Maciej L Goniewicz1, Ribhav Gupta2, Yong Hee Lee2, Skyler Reinhardt2, Sungroul Kim3, Bokyeong Kim3, Leon Kosmider4, Andrzej Sobczak5. 1. Department of Health Behavior, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, United States. Electronic address: maciej.goniewicz@roswellpark.org. 2. Department of Health Behavior, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, United States. 3. Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Soonchunhyang University, Asan, South Korea. 4. Department of General and Analytical Chemistry, School of Pharmacy and the Division of Laboratory Medicine, Medical University of Silesia, Sosnowiec, Poland; Department of Chemical Hazards, Institute of Occupational and Environmental Health, Sosnowiec, Poland. 5. Department of Chemical Hazards, Institute of Occupational and Environmental Health, Sosnowiec, Poland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Electronic cigarettes vaporize nicotine dissolved in glycerine and/or propylene glycol (e-liquid). Due to a lack of regulations, e-liquids may contain inaccurately labelled nicotine levels. Our aim was to test nicotine levels in samples of e-liquids from three countries. METHODS: We measured nicotine concentration in 32, 29 and 30 e-liquids purchased between 2013 and 2014 from locations in the United States (US), South Korea, and Poland, respectively. RESULTS: Nicotine concentration in the US products varied from 0 to 36.6 mg/mL. Traces of nicotine were found in three US products labelled as 'nicotine free'. Two-thirds of South Korean products did not contain detectable amounts of nicotine, whereas nicotine concentration in other products varied from 6.4±0.7 to 150.3±7.9 (labelled as 'pure nicotine') mg/mL. In products from Poland, nicotine concentration varied from 0 to 24.7±0.1 mg/mL. Overall, we found significant discrepancies (>20%) in the labelled nicotine concentrations in 19% of analysed e-liquids. CONCLUSION: Most of the analysed samples had no significant discrepancies in labelled nicotine concentrations and contained low nicotine levels. However some products labelled as 'nicotine-free' had detectable levels of the substance, suggesting insufficient manufacturing quality control. We identified a single product labelled as 'pure nicotine' which contained significantly higher concentration of the drug, increasing the risk of accidental poisoning. The study reveals the need for quality standards of these new nicotine containing products.
BACKGROUND: Electronic cigarettes vaporize nicotine dissolved in glycerine and/or propylene glycol (e-liquid). Due to a lack of regulations, e-liquids may contain inaccurately labelled nicotine levels. Our aim was to test nicotine levels in samples of e-liquids from three countries. METHODS: We measured nicotine concentration in 32, 29 and 30 e-liquids purchased between 2013 and 2014 from locations in the United States (US), South Korea, and Poland, respectively. RESULTS:Nicotine concentration in the US products varied from 0 to 36.6 mg/mL. Traces of nicotine were found in three US products labelled as 'nicotine free'. Two-thirds of South Korean products did not contain detectable amounts of nicotine, whereas nicotine concentration in other products varied from 6.4±0.7 to 150.3±7.9 (labelled as 'pure nicotine') mg/mL. In products from Poland, nicotine concentration varied from 0 to 24.7±0.1 mg/mL. Overall, we found significant discrepancies (>20%) in the labelled nicotine concentrations in 19% of analysed e-liquids. CONCLUSION: Most of the analysed samples had no significant discrepancies in labelled nicotine concentrations and contained low nicotine levels. However some products labelled as 'nicotine-free' had detectable levels of the substance, suggesting insufficient manufacturing quality control. We identified a single product labelled as 'pure nicotine' which contained significantly higher concentration of the drug, increasing the risk of accidental poisoning. The study reveals the need for quality standards of these new nicotine containing products.
Authors: Andrea R Vansickel; Caroline O Cobb; Michael F Weaver; Thomas E Eissenberg Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2010-07-20 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Ahmad El-Hellani; Rola Salman; Rachel El-Hage; Soha Talih; Nathalie Malek; Rima Baalbaki; Nareg Karaoghlanian; Rima Nakkash; Alan Shihadeh; Najat A Saliba Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2018-01-05 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Lauren F Chun; Farzad Moazed; Carolyn S Calfee; Michael A Matthay; Jeffrey E Gotts Journal: Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol Date: 2017-05-18 Impact factor: 5.464