Catherine Ann Hess1, Pablo Olmedo2, Ana Navas-Acien3, Walter Goessler4, Joanna E Cohen5, Ana Maria Rule2. 1. University of California, Berkeley, School of Public Health, Prevention Research Center, 180 Grand Ave., Ste. 1200, Oakland, CA 94612, USA; Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 N. Wolfe St. Baltimore, MD 21205, USA. Electronic address: chess@prev.org. 2. Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 N. Wolfe St. Baltimore, MD 21205, USA. 3. Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 N. Wolfe St. Baltimore, MD 21205, USA; Institute for Global Tobacco Control, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 N. Wolfe St. Baltimore, MD 21205, USA. 4. Karl-Franzens-Universität Graz, Graz, Institute of Chemistry, Unversitätsplatz 1, 8010 Graz, Austria. 5. Institute for Global Tobacco Control, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 N. Wolfe St. Baltimore, MD 21205, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The popularity of electronic cigarette devices is growing worldwide. The health impact of e-cigarette use, however, remains unclear. E-cigarettes are marketed as a safer alternative to cigarettes. The aim of this research was the characterization and quantification of toxic metal concentrations in five, nationally popular brands of cig-a-like e-cigarettes. METHODS: We analyzed the cartomizer liquid in 10 cartomizer refills for each of five brands by Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS). RESULTS: All of the tested metals (cadmium, chromium, lead, manganese and nickel) were found in the e-liquids analyzed. Across all analyzed brands, mean (SD) concentrations ranged from 4.89 (0.893) to 1970 (1540) μg/L for lead, 53.9 (6.95) to 2110 (5220) μg/L for chromium and 58.7 (22.4) to 22,600 (24,400) μg/L for nickel. Manganese concentrations ranged from 28.7 (9.79) to 6910.2 (12,200) μg/L. We found marked variability in nickel and chromium concentration within and between brands, which may come from heating elements. CONCLUSION: Additional research is needed to evaluate whether e-cigarettes represent a relevant exposure pathway for toxic metals in users. Copyright Â
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The popularity of electronic cigarette devices is growing worldwide. The health impact of e-cigarette use, however, remains unclear. E-cigarettes are marketed as a safer alternative to cigarettes. The aim of this research was the characterization and quantification of toxic metal concentrations in five, nationally popular brands of cig-a-like e-cigarettes. METHODS: We analyzed the cartomizer liquid in 10 cartomizer refills for each of five brands by Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS). RESULTS: All of the tested metals (cadmium, chromium, lead, manganese and nickel) were found in the e-liquids analyzed. Across all analyzed brands, mean (SD) concentrations ranged from 4.89 (0.893) to 1970 (1540) μg/L for lead, 53.9 (6.95) to 2110 (5220) μg/L for chromium and 58.7 (22.4) to 22,600 (24,400) μg/L for nickel. Manganese concentrations ranged from 28.7 (9.79) to 6910.2 (12,200) μg/L. We found marked variability in nickel and chromium concentration within and between brands, which may come from heating elements. CONCLUSION: Additional research is needed to evaluate whether e-cigarettes represent a relevant exposure pathway for toxic metals in users. Copyright Â
Authors: D Mergler; M Baldwin; S Bélanger; F Larribe; A Beuter; R Bowler; M Panisset; R Edwards; A de Geoffroy; M P Sassine; K Hudnell Journal: Neurotoxicology Date: 1999 Apr-Jun Impact factor: 4.294
Authors: Lindsay E Wu; Aviva Levina; Hugh H Harris; Zhonghou Cai; Barry Lai; Stefan Vogt; David E James; Peter A Lay Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2015-12-22 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: Tamika D Gilreath; Adam Leventhal; Jessica L Barrington-Trimis; Jennifer B Unger; Tess Boley Cruz; Kiros Berhane; Jimi Huh; Robert Urman; Kejia Wang; Steve Howland; Mary Ann Pentz; Chih Ping Chou; Rob McConnell Journal: J Adolesc Health Date: 2015-11-17 Impact factor: 5.012
Authors: Maciej Lukasz Goniewicz; Jakub Knysak; Michal Gawron; Leon Kosmider; Andrzej Sobczak; Jolanta Kurek; Adam Prokopowicz; Magdalena Jablonska-Czapla; Czeslawa Rosik-Dulewska; Christopher Havel; Peyton Jacob; Neal Benowitz Journal: Tob Control Date: 2013-03-06 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: Konstantinos E Farsalinos; Vassilis Voudris; Konstantinos Poulas Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2015-05-15 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Christian Montanari; Leslie K Kelley; Tony M Kerr; Maury Cole; Nicholas W Gilpin Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2019-11-23 Impact factor: 4.530
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
Authors: Markus Hilpert; Vesna Ilievski; Maxine Coady; Maria Andrade-Gutierrez; Beizhan Yan; Steven N Chillrud; Ana Navas-Acien; Norman J Kleiman Journal: Inhal Toxicol Date: 2019-12-04 Impact factor: 2.724