Loading…
Insights from two industrial hygiene pilot e-cigarette passive vaping studies
While several reports have been published using research methods of estimating exposure risk to e-cigarette vapors in nonusers, only two have directly measured indoor air concentrations from vaping using validated industrial hygiene sampling methodology. Our first study was designed to measure indoo...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of occupational and environmental hygiene 2016-04, Vol.13 (4), p.275-283 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c460t-87b5e6c2beaf5b4408e94c420f39344d7f8cee4d75f03ea7874af2f8aad919003 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c460t-87b5e6c2beaf5b4408e94c420f39344d7f8cee4d75f03ea7874af2f8aad919003 |
container_end_page | 283 |
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 275 |
container_title | Journal of occupational and environmental hygiene |
container_volume | 13 |
creator | Maloney, John C. Thompson, Michael K. Oldham, Michael J. Stiff, Charles L. Lilly, Patrick D. Patskan, George J. Shafer, Kenneth H. Sarkar, Mohamadi A. |
description | While several reports have been published using research methods of estimating exposure risk to e-cigarette vapors in nonusers, only two have directly measured indoor air concentrations from vaping using validated industrial hygiene sampling methodology. Our first study was designed to measure indoor air concentrations of nicotine, menthol, propylene glycol, glycerol, and total particulates during the use of multiple e-cigarettes in a well-characterized room over a period of time. Our second study was a repeat of the first study, and it also evaluated levels of formaldehyde. Measurements were collected using active sampling, near real-time and direct measurement techniques. Air sampling incorporated industrial hygiene sampling methodology using analytical methods established by the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Active samples were collected over a 12-hr period, for 4 days. Background measurements were taken in the same room the day before and the day after vaping. Panelists (n = 185 Study 1; n = 145 Study 2) used menthol and non-menthol MarkTen prototype e-cigarettes. Vaping sessions (six, 1-hr) included 3 prototypes, with total number of puffs ranging from 36-216 per session. Results of the active samples were below the limit of quantitation of the analytical methods. Near real-time data were below the lowest concentration on the established calibration curves. Data from this study indicate that the majority of chemical constituents sampled were below quantifiable levels. Formaldehyde was detected at consistent levels during all sampling periods. These two studies found that indoor vaping of MarkTen prototype e-cigarette does not produce chemical constituents at quantifiable levels or background levels using standard industrial hygiene collection techniques and analytical methods. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1080/15459624.2015.1116693 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1768562279</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3982247401</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c460t-87b5e6c2beaf5b4408e94c420f39344d7f8cee4d75f03ea7874af2f8aad919003</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkU1PGzEQhi1UBCnwE1qt1EsvG_z9cWuFCo0UxAXOlrM7Tox216ntBeXfd6MEDj20vcyMRs-8lvUg9IngOcEaXxPBhZGUzykmYk4IkdKwEzTb72sjGf3wPlN-jj7m_IwxlYTJM3ROpVBSMz5D94shh_Wm5Mqn2FflNVZhaMdcUnBdtdmtAwxQbUMXSwV1E9YuQSnTxuUcXqB6cdswrKtcxjZAvkSn3nUZro79Aj3d_ni8-VkvH-4WN9-XdcMlLrVWKwGyoStwXqw4xxoMbzjFnhnGeau8bgCmLjxm4JRW3HnqtXOtIQZjdoG-HnK3Kf4aIRfbh9xA17kB4pgtUQYbRtVU_o1qZbTCjPwHKrWQlKp96pc_0Oc4pmH680QpyqkSnE-UOFBNijkn8HabQu_SzhJs9xbtm0W7t2iPFqe7z8f0cdVD-371pm0Cvh2AMPiYevcaU9fa4nZdTD65oQnZsr-_8RuZZKq2</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1772427544</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Insights from two industrial hygiene pilot e-cigarette passive vaping studies</title><source>Taylor and Francis Science and Technology Collection</source><creator>Maloney, John C. ; Thompson, Michael K. ; Oldham, Michael J. ; Stiff, Charles L. ; Lilly, Patrick D. ; Patskan, George J. ; Shafer, Kenneth H. ; Sarkar, Mohamadi A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Maloney, John C. ; Thompson, Michael K. ; Oldham, Michael J. ; Stiff, Charles L. ; Lilly, Patrick D. ; Patskan, George J. ; Shafer, Kenneth H. ; Sarkar, Mohamadi A.</creatorcontrib><description>While several reports have been published using research methods of estimating exposure risk to e-cigarette vapors in nonusers, only two have directly measured indoor air concentrations from vaping using validated industrial hygiene sampling methodology. Our first study was designed to measure indoor air concentrations of nicotine, menthol, propylene glycol, glycerol, and total particulates during the use of multiple e-cigarettes in a well-characterized room over a period of time. Our second study was a repeat of the first study, and it also evaluated levels of formaldehyde. Measurements were collected using active sampling, near real-time and direct measurement techniques. Air sampling incorporated industrial hygiene sampling methodology using analytical methods established by the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Active samples were collected over a 12-hr period, for 4 days. Background measurements were taken in the same room the day before and the day after vaping. Panelists (n = 185 Study 1; n = 145 Study 2) used menthol and non-menthol MarkTen prototype e-cigarettes. Vaping sessions (six, 1-hr) included 3 prototypes, with total number of puffs ranging from 36-216 per session. Results of the active samples were below the limit of quantitation of the analytical methods. Near real-time data were below the lowest concentration on the established calibration curves. Data from this study indicate that the majority of chemical constituents sampled were below quantifiable levels. Formaldehyde was detected at consistent levels during all sampling periods. These two studies found that indoor vaping of MarkTen prototype e-cigarette does not produce chemical constituents at quantifiable levels or background levels using standard industrial hygiene collection techniques and analytical methods.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1545-9624</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1545-9632</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/15459624.2015.1116693</identifier><identifier>PMID: 26576834</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Taylor & Francis</publisher><subject>Air Pollutants - analysis ; Air Pollution, Indoor - analysis ; Atmosphere concentrations ; Constituents ; e-cigarette ; Electronic cigarettes ; Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems ; Formaldehyde - analysis ; Glycerol - analysis ; Health ; Health risk assessment ; Human exposure ; Hygiene ; Industrial health and safety ; Mathematical analysis ; Measurement techniques ; Menthol ; Menthol - analysis ; Nicotine - analysis ; Occupational Health ; Occupational safety ; Particulate Matter - analysis ; passive vaping ; Pilot Projects ; Propylene Glycol - analysis ; Prototypes ; Sampling ; Studies ; Vaping</subject><ispartof>Journal of occupational and environmental hygiene, 2016-04, Vol.13 (4), p.275-283</ispartof><rights>2016 JOEH, LLC 2016</rights><rights>Copyright Taylor & Francis Group 2016</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c460t-87b5e6c2beaf5b4408e94c420f39344d7f8cee4d75f03ea7874af2f8aad919003</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c460t-87b5e6c2beaf5b4408e94c420f39344d7f8cee4d75f03ea7874af2f8aad919003</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26576834$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Maloney, John C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thompson, Michael K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oldham, Michael J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stiff, Charles L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lilly, Patrick D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Patskan, George J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shafer, Kenneth H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sarkar, Mohamadi A.</creatorcontrib><title>Insights from two industrial hygiene pilot e-cigarette passive vaping studies</title><title>Journal of occupational and environmental hygiene</title><addtitle>J Occup Environ Hyg</addtitle><description>While several reports have been published using research methods of estimating exposure risk to e-cigarette vapors in nonusers, only two have directly measured indoor air concentrations from vaping using validated industrial hygiene sampling methodology. Our first study was designed to measure indoor air concentrations of nicotine, menthol, propylene glycol, glycerol, and total particulates during the use of multiple e-cigarettes in a well-characterized room over a period of time. Our second study was a repeat of the first study, and it also evaluated levels of formaldehyde. Measurements were collected using active sampling, near real-time and direct measurement techniques. Air sampling incorporated industrial hygiene sampling methodology using analytical methods established by the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Active samples were collected over a 12-hr period, for 4 days. Background measurements were taken in the same room the day before and the day after vaping. Panelists (n = 185 Study 1; n = 145 Study 2) used menthol and non-menthol MarkTen prototype e-cigarettes. Vaping sessions (six, 1-hr) included 3 prototypes, with total number of puffs ranging from 36-216 per session. Results of the active samples were below the limit of quantitation of the analytical methods. Near real-time data were below the lowest concentration on the established calibration curves. Data from this study indicate that the majority of chemical constituents sampled were below quantifiable levels. Formaldehyde was detected at consistent levels during all sampling periods. These two studies found that indoor vaping of MarkTen prototype e-cigarette does not produce chemical constituents at quantifiable levels or background levels using standard industrial hygiene collection techniques and analytical methods.</description><subject>Air Pollutants - analysis</subject><subject>Air Pollution, Indoor - analysis</subject><subject>Atmosphere concentrations</subject><subject>Constituents</subject><subject>e-cigarette</subject><subject>Electronic cigarettes</subject><subject>Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems</subject><subject>Formaldehyde - analysis</subject><subject>Glycerol - analysis</subject><subject>Health</subject><subject>Health risk assessment</subject><subject>Human exposure</subject><subject>Hygiene</subject><subject>Industrial health and safety</subject><subject>Mathematical analysis</subject><subject>Measurement techniques</subject><subject>Menthol</subject><subject>Menthol - analysis</subject><subject>Nicotine - analysis</subject><subject>Occupational Health</subject><subject>Occupational safety</subject><subject>Particulate Matter - analysis</subject><subject>passive vaping</subject><subject>Pilot Projects</subject><subject>Propylene Glycol - analysis</subject><subject>Prototypes</subject><subject>Sampling</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Vaping</subject><issn>1545-9624</issn><issn>1545-9632</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNkU1PGzEQhi1UBCnwE1qt1EsvG_z9cWuFCo0UxAXOlrM7Tox216ntBeXfd6MEDj20vcyMRs-8lvUg9IngOcEaXxPBhZGUzykmYk4IkdKwEzTb72sjGf3wPlN-jj7m_IwxlYTJM3ROpVBSMz5D94shh_Wm5Mqn2FflNVZhaMdcUnBdtdmtAwxQbUMXSwV1E9YuQSnTxuUcXqB6cdswrKtcxjZAvkSn3nUZro79Aj3d_ni8-VkvH-4WN9-XdcMlLrVWKwGyoStwXqw4xxoMbzjFnhnGeau8bgCmLjxm4JRW3HnqtXOtIQZjdoG-HnK3Kf4aIRfbh9xA17kB4pgtUQYbRtVU_o1qZbTCjPwHKrWQlKp96pc_0Oc4pmH680QpyqkSnE-UOFBNijkn8HabQu_SzhJs9xbtm0W7t2iPFqe7z8f0cdVD-371pm0Cvh2AMPiYevcaU9fa4nZdTD65oQnZsr-_8RuZZKq2</recordid><startdate>20160402</startdate><enddate>20160402</enddate><creator>Maloney, John C.</creator><creator>Thompson, Michael K.</creator><creator>Oldham, Michael J.</creator><creator>Stiff, Charles L.</creator><creator>Lilly, Patrick D.</creator><creator>Patskan, George J.</creator><creator>Shafer, Kenneth H.</creator><creator>Sarkar, Mohamadi A.</creator><general>Taylor & Francis</general><general>Taylor & Francis LLC</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QF</scope><scope>7QQ</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>7SE</scope><scope>7SP</scope><scope>7SR</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7T2</scope><scope>7TA</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>7U5</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>8BQ</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F28</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H8D</scope><scope>H8G</scope><scope>JG9</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7U2</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20160402</creationdate><title>Insights from two industrial hygiene pilot e-cigarette passive vaping studies</title><author>Maloney, John C. ; Thompson, Michael K. ; Oldham, Michael J. ; Stiff, Charles L. ; Lilly, Patrick D. ; Patskan, George J. ; Shafer, Kenneth H. ; Sarkar, Mohamadi A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c460t-87b5e6c2beaf5b4408e94c420f39344d7f8cee4d75f03ea7874af2f8aad919003</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Air Pollutants - analysis</topic><topic>Air Pollution, Indoor - analysis</topic><topic>Atmosphere concentrations</topic><topic>Constituents</topic><topic>e-cigarette</topic><topic>Electronic cigarettes</topic><topic>Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems</topic><topic>Formaldehyde - analysis</topic><topic>Glycerol - analysis</topic><topic>Health</topic><topic>Health risk assessment</topic><topic>Human exposure</topic><topic>Hygiene</topic><topic>Industrial health and safety</topic><topic>Mathematical analysis</topic><topic>Measurement techniques</topic><topic>Menthol</topic><topic>Menthol - analysis</topic><topic>Nicotine - analysis</topic><topic>Occupational Health</topic><topic>Occupational safety</topic><topic>Particulate Matter - analysis</topic><topic>passive vaping</topic><topic>Pilot Projects</topic><topic>Propylene Glycol - analysis</topic><topic>Prototypes</topic><topic>Sampling</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Vaping</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Maloney, John C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thompson, Michael K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oldham, Michael J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stiff, Charles L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lilly, Patrick D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Patskan, George J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shafer, Kenneth H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sarkar, Mohamadi A.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Aluminium Industry Abstracts</collection><collection>Ceramic Abstracts</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Corrosion Abstracts</collection><collection>Electronics & Communications Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineered Materials Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Health and Safety Science Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Materials Business File</collection><collection>Mechanical & Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Solid State and Superconductivity Abstracts</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>METADEX</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ANTE: Abstracts in New Technology & Engineering</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Aerospace Database</collection><collection>Copper Technical Reference Library</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Safety Science and Risk</collection><jtitle>Journal of occupational and environmental hygiene</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Maloney, John C.</au><au>Thompson, Michael K.</au><au>Oldham, Michael J.</au><au>Stiff, Charles L.</au><au>Lilly, Patrick D.</au><au>Patskan, George J.</au><au>Shafer, Kenneth H.</au><au>Sarkar, Mohamadi A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Insights from two industrial hygiene pilot e-cigarette passive vaping studies</atitle><jtitle>Journal of occupational and environmental hygiene</jtitle><addtitle>J Occup Environ Hyg</addtitle><date>2016-04-02</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>13</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>275</spage><epage>283</epage><pages>275-283</pages><issn>1545-9624</issn><eissn>1545-9632</eissn><abstract>While several reports have been published using research methods of estimating exposure risk to e-cigarette vapors in nonusers, only two have directly measured indoor air concentrations from vaping using validated industrial hygiene sampling methodology. Our first study was designed to measure indoor air concentrations of nicotine, menthol, propylene glycol, glycerol, and total particulates during the use of multiple e-cigarettes in a well-characterized room over a period of time. Our second study was a repeat of the first study, and it also evaluated levels of formaldehyde. Measurements were collected using active sampling, near real-time and direct measurement techniques. Air sampling incorporated industrial hygiene sampling methodology using analytical methods established by the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Active samples were collected over a 12-hr period, for 4 days. Background measurements were taken in the same room the day before and the day after vaping. Panelists (n = 185 Study 1; n = 145 Study 2) used menthol and non-menthol MarkTen prototype e-cigarettes. Vaping sessions (six, 1-hr) included 3 prototypes, with total number of puffs ranging from 36-216 per session. Results of the active samples were below the limit of quantitation of the analytical methods. Near real-time data were below the lowest concentration on the established calibration curves. Data from this study indicate that the majority of chemical constituents sampled were below quantifiable levels. Formaldehyde was detected at consistent levels during all sampling periods. These two studies found that indoor vaping of MarkTen prototype e-cigarette does not produce chemical constituents at quantifiable levels or background levels using standard industrial hygiene collection techniques and analytical methods.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Taylor & Francis</pub><pmid>26576834</pmid><doi>10.1080/15459624.2015.1116693</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1545-9624 |
ispartof | Journal of occupational and environmental hygiene, 2016-04, Vol.13 (4), p.275-283 |
issn | 1545-9624 1545-9632 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1768562279 |
source | Taylor and Francis Science and Technology Collection |
subjects | Air Pollutants - analysis Air Pollution, Indoor - analysis Atmosphere concentrations Constituents e-cigarette Electronic cigarettes Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems Formaldehyde - analysis Glycerol - analysis Health Health risk assessment Human exposure Hygiene Industrial health and safety Mathematical analysis Measurement techniques Menthol Menthol - analysis Nicotine - analysis Occupational Health Occupational safety Particulate Matter - analysis passive vaping Pilot Projects Propylene Glycol - analysis Prototypes Sampling Studies Vaping |
title | Insights from two industrial hygiene pilot e-cigarette passive vaping studies |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T16%3A24%3A43IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Insights%20from%20two%20industrial%20hygiene%20pilot%20e-cigarette%20passive%20vaping%20studies&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20occupational%20and%20environmental%20hygiene&rft.au=Maloney,%20John%20C.&rft.date=2016-04-02&rft.volume=13&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=275&rft.epage=283&rft.pages=275-283&rft.issn=1545-9624&rft.eissn=1545-9632&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/15459624.2015.1116693&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3982247401%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c460t-87b5e6c2beaf5b4408e94c420f39344d7f8cee4d75f03ea7874af2f8aad919003%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1772427544&rft_id=info:pmid/26576834&rfr_iscdi=true |