Clear The Air News Tobacco Blog Rotating Header Image

Safety

Blu unveils new vaping range to comply with EU tobacco product legislation

E-smoking brand Blu has unveiled its next-generation range ahead of the deadline for retailers to sell off stocks that don’t comply with strict EU legislation.

From 27 May 2017, it will be unlawful to sell vaping products that contravene EU Tobacco Products Directive II (EUTPD II), which focus on quality and safety, and include the requirement for a product warning stating, “This product contains nicotine, which is a highly addictive substance.”

The new EUTPD II-compliant line-up from Blu will roll out on 1 November with improved technology ‘to provide a better experience for consumers’. It includes a PRO e-cig kit, with a Clearomiser mouthpiece, and a selection of e-liquids.

The brand has also launched a guide to EUTPD II to help retailers understand the changes being put in place.

The vaping market was booming, with a retail sales value of £168m and showing an 18% increase on sales last year, according to Jennifer Roberts, vice-president of customer marketing at Blu (UK). “But it’s going to see a lot of change over the next six to nine months as the next stage of legislation comes into effect,” she added.

Retailers should begin to promote non-compliant stock to sell through, said Roberts. “By beginning the changeover to compliant stock as soon as possible, retailers will give a positive message to shoppers and show they understand the category and are a credible vaping stockist.”

Vape cigarette battery sets fire to luggage in aircraft cargo hold

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/news/vape-cigarette-battery-sets-fire-to-luggage-on-united-flight/

An e-cigarette battery set fire to an air passenger’s luggage while it was being loaded into the hold of a United Airlines flight, according to reports.

Baggage handlers at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport spotted smoke coming from a bag as they stowed it in an aircraft destined for Houston, said Seattle’s Komo News.

Firefighters extinguished the flames and traced the source of the fire to a vape cigarette battery which was connected to a charger, reported the newspaper. The owner of the bag was identified, and the flight took off slightly delayed.

United Airlines has been contacted for comment.

E-cigarettes are powered by lithium-ion batteries – a particularly volatile type of rechargable cell that has been linked to spontaneous fires in smartphones and other electronic devices.

The US Department of Transportation and the UK’s Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) prohibit the transportation of electronic cigarettes in checked-in baggage, due to the volatility of their lithium-ion batteries. They must be carried in hand luggage, but using vapes in the cabins of commercial flights is also illegal.

This isn’t the first incident of its kind. In 2014, firefighters at Logan International Airport in Boston, Massachusetts, were called to extinguish a passenger’s vape that had ignited inside a cargo hold. And in March this year, a Delta Airlines flight from Atlanta International to St Louis was delayed when a passenger’s e-cigarette set light to their carry-on bag during boarding.

United Airlines’ baggage guidance states: “Electronic cigarettes and personal vaporizers will not be accepted in checked or gate-checked baggage. These items may be stowed in carry-on baggage or on your person during travel, however, the use and charging of e-cigarettes and personal vaporizers is prohibited onboard all United flights.”

The CAA states that “e-cigarettes, e-cigars, personal vaporizers and electronic nicotine delivery systems all contain lithium batteries, which must be carried in the cabin and not in your suitcase”. See the CAA website for full guidance on travelling with lithium-ion batteries in phones, cameras and e-cigarettes.

“We know from recent incidents that e-cigarettes in checked bags can catch fire during transport,” said US Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx when e-cigarettes were banned from hold luggage in America. “Fire hazards in flight are particularly dangerous. Banning e-cigarettes from checked bags is a prudent safety measure.”

Earlier this month, it was announced that Samsung would halt the production of its lithium ion-powered Note 7 phone after multiple reports of the devices catching fire. Airlines such as Qantas, Singapore Airlines and Cathay Pacific had prohibited passengers from bringing the smartphones on board.

E-cigarettes: a consumer-led revolution

E-cigarettes are used by millions in the UK, but information about them is sometimes conflicting. So what is the current evidence on them?

https://www.theguardian.com/science/sifting-the-evidence/2015/oct/23/e-cigarettes-a-consumer-led-revolution

It has been described as a ‘disruptive technology’ potentially capable of breaking our fatal relationship with tobacco. So the setting for a public debate on e-cigarettes – a museum part-funded by the tobacco industry, in a city home to the global headquarters of one of the largest tobacco manufacturers – was perhaps ironic. Yet on Wednesday evening, I found myself at the M-Shed in Bristol, watching just that: a debate about whether e-cigarettes could be part of the solution to the tobacco epidemic.

To mark the launch of a new Integrative Cancer Epidemiology Programme, linked to the Medical Research Centre Integrative Epidemiology Unit at the University of Bristol, Professor Marcus Munafò (Professor of Biological Psychology at the University of Bristol) and Professor Linda Bauld (Professor of Health Policy at the University of Stirling), both collaborators of mine, discussed e-cigarettes. Professor Gabriel Scally (Public Health Doctor and former Regional Director of Public Health for the South West of England) chaired the discussion.

Billed as a debate about whether e-cigarettes might be ‘the key to reducing smoking’, some in the audience may have expected a heated discussion. However, with this line-up of academics, influential in the fields of public health, tobacco and addiction, the discussion was evidence-based and measured. As for the motion of the debate, the panel was unanimous: e-cigarettes may not be the key to reducing smoking, but they are certainly an important part of the solution.

This may be surprising to some, given ongoing discussions surrounding e-cigarettes in the media. So what is the current evidence on e-cigarettes?

Although we don’t know the long-term health effects of e-cigarette use, they’re less harmful than cigarettes

Pretty much everything is safer than cigarettes. There is no other consumer product, which, when used as the manufacturer intends, kills every other user, taking from them an average of 10 years of healthy life.

It’s been said that “people smoke for the nicotine, but die from the tar”. E-cigarettes present a solution to this problem by providing a ‘clean’ (or cleaner) method of nicotine delivery. They deliver nicotine in a similar way to a cigarette (and much faster than other forms of nicotine replacement therapy; NRT), but don’t contain the other chemicals that ultimately kill cigarette users.

A recent Public Health England report stated that e-cigarettes are 95% less harmful than cigarettes, a controversial figure. However, as Linda pointed out, it’s almost irrelevant whether e-cigarettes are 95%, 90% or even 80% less harmful than cigarettes. What’s important, is that they are less harmful.

Yes, there are still some concerns about e-cigarettes and increasing levels of confusion and misinformation among the public around them. Evidence suggests that both adults and teenagers are more likely to report that e-cigarettes are equally harmful as cigarettes today, than they were a few years ago. Both Marcus and Linda speculate that these views may have been shaped by media reports fueled by disagreements between academics.

Horror stories of children drinking the liquid nicotine (a problem which can be alleviated by having stricter controls on safety caps) and fires and accidents caused by exploding devices (the frequency of which is still far lower than the risk of fire posed by cigarettes) have been reported in the media. There are ongoing concerns about the chemicals produced when e-cigarettes are used, some of which are the same as the dangerous chemicals found in burning cigarettes (although the amount of these chemicals is a tiny fraction of the amounts found in cigarettes). Finally, we can’t yet be certain about the long-term health consequences of vaping, simply because people haven’t been using them for long enough to know (just like we didn’t know for decades that cigarettes definitely caused lung cancer).

For these reasons, we should be careful to ensure that children and non-smokers don’t start using e-cigarettes – currently there is very little evidence that these groups are regularly using the devices. However, most academics and public health officials are in agreement that for current smokers, e-cigarettes are a safer alternative to smoking.

E-cigarettes can be an effective method of stopping smoking

Linda presented evidence on the effectiveness of e-cigarettes for smoking cessation. E-cigarettes seem to be somewhere in the middle of the range when it comes to helping smokers quit. Some studies show that they are more effective than either willpower alone or NRT bought over the counter, but less effective than behavioural support.

The type of e-cigarette used matters too. The early models (‘1st generation’ or ‘cigalike’ models) don’t seem to be very effective methods of smoking cessation – interestingly, these are predominantly the models being bought up by the tobacco industry. The 2nd generation e-cigarettes and tank models (which can be refilled with liquids) seem to lead to higher levels of quitting success.

The sheer reach of e-cigarettes is their most powerful weapon. While behavioural support for cessation, combined with NRT or varenicline, has been underused by smokers wanting to quit, the rise of e-cigarette use over the past five years has been unprecedented. There are now an estimated 2.6 million vapers in the UK. With such a large numbers of users, even modest levels of smoking cessation success from their use will have a large impact on cessation rates.

E-cigarettes are a consumer-led revolution

The speed of the e-cigarette revolution and its ability to galvanize a whole community of individuals who now define themselves as ‘vapers’ is impressive. Never before has a route out of smoking garnered as much support from its users. As far as I know, there are no online forums for nicotine patch users to discuss optimal patch placement, no celebrity endorsements for nicotine lozenges and no users of nicotine nasal sprays challenging European Union Directives.

Many vapers feel passionately that e-cigarettes have enabled them to quit smoking. Indeed, a passionate crowd was in attendance at the debate. When asked at the beginning to raise their hands if they had ever tried an e-cigarette, over half of the audience did so. This is in comparison to population surveys that report 1.5%, 16.5% and 58.5% rates of ever use among non-smokers, ex-smokers and daily smokers respectively.

The last question in the debate came from a member of the public who defined himself as a ‘vaper and ex-smoker’. He expressed his dismay that new the EU Tobacco Products Directive (TPD – due to come into force in May 2016) will impose strict regulations on e-cigarettes, including bottle sizes, tank sizes and nicotine strength. In order to continue selling e-cigarettes not meeting these new regulations, retailers can instead apply for their products to be registered as medicines. But this is an extremely costly route, likely to be impractical for the majority of e-cigarette retailers other than the incredibly wealthy tobacco industry. The TPD is currently being challenged by one e-cigarette retailer. However, if it goes ahead, there are concerns from vapers and those in the public health community, that it may mean the end of vaping as we know it.

Arguably one of the reasons why e-cigarettes are so popular is that they reflect a consumer-led revolution, built from the ground up. Users can personalise their product, and many see vaping as a lifestyle choice rather than a smoking cessation aid or a medicine. If strict regulation means fewer smokers switch to using e-cigarettes, this could be a huge public health opportunity missed.

Olivia Maynard is a tobacco researcher at the University of Bristol. You can find her on twitter @oliviamaynard17.

Are E-Cig Injuries Exploding Upward?

These images show injuries to the thigh and hand that resulted from burns from flames after the lithium-ion battery of an e-cigarette exploded.  Credit: The New England Journal of Medicine © 2016

These images show injuries to the thigh and hand that resulted from burns from flames after the lithium-ion battery of an e-cigarette exploded.
Credit: The New England Journal of Medicine © 2016

Injuries from exploding e-cigarettes appear to be on the rise, according to a new analysis from a Seattle hospital.

Over a nine-month period from October 2015 to June 2016, health care workers at the University of Washington Medical Center treated 15 patients for injuries from exploding e-cigarettes.

For comparison, from 2009 to 2014, there were a total of 25 reports of injuries in the U.S. from these devices, the authors wrote in a letter published today (Oct. 5) in the New England Journal of Medicine. [E-Cigarettes: What Vaping Does to Your Body]

“We suspect that with the growing use of [e-cigarettes], many hospitals around the country will see an increase in injuries related to e-cigarette explosions,” the authors, led by Dr. Elisha Brownson, a surgeon specializing in burn care, wrote in the letter.

Of the 15 Seattle patients, 12 experienced burns from flames, according to the report. These injuries require extensive wound care and a procedure called skin grafting — in which a piece of the patient’s healthy skin from another part of the body is transplanted to the burned area — the authors wrote.

Chemical burns were also a common type of injury from an exploding e-cigarette: among the Seattle patients, five experienced such burns, which also require wound care.

These burns are caused by the alkaline chemicals found in the device’s battery, according to the report.

Four of the patients experienced “blast injuries,” the authors wrote. These injuries caused tooth loss and “extensive” soft-tissue loss in the patients, and some patients needed surgery to remove damaged tissue and close up their wounds, according to the report.

Some of the patients with blast injuries also had “traumatic tattooing,” which occurs when foreign particles get embedded below the surface of a person’s skin, creating a tattooed appearance.

The authors noted that more than half of the injuries were to the thigh or groin, one-third of the injuries were to the hands and one-fifth of the injuries were to the face.

Patients injured by e-cigarettes often require medical treatments from a number of different specialists, including emergency medicine providers, plastic surgeons, burn care providers, vocational counselors and psychologists, according to the report.

In all of the cases that the authors described, the device’s lithium-ion battery caused the explosion.

The authors noted that the Food and Drug Administration recently announced that it would begin to regulate all tobacco products, including e-cigarettes, but that it’s unclear if the agency would also regulate the batteries.

Originally published on Live Science.

Ballymena man found guilty of drink driving despite e-cigarette vaping claim

A Ballymena man who told a court that alcohol in an e-cigarette had caused a breathalyser to show he was over the drink-drive limit has lost his case.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/ballymena-man-found-guilty-of-drink-driving-despite-ecigarette-vaping-claim-35014281.html

A Ballymena man who told a court that alcohol in an e-cigarette had caused a breathalyser to show he was over the drink-drive limit has lost his case.

Chef Aaron Galbraith (35) said he was “shocked” after he was banned from driving for three years and fined £300 yesterday.

It is believed to be the first time in the UK that a defendant has used ‘vaping’ as a defence against drink-driving.

Puffing on his e-cig outside Ballymena Courthouse gates, Galbraith said he was considering appealing the decision.

As he faced a two-mile walk home from the court to Dunluce Park, he insisted to reporters he had not been drinking, but had been vaping before and after the accident, including shortly before the breathalyser test.

Galbraith said because he had a previous drink-driving offence from 10 years ago, it meant that he would never have taken the wheel again if he had consumed drink.

His defence team brought in a scientist who claimed it was possible the e-cigarette had put him over the limit.

District Judge Des Perry said although he was not discarding the evidence given in court by expert witness Michael John Walker — a private consultant in analytical measurement science — nothing he had put forward cast any doubt on the findings of the police who noted Galbraith was unsteady and slurring his speech at the roadside.

He also noted that the defendant had held down a job despite smoking e-cigarettes.

Judge Perry said he was “inclined to take the view that the possibility of e-cigarettes causing anything of this nature is remote in the extreme” and therefore the driving with excess alcohol charge was proven.

The court was told that police received a report at 12.05am in November last year of a collision at Tully Road near Ballymena.

They arrived 10 minutes later to find the defendant standing beside the vehicle. He told an officer he lost control because of the weather conditions.

A police officer noted he was unsteady on his feet and his speech was slurred.

Defence barrister Stephen Law said Galbraith was vaping before a preliminary breath test at the scene, which he failed.

He was then driven to Coleraine Police Station and Mr Law said his client again vaped in the foyer before breath tests were carried out at around 1.55am. They showed an alcohol reading of 65 with the legal limit being 35.

A prosecutor said the defendant had been asked before the test if he had inhaled anything in the previous 20 minutes and he said no. She said he should have told the truth.

Galbraith told the court he would use up to 35 millilitres of e-cigarette fluid a day but had never felt any ill-effects before.

Mr Walker told the court that literature shows around two-thirds of e-cigarettes contain ethanol (alcohol) and said it was a “possibility” that up until 15 minutes after vaping there was a chance condensed ethanol in the airway could give a misleadingly high breathalyser reading.

A prosecutor then asked Mr Walker if he accepted it was highly unlikely a breathalyser reading of 65 had anything to do with vaping.

The scientist accepted it was unlikely, but said there was a “residual possibility, quite low on the spectrum”.

After the hearing, Galbraith said he was “shocked” at the outcome.

“The vape put me over the limit, it gave a false breathalyser reading,” he insisted.

He said the accident was caused by it being a wet night and that the back of the car had “just slid out”.

Galbraith is still vaping. “It is either that or go back on the cigarettes, and I don’t want to go back to them,” he said.

Drink drive accused says e-cigarette put him over the limit

Scientific evidence to be presented in case against alleged drink driver

Evidence from a scientist is due to be presented next month in a case in which an alleged drink driver is attempting to prove alcohol in an e-cigarette put him over the limit, a court was told on Thursday.

The case is believed to be one of the first of its kind in Northern Ireland and a judge says he is looking forward to hearing the details.

Aaron David Galbraith, 35, of Dunluce Park, Ballymena , is charged with driving with excess alcohol in his breath at Tully Road outside the Co Antrim town in November last year.

Defence lawyer Stewart Ballentine told a previous court he wanted to investigate whether alcohol in an electronic cigarette accounted for his client allegedly being almost twice the legal drink limit and the scientist was drafted in.

The accused allegedly had an alcohol/breath reading of 65 – with the legal limit being 35.

Mr Ballentine also told the earlier sitting his client was “constantly using” an e-cigarette at the time of the alleged offence and was adamant he had not consumed any alcohol.

Ballymena Magistrates Court was told on Thursday the case will be heard next month.

District Judge Des Perry told a previous court he was very interested in the outcome of the potentially ground-breaking case.

At a sitting earlier this year the judge said he found the possible link to drink driving “very worrying because I use these gadgets (e-cigarettes) and I might be committing various criminal offences”.

The judge added he had never noticed any adverse effects from e-cigarettes but said over-indulgence is bad.

At Thursday’s court, Judge Perry who is soon to retire, added he is keenly anticipating the court case.

“I wouldn’t miss it,” he told the court.

Why are E-Cigarettes Blowing Up?

http://richmond.legalexaminer.com/defective-dangerous-products/912/

E-Cigarette Explodes in Man’s Pocket:

The poor guy is simply trying to pay for something at the Shell station when the battery in the e-cigarette in his pocket explodes. He was hospitalized with burns to his groin and hand. Here’s another video about a guy in Florida who is in a coma after his e-cig blew up in his face while he was vaping. The explosion shot the mouth piece down his throat where it may have exploded again.

E-cigarettes have become a multi-billion dollar industry. The potential for these devices to cause horrific injuries can be appreciated by simply watching the first several You Tube videos under “exploding e-cigarettes” where surveillance video captured the explosions. Just Google “exploding e-cigarettes” and you’ll also discover pages of stories about e-cigarette explosions resulting in terrible burn injuries.

Why are e-cigarettes exploding?

All e-cigarettes rely on a heating element that boils a liquid chemical solution. The solution is typically a combination of nicotine, flavoring, and various chemicals. The power source for the heating element is a lithium ion battery.

These batteries contain flammable electrolytes. When the electrolytes are heated to their boiling point, the pressure inside the battery can cause the battery to rupture, which in turn causes the electrolytes to catch on fire. Similar to what happens to the defective propellant in a Takata airbag, the pressure can cause the e-cigarette container and the battery to break apart and spray burning shrapnel. Explosions have occurred during vaping and while the e-cigs were in the user’s pocket. Reported injuries from exploding e-cigarettes include severe burns to the face, groin, hands, and legs; eye injuries including blindness; and coma.

Legal issues

The bad news for victims is that approximately 90% of e-cigarettes sold in the United States were made in China. Most of those are sold by retail vaping shops that may or may not have sufficient insurance coverage. As the plaintiffs in the Chinese drywall litigation learned, Chinese manufacturing defendants can be difficult to serve.

Moreover, China may not recognize a U.S. judgment, so collection can be problematic. The good news is that the products liability laws in states like Virginia recognize legal theories based upon breach of warranties against distributors. Virginia also recognizes joint and several liability, which means that one can sue the manufacturer, distributor, component parts manufacturers (e.g., the lithium battery manufacturer) and retailers, and collect the entire judgment against the insured or solvent defendants.

Can e-cigarettes be made to be safe?

Even though these devices are blowing up in consumers’ faces and in their pockets, they have gone largely unregulated. The civil justice system is the only way to hold the manufacturers of these defective devices responsible and to effect the change necessary to make these devices safer. I hesitate to use the word “safe” because a new study shows that the vapor from e-cigarettes contains two previously undiscovered cancer-causing chemicals. As the Washington Post reported today, researchers found that e-cigarette vapor contains 29 chemicals, two of which are considered probable carcinogens. According the the New England Journal of Medicine, the chemicals are used to create artificial smoke. When these chemicals are decomposed by being heated, they also release toxic chemicals such as acrolein and formaldehyde. The myth that vaping is safe is being debunked by science.

E-cig liquid nicotine containers often mislabeled

http://medicalxpress.com/news/2016-07-e-cig-liquid-nicotine-mislabeled.html

And as many as two-thirds of these containers may not be child-resistant, the researchers found.

Consuming even small amounts of liquid nicotine can harm a child, the scientists said.

“Mislabeling of nicotine in e-liquids exposes the user to the harmful effects of nicotine,” said study author Kelly Buettner-Schmidt, an associate professor of nursing at North Dakota State University.

“In areas without child-resistant packaging requirements, children may be exposed to harmful nicotine,” she said in a university news release.

The researchers checked 93 e-cigarette liquid containers from 16 stores in North Dakota. They found that 70 were labeled containing nicotine amounts ranging from 3 to 24 milligrams per milliliter (mg/mL). However, actual nicotine levels in 51 percent of the containers were different from what was on the label. Thirty-four percent had less nicotine, while 17 percent had more than the label said.

The actual amount of nicotine in the mislabeled containers ranged from 66 percent less to 172 percent more, the study showed.

Of the 23 containers that claimed to have no nicotine, almost half had some nicotine. The average level was 0.19 mg/mL, and the highest was 0.48 mg/mL, researchers said.

Results were published in the July-August issue of the Journal of Pediatric Nursing.

Exclusive: E-cigarettes should not be available on prescription, say GPs

The vast majority of GPs do not believe that e-cigarettes should be prescribed for patients trying to stop smoking, a GPonline survey has found.

http://www.gponline.com/exclusive-e-cigarettes-not-available-prescription-say-gps/article/1402565

Almost 70% of GPs rejected the idea that NHS e-cigarette prescriptions should be made be available for patients wanting to quit smoking.

A small proportion (17%) of GPs backed the idea of prescribing e-cigarettes, while 14% of the 448 doctors who responded said they weren’t sure.

A report from the Royal College of Physicians, published earlier this year, advised GPs to promote e-cigarettes ‘as widely as possible as a substitute for smoking’.

The report said the use of e-cigarettes was a viable harm reduction strategy. After its publication, the RCGP called on NICE to investigate whether e-cigarettes should be prescribed to patients.

E-cigarette safety

Many GPs felt there was not enough long-term data on the safety of e-cigarettes to justify prescribing them. One GP said: ‘To my mind it is still smoking and we do not know the harm these vapours are doing.’

Another said: ‘If people can afford to smoke they can afford to buy the e-cigarette to quit. The NHS should not bear the burden of everything. We have to prioritise.’

A GP who backed prescribing e-cigarettes said: ‘Yes they should be available on prescription, but it is difficult to evidence what strength or prescription would be beneficial across a standard population.’

Another said: ‘These certainly have a role in encouraging smoking cessation, but I feel that making them available on prescription serves to medicalise this issue rather than better promoting patient self-management and responsibility.’

However, 37% of GPs said that they were likely or very likely to recommend e-cigarettes to patients who are trying to give up smoking, compared with just 28% who said they were either unlikely or very unlikely to recommend them. The remaining 35% said they were ‘neutral’ on whether to recommend e-cigarettes.

Smoking cessation

One GP said: ‘I don’t have any information on long-term consequences so feel unable to recommend them, but if a patient asked, I would agree that evidence based on short-term use suggests that they are less harmful than cigarettes, with the qualification that this does not mean they are safe.’

Another said: ‘I am not convinced that they are safe, but I know that a cigarette isn’t.’

A spokeswoman for NICE said its public health guidance on reducing harm from smoking recommends licensed nicotine-containing products, and e-cigarettes licensed by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency would come under this category.

‘We haven’t produced guidance that looks at e-cigarettes specifically,’ she said.

‘As is usual process, the DH or Public Health England would have to officially refer the products to us before we can appraise them.’

Toxins in e-cig vapor increase with heat and device use

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/07/160727090350.htm

Electronic cigarettes, or e-cigs, have grown in popularity as an alternative to traditional cigarette smoking. But health experts and consumer advocates have raised concerns over their safety. Now scientists report in ACS’ journal Environmental Science & Technology new measurements of potentially toxic compounds in e-cigarette vapor and factors that affect these levels.

Hugo Destaillats and colleagues analyzed vapor from two different kinds of e-cig vaporizers filled with three different refill e-liquids. They identified several vapor components including glycidol — which hadn’t previously been identified in e-cig vapor — formaldehyde and acrolein.

The World Health Organization categorizes glycidol as a probable carcinogen, and acrolein is a powerful irritant. Testing also showed that increasing the voltage and heat in a single-coil vaporizer (as opposed to one with a double-coil) triples the aldehyde emissions per puff and bumped up the acrolein levels by a factor of 10.

Additionally, the release of potentially toxic compounds increased with use. These compounds originate from thermal decomposition of propylene glycol and glycerin, two solvents used to formulate most e-liquids.