Bill Godshall Update 2014-01-14
lots of links and research and stuff
first link exerpt: http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1471-2458-14-18.pdf
Abstract:
Background
Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are generally recognized as a safer alternative to
combusted tobacco products, but there are conflicting claims about the degree to which these
products warrant concern for the health of the vapers (e-cigarette users). This paper reviews
available data on chemistry of aerosols and liquids of electronic cigarettes and compares
modeled exposure of vapers with occupational safety standards.
Methods
Both peer-reviewed and “grey” literature were accessed and more than 9,000 observations of
highly variable quality were extracted. Comparisons to the most universally recognized
workplace exposure standards, Threshold Limit Values (TLVs), were conducted under “worst
case” assumptions about both chemical content of aerosol and liquids as well as behavior of
vapers.
Results
There was no evidence of potential for exposures of e-cigarette users to contaminants that are
associated with risk to health at a level that would warrant attention if it were an involuntary
workplace exposures. The vast majority of predicted exposures are < <1% of TLV. Predicted
exposures to acrolein and formaldehyde are typically <5% TLV. Considering exposure to the
aerosol as a mixture of contaminants did not indicate that exceeding half of TLV for mixtures
was plausible. Only exposures to the declared major ingredients -- propylene glycol and
glycerin -- warrant attention because of precautionary nature of TLVs for exposures to
hydrocarbons with no established toxicity.
Conclusions
Current state of knowledge about chemistry of liquids and aerosols associated with electronic
cigarettes indicates that there is no evidence that vaping produces inhalable exposures to
contaminants of the aerosol that would warrant health concerns by the standards that are used
to ensure safety of workplaces. However, the aerosol generated during vaping as a whole (contaminants plus declared ingredients) creates personal exposures that would justify
surveillance of health among exposed persons in conjunction with investigation of means to
keep any adverse health effects as low as reasonably achievable. Exposures of bystanders are
likely to be orders of magnitude less, and thus pose no apparent concern.
lots of links and research and stuff
first link exerpt: http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1471-2458-14-18.pdf
Abstract:
Background
Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are generally recognized as a safer alternative to
combusted tobacco products, but there are conflicting claims about the degree to which these
products warrant concern for the health of the vapers (e-cigarette users). This paper reviews
available data on chemistry of aerosols and liquids of electronic cigarettes and compares
modeled exposure of vapers with occupational safety standards.
Methods
Both peer-reviewed and “grey” literature were accessed and more than 9,000 observations of
highly variable quality were extracted. Comparisons to the most universally recognized
workplace exposure standards, Threshold Limit Values (TLVs), were conducted under “worst
case” assumptions about both chemical content of aerosol and liquids as well as behavior of
vapers.
Results
There was no evidence of potential for exposures of e-cigarette users to contaminants that are
associated with risk to health at a level that would warrant attention if it were an involuntary
workplace exposures. The vast majority of predicted exposures are < <1% of TLV. Predicted
exposures to acrolein and formaldehyde are typically <5% TLV. Considering exposure to the
aerosol as a mixture of contaminants did not indicate that exceeding half of TLV for mixtures
was plausible. Only exposures to the declared major ingredients -- propylene glycol and
glycerin -- warrant attention because of precautionary nature of TLVs for exposures to
hydrocarbons with no established toxicity.
Conclusions
Current state of knowledge about chemistry of liquids and aerosols associated with electronic
cigarettes indicates that there is no evidence that vaping produces inhalable exposures to
contaminants of the aerosol that would warrant health concerns by the standards that are used
to ensure safety of workplaces. However, the aerosol generated during vaping as a whole (contaminants plus declared ingredients) creates personal exposures that would justify
surveillance of health among exposed persons in conjunction with investigation of means to
keep any adverse health effects as low as reasonably achievable. Exposures of bystanders are
likely to be orders of magnitude less, and thus pose no apparent concern.
Last edited:
