tHIS IS A BIT MORE REALISTICALLY Presented.
compounds analyzed.”
Does e-cigarette consumption cause passive vaping?
Schripp, T., et al.
Published in Indoor Air, 2013
Worthy of note is that the initial tests in an 8m3 chamber did not show any of the expected chemicals from vapour, suggesting that the vapour is not sustained in the air, and is dispersed and settles out quickly, limiting exposure. They also detected formaldehyde, but stated:
“This might be caused by the person in the chamber itself, because people are known to exhale formaldehyde in low amounts and the increase was already observed during the conditioning phase, furthermore the release of formaldehyde was below the limit of detection in the small scale [10 litre] experiments”.
The level observed during cigarette smoking stands in stark contrast to this, as indicated in this graph:
Given that formaldehyde is a ubiquitous airborne chemical, it suggests that emission of formaldehyde from the use of an electronic cigarette was not of a level to cause additional risk. Indeed, the results from the 8m3 show very few chemicals at detectable levels, and all of those chemicals have no risks associated with them at low concentrations, with the possible exception of isoprene (which is also generated in breath; in fact, it the most significant hydrocarbon in exhaled breath). Isoprene levels were 8 µg/m3 for the participant blank, and fell to below that for the first two e-cigarette tests, before rising to 10 µg/m3 for the third test.
No estimate of error margin was given, but these results are not suggestive of isoprene generation by e-cigarettes at significant levels. The value for cigarettes smoke was 135 µg/m3. Given the lack of results in a standard size room (8m3), the claim that “'passive vaping' must be expected from the consumption of e-cigarettes” does not seem to be well supported by the results. Indeed, the data would seem to demonstrate exactly the opposite.
Results from a much smaller 10 litre chamber did show more results (again, mainly harmless) and this is not a volume representative of passive vaping since even the smallest conceivable shared space is necessarily larger than this. (People do not cohabit saucepans.). Unfortunately, they did not run the smoke tests in the 10 litre chamber, so direct comparisons on this extremely small volume cannot be made.
Characterization of chemicals released to the environment by electronic cigarette use (ClearStream-AIR project): is passive vaping a reality?
Romagna, G., et al
Abstract presented at SRNT meeting, Helsinki, 2012
“…this preliminary assessment indicates that passive vaping impact, when compared to the traditional cigarette smoking, is so low that it is just detectable, and it does not have the toxic and carcinogenic characteristics of cigarette smoking. The absence of combustion and the lack of sidestream smoking, with its known toxic effects [2,6] are probably the main reasons for the differences observed in air pollution characteristics between e-cigarettes and tobacco smoking.
On the base of the obtained results and on ARPA data about urban pollution, we can conclude by saying that could be more unhealthy to breathe air in big cities compared to staying in the same room with someone who is vaping.”
