Arit Harvanko1, Richard Kryscio2, Catherine Martin3, Thomas Kelly4. 1. Department of Psychology, University of Kentucky, Kastle Hall, 171 Funkhouser Drive, Lexington, KY 40506-0044 United States; Department of Behavioral Science, University of Kentucky, Medical Behavioral Science Building, Lexington, KY 40536-0086 United States. Electronic address: Arit.H@uky.edu. 2. Department of Statistics, University of Kentucky, 725 Rose Street Multidisciplinary Science Building 0082, Room 311, Lexington, KY 40536-0082 United States. Electronic address: Kryscio@email.uky.edu. 3. Department of Psychiatry, University of Kentucky College of Medicine, 245 Fountain Court, Lexington, KY 40509-1810 United States. Electronic address: Cmartin@uky.edu. 4. Department of Psychology, University of Kentucky, Kastle Hall, 171 Funkhouser Drive, Lexington, KY 40506-0044 United States; Department of Behavioral Science, University of Kentucky, Medical Behavioral Science Building, Lexington, KY 40536-0086 United States; Department of Psychiatry, University of Kentucky College of Medicine, 245 Fountain Court, Lexington, KY 40509-1810 United States. Electronic address: thkelly@uky.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Little is known about the behavioral effects of non-nicotine ingredients in electronic cigarette liquids. Propylene glycol (PG) and vegetable glycerin (VG) are the most common humectants used in electronic cigarette liquids. These ingredients may influence stimulus effects (e.g., visibility of exhalant, taste, or smell), which have played a role in the abuse liability of conventional cigarettes. In the current study, the stimulus effects of aerosol from liquids varying only in PG and VG content were assessed. METHODS: Sixteen electronic cigarette users completed five sessions (one practice and four testing sessions). Following one hour of nicotine deprivation, two sampling puffs from liquid formulations containing 100/0, 75/25, 50/50, 25/75, and 0/100% PG/VG concentrations were administered in random order during five assessments, each separated by 20 min. Measures included self-reported stimulus effects and breakpoint on a multiple-choice procedure with options consisting of sampled puffs or varying amounts of money. RESULTS: VG content was associated with greater reports of visibility of the exhalant (i.e., "cloud"). Liquids with only PG or VG engendered lower reports of inhalation sensations (e.g., throat hit) and greater reductions of systolic blood pressure compared to mixtures of PG and VG. There was no effect of liquid formulation on the multiple-choice procedure, but puffs were rarely chosen over even the smallest monetary option ($0.05), suggesting minimal reinforcing efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: Liquids containing greater concentrations of VG are more capable of producing visible exhalant and mixtures of PG and VG engender greater airway sensory effects than either ingredient alone.
BACKGROUND: Little is known about the behavioral effects of non-nicotine ingredients in electronic cigarette liquids. Propylene glycol (PG) and vegetable glycerin (VG) are the most common humectants used in electronic cigarette liquids. These ingredients may influence stimulus effects (e.g., visibility of exhalant, taste, or smell), which have played a role in the abuse liability of conventional cigarettes. In the current study, the stimulus effects of aerosol from liquids varying only in PG and VG content were assessed. METHODS: Sixteen electronic cigarette users completed five sessions (one practice and four testing sessions). Following one hour of nicotine deprivation, two sampling puffs from liquid formulations containing 100/0, 75/25, 50/50, 25/75, and 0/100% PG/VG concentrations were administered in random order during five assessments, each separated by 20 min. Measures included self-reported stimulus effects and breakpoint on a multiple-choice procedure with options consisting of sampled puffs or varying amounts of money. RESULTS: VG content was associated with greater reports of visibility of the exhalant (i.e., "cloud"). Liquids with only PG or VG engendered lower reports of inhalation sensations (e.g., throat hit) and greater reductions of systolic blood pressure compared to mixtures of PG and VG. There was no effect of liquid formulation on the multiple-choice procedure, but puffs were rarely chosen over even the smallest monetary option ($0.05), suggesting minimal reinforcing efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: Liquids containing greater concentrations of VG are more capable of producing visible exhalant and mixtures of PG and VG engender greater airway sensory effects than either ingredient alone.
Authors: Robert Tarran; R Graham Barr; Neal L Benowitz; Aruni Bhatnagar; Hong W Chu; Pamela Dalton; Claire M Doerschuk; M Bradley Drummond; Diane R Gold; Maciej L Goniewicz; Eric R Gross; Nadia N Hansel; Philip K Hopke; Robert A Kloner; Vladimir B Mikheev; Evan W Neczypor; Kent E Pinkerton; Lisa Postow; Irfan Rahman; Jonathan M Samet; Matthias Salathe; Catherine M Stoney; Philip S Tsao; Rachel Widome; Tian Xia; DaLiao Xiao; Loren E Wold Journal: Function (Oxf) Date: 2021-02-08
Authors: Lin Li; Ron Borland; Kenneth Michael Cummings; Geoffrey T Fong; Shannon Gravely; Danielle M Smith; Maciej L Goniewicz; Richard J O'Connor; Mary E Thompson; Ann McNeill Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2021-08-18 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Natalie L Johnson; Theresa Patten; Minghong Ma; Mariella De Biasi; Daniel W Wesson Journal: Front Neurosci Date: 2022-07-19 Impact factor: 5.152
Authors: M Woodall; J Jacob; K K Kalsi; V Schroeder; E Davis; B Kenyon; I Khan; J P Garnett; R Tarran; D L Baines Journal: Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol Date: 2020-09-30 Impact factor: 6.011