uncertainties about their impact on health and indoor air quality have resulted in proposals for bans on indoor e-cigarette use. Objective: To assess potential health impacts relating to the use of e-cigarettes, a series of studies were conducted using e-cigarettes and standard tobacco cigarettes. Methods and materials: Four different high nicotine e-liquids were vaporized in two sets of experiments by generic 2-piece e-cigarettes to collect emissions and assess indoor air concentrations of common tobacco smoke by products. Tobacco cigarette smoke tests were conducted for comparison. Results: Comparisons of pollutant concentrations were made between e-cigarette vapor and tobacco smoke samples. Pollutants included VOCs, carbonyls, PAHs, nicotine, TSNAs, and glycols. From these results, risk analyses were conducted based on dilution into a 40 m(3) room and standard toxicological data. Non-cancer risk analysis revealed "No Significant Risk" of harm to human health for vapor samples from e-liquids (A-D). In contrast, for tobacco smoke most findings markedly exceeded risk limits indicating a condition of "Significant Risk" of harm to human health. With regard to cancer risk analysis, no vapor sample from e-liquids A-D exceeded the risk limit for either children or adults. The tobacco smoke sample approached the risk limits for adult exposure. Conclusions: For all byproducts measured, electronic cigarettes produce very small exposures relative to tobacco cigarettes. The study indicates no apparent risk to human health from e-cigarette emissions based on the compounds analyzed.
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "tion of PAH was dominated by the more volatile substances naphthalene , acenaphthene , fluorene and phenanthrene . With re - gard to the seven PAH classified as probable carcinogens by the IARC ( IARC , 2002 , 2010 ) , the concentration increased on average by 20% from 122 . 8 ng / m 3 ( control ) to 147 . 3 ± 26 . 2 ng / m 3 ( vaping sessions ) . McAuley et al . ( 2012 ) vaporized different high nicotine liquids by generic e - cigarettes and assessed the indoor air con - centrations of tobacco smoke specific pollutants including PAH . Most PAH were found below the limit of detection ( LOD ) . However , an anomaly was seen with B [ a ] P as it was found at similar levels in e - cigarette vapor , tobacc"
ABSTRACT: Waterpipe (WP) smoking is growing as an alternative to cigarette smoking, especially in younger age groups. E-cigarette use has also increased in recent years. A majority of smokers mistakenly believe that WP smoking is a social entertainment practice that leads to more social behavior and relaxation and that this type of smoking is safe or less harmful and less addictive than cigarette smoking. In reality, WP smokers are exposed to hundreds of toxic substances that include known carcinogens. High exposures to carbon monoxide and nicotine are major health threats. Persons exposed to secondhand WP smoke are also at risk. There is growing evidence that WP smoke causes adverse effects on the pulmonary and cardiovascular systems and is responsible for cancer.Atmospheric Environment 04/2015; 106:429-441. DOI:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2014.08.030 · 3.28 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "However, the toxicant levels detected in the air after ECIG use were significantly lower than the toxicant levels after conventional cigarette use, and the different ECIGs tested produced variable toxicant levels. Other research, funded by a pro-ECIG organization, concluded that there are toxicants in ECIG vapor that are emitted into the air, but at far lower levels than conventional cigarettes (McAuley et al., 2012). In addition, ECIGs emit significantly lower amounts of particulate matter relative to tobacco cigarettes, suggesting a lower risk of environmental vapor exposure (Pellegrino et al., 2012). "
ABSTRACT: Electronic cigarettes (ECIGs), also referred to as electronic nicotine delivery systems or "e-cigarettes," generally consist of a power source (usually a battery) and heating element (commonly referred to as an atomizer) that vaporizes a solution (e-liquid). The user inhales the resulting vapor. Electronic cigarettes have been increasing in popularity since they were introduced into the US market in 2007. Many questions remain about these products, and limited research has been conducted. This review describes the available research on what ECIGs are, effects of use, survey data on awareness and use, and the utility of ECIGs to help smokers quit using tobacco cigarettes. This review also describes arguments for and against ECIGs and concludes with steps to move research on ECIGs forward.Journal of Addiction Medicine 07/2014; 8(4):223-233. DOI:10.1097/ADM.0000000000000049 · 1.76 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "From a public health perspective it is important to consider the impact of e-cigarette use on bystanders. The existing evidence from environmental exposure and chemical analyses of vapour indicates that the effects of e-cigarette use on bystanders are minimal compared with conventional cigarettes [McAuley et al. 2012; Schripp et al. 2013]. This is not surprising considering the nature and levels of contaminants in the vapour and the notion that, unlike tobacco cigarettes, sidestream smoke exposure is nonexistent in e-cigarettes, that is, the only vapour released into the air is that exhaled by the user, not by the e-cigarette itself. "
ABSTRACT: A growing body of scientific studies show that e-cigarettes may serve as an acceptable substitute for smoking tobacco cigarettes, thereby reducing or eliminating exposure to harmful elements in smoke. The success of e-cigarettes is such that sales of these products are rapidly gaining on traditional cigarettes. The rapidly evolving phenomenon is raising concerns for the health community, pharmaceutical industry, health regulators and state governments. Obviously, these products need to be adequately regulated, primarily to protect users. Depending on the form and intended scope, certain regulatory decisions may have diverse unintended consequences on public health and may face many different challenges. Ideally, before any regulations are enacted, the regulatory body will require sufficient scientific research to verify that a problem does exist, quantify the problem, explore all potential solutions including making no change at all, determine the possible consequences of each, and then select the solution that is best for public health. Here we present an overview on the existing and deeming regulatory decisions for electronic cigarettes. We challenge them, based on the mounting scientific evidence with the ultimate goal of proposing appropriate recommendations while minimizing potential unintended consequences of ill-informed regulation.Therapeutic Advances in Chronic Disease 03/2014; 5(2):50-61. DOI:10.1177/2040622314521271
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.