Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Oct 27;11(11):11177-91.
doi: 10.3390/ijerph111111177.

Comparison of select analytes in exhaled aerosol from e-cigarettes with exhaled smoke from a conventional cigarette and exhaled breaths

Gerald A Long  1
Affiliations

Comparison of select analytes in exhaled aerosol from e-cigarettes with exhaled smoke from a conventional cigarette and exhaled breaths

Gerald A Long. Int J Environ Res Public Health. .

Abstract

Exhaled aerosols were collected following the use of two leading U.S. commercial electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) and a conventional cigarette by human subjects and analyzed for phenolics, carbonyls, water, glycerin and nicotine using a vacuum-assisted filter pad capture system. Exhaled breath blanks were determined for each subject prior to each product use and aerosol collection session. Distribution and mass balance of exhaled e-cigarette aerosol composition was greater than 99.9% water and glycerin, and a small amount (<0.06%) of nicotine. Total phenolic content in exhaled e-cigarette aerosol was not distinguishable from exhaled breath blanks, while total phenolics in exhaled cigarette smoke were significantly greater than in exhaled e-cigarette aerosol and exhaled breaths, averaging 66 µg/session (range 36 to 117 µg/session). The total carbonyls in exhaled e-cigarette aerosols were also not distinguishable from exhaled breaths or room air blanks. Total carbonyls in exhaled cigarette smoke was significantly greater than in exhaled e-cigarette aerosols, exhaled breath and room air blanks, averaging 242 µg/session (range 136 to 352 µg/session). These results indicate that exhaled e-cigarette aerosol does not increase bystander exposure for phenolics and carbonyls above the levels observed in exhaled breaths of air.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The three study products: (a) Marlboro Gold Box, 85 mm conventional cigarette (MGB); (b) blu Classic Tobacco Disposabe (blu CTD); (c) blu Magnificent Menthol Disposable (blu MMD).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Schematic of the vacuum-assisted collection system for exhaled samples. The single pad collection was used for analysis of phenolics and major components. The apparatus used for the collection of carbonyls included a second filter holder of identical dimensions in series with the first.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Average distributions and mass balances of water, glycerin and nicotine in exhaled e-cigarette aerosols for (a) blu Classic Tobacco Disposable (blu CTD) and (b) blu Magnificent Menthol Disposable (blu MMD).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Total exhaled phenolics for exhaled aerosol and breaths for Marlboro Gold Box (MGB), blu Classic Tobacco Disposable (blu CTD) and blu Magnificent Menthol Disposable (blu MMD).
Figure 5
Figure 5
Total carbonyls in exhaled aerosol, breaths and room blanks for Marlboro Gold Box (MGB), blu Classic Tobacco Disposable (blu CTD) and blu Magnificent Menthol Disposable (blu MMD).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Regan A.K., Promoff G., Dube S.R., Arrazola R. Electronic nicotine delivery systems: Adult use and awareness of the “e-cigarette” in the USA. Tob. Control. 2013;22:19–23. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2011-050044. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Laugesen M. Safety Report on the Ruyan® E-cigarette Cartridge and Inhaled Aerosol. Public Health Medicine Registrar, Auckland District Health Board; Auckland, New Zealand: 2008.
    1. Laugesen M. Poster 5–11. Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco (SRNT); Dublin, Ireland: 2009.
    1. Cahn Z., Siegel M. Electronic cigarettes as a harm reduction strategy for tobacco control: A step forward or a repeat of past mistakes? J. Public Health Policy. 2010 doi: 10.1057/jphp.2010.41. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Pellegrino R.M., Tinghino B., Mangiaracina G., Marani A., Vitali M., Protano C., Osborn J.F., Cattaruzza M.S. Electronic cigarettes: An evaluation of exposure to chemicals and fine particulate matter (PM) Ann. Ig. 2012;24:279–288. - PubMed

Publication types