Abstract
The rapid evolution of electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) products warrants surveillance of the differences in exposure across device types-modifiable devices (MODs), cartridge ("pod")-containing devices (PODs), disposable PODs (d-PODs)-and flavors of the products available on the market. This study aimed to measure and compare metal aerosol concentrations by device type and common flavors. We collected aerosol from 104 MODs, 67 PODs (four brands: JUUL, Bo, Suorin, PHIX), and 23 d-PODs (three brands: ZPOD, Bidi, Stig) via droplet deposition in a series of conical pipette tips. Metals and metalloids [aluminum (Al), arsenic (As), cobalt (Co), chromium (Cr), copper (Cu), iron (Fe), manganese (Mn), nickel (Ni), lead (Pb), antimony (Sb), tin (Sn), and zinc (Zn)] were measured using inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS), results were log-transformed for statistical analysis, and concentrations are reported in aerosol units (). Of the 12 elements analyzed, concentrations were statistically significantly higher in MOD devices, except for Co and Ni, which were higher in PODs and d-PODs. Of the POD brands analyzed, PHIX had the highest median concentrations among four metals (Al, Ni, Pb, and Sn) compared to the rest of the POD brands. According to POD flavor, seven metals were three to seven orders of magnitude higher in tobacco-flavored aerosol compared to those in mint and mango flavors. Among the d-POD brands, concentrations of four metals (Al, Cu, Ni, and Pb) were higher in the ZPOD brand than in Bidi Stick and Stig devices. According to d-POD flavor, only Cr concentrations were found to be statistically significantly higher in mint than tobacco-flavored d-PODs. We observed wide variability in aerosol metal concentrations within and between the different e-cigarette device types, brands, and flavors. Overall, MOD devices generated aerosols with higher metal concentrations than PODs and d-PODs, and tobacco-flavored aerosols contained the highest metal concentrations. Continued research is needed to evaluate additional factors (i.e., nicotine type) that contribute to metal exposure from new and emerging e-cigarette devices in order to inform policy. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP11921.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.