| Cammalleri et al. (2020) |
The indoor air (no smoking) and outdoor air (where people usually smoke) were measured simultaneously for 10 hours in a university library to assess particulate matter (PM) emitted by traditional cigarettes, hand-rolled cigarettes, electronic cigarettes and heated tobacco products. (IQOS, JUUL, GLO). |
Air pollution measured by PM of different diameters (≤ 10, 4, 2.5, 1 µm = PM*10, PM4, PM2.5, PM1) indoors and outdoors. Unit of measurement = μg m-3. |
Increase in particulate matter (PM1) with the use of Glo (check the accuracy of the registration symbol) in an outdoor area: Before use: average PM1 level (in μg m-3) of 35.85 (SD: 1.09); After use: mean PM1 level (in μg m-3) of 106.30 (SD: 191.92). There was no significant difference after using IQOS. PM1 peaks in the external environment about 4 and 34 times greater than the baseline level, respectively for the use of IQOS and GLO. |
No |
| Cancelada et al. (2019) |
IQOS and 3 types of heatsticks were consumed by one machine in puff volumes of 55mL, puff durations of 2s (1650 cm3 min-1) and puff intervals of 30s. The heating blade was powered for a period of 6min, generating a total of 12 individual puffs. Temperature measurements were taken every 10-20s during the 6min of operation and repeated 3x to assess reproducibility. |
More than 100 volatile compounds were detected in the emission of heated tobacco products, of which 33 were identified and quantified. Air pollution measured by μg of identified volatile compound. |
Nitrogen compounds: nicotine (<0.09), pyridine (0.32 to 0.62); , 3-ethenylpyridine (0.03 to 0.05), pyrrole (0.26 to 0.42), N-methylformamide (<0.04), acrylonitrile (<0.03), 3-ethylpyridine (<0. 04), 2,3-dimethylpyridine (<0.04); Carbonyls: acetaldehyde (18.6 to 24.2), diacetyl (1.3 to 1.4), butanal (2.3 to 3), acetone (3.2 to 4.3), propanal (1.0 to 1, 2), benzaldehyde (0.4 to 1.5), methacrolein (0.8 to 1.1), acrolein (0.6 to 0.8), crotonaldehyde (0.3 to 0.4), formaldehyde (0. .7 to 1.0), 2-butanone (1.0 to 1.5), m-tolualdehyde (0.40 to 0.52), hexaldehyde (0.08 to 0.2); Other oxygenated compounds: acetol (hydroxyacetone) (1.3 to 3.4), furfural (1.0 to 1.7), glycidol (0.1 to 0.2), 2-furanmethanol (0.5 to 0.8); Terpenoids: isoprene (0.47 to 0.8), menthol (10.5); and Aromatic compounds: phenol (0.09 to 0.51), p-cresol +m-cresol (<0.07), o-cresol (<0.04), benzene (0.08 to 0.12), quinoline (<0.04), naphthalene (<0.02 to 0.024). Mean daily intakes predicted by users for benzene, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde and acrolein were 39 μg, 32 μg, 2.2 mg and 71 μg, respectively. Concerning acrolein levels (greater than 0.35 μg m−3). |
No |
| Enomoto et al. (2022) |
They simulated 2 environments (restaurant and residence), with an experiment time of 1h, and evaluated the use of 3 types of heated tobacco systems (T1.0a, IT2.0a, and DT2.2a) and a commercial cigarette. For the restaurant simulation, 2 adult smokers entered the chamber and smoked alternately every 8 minutes, a total of 7 cigarettes, with 15 to 16 puffs per cigarette. To simulate a residence, 1 smoker entered the room and smoked 1 cigarette every 30 minutes, for a total of 2. |
48 constituents were measured as tobacco-specific nitrosamines; carbonyls, VOC, TVOC, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, polycyclic aromatic amines, mercury, lead, cadmium, chromium, nickel, beryllium, arsenic, ETS markers, specific components of the tobacco heating system, CO, CO2, ammonia and NOx, NO2, combined nitrogen oxides. |
In the “residence” simulation, the use of IT1.0a and IT12.0a increased the concentration of TVOC and glycerol in the air, compared to the control: TVOC (µg/m3) - IT1.0a 83.2 +-9.2; IT2.0a 84.2+-7.5; Control 42.1+-13.2; Glycerol (µg/m3) - IT1.0a 54.2 +-10.4; IT2.0a 90.9+-20.5; Control - 13.4+-2.3. In the "restaurant" the use of DT2.2a increased the concentration in the air of acetaldehyde, propionaldehyde, n-butyraldehyde, glycerol, benzene, pyridine, NNN, NAT and NNK, compared to control: NNN (ng/m3) - 2.85 ; Control LOD; NAT (ng/m3) - <LOQ; Control – LOD; NNK (ng/m3) - <LOQ; Control – LOD; Acetaldehyde (µg/m3) - DT2.2a 10.4 +-1.1 ; Control - 4.62+-0.26; Propionaldehyde (µg/m3) - DT2.2a 1.17 +-0.07; Control - 0.618+-0.040; n-butyraldehyde (µg/m3) - DT2.2a 2, 08+-0.30; Control - 0.900+-0.087; Glycerol (µg/m3): 37.3+-6.9; Control 13.4+-2.3; Benzene (µg/m3): <LOQ; Control: <LOD; Pyridine (µg/m3): 1.59+-0.14; Control - <LOQ. |
Yes |
| Foster et al. (2018) |
Four participants were present in the test room at all times, accompanied by an independent non-smoker moderator, and 5 test situations were carried out, each lasting 4 hours, conducted per week in 3 stages, according to the 3 conditions of ventilation (office, residence and hospitality). 1 heated tobacco product and 2 regular cigarettes - Luck Strike regular (7mg tar) and Du Maurier Silver (9mg tar) were used. |
O2, CO, NOx, ozone (O3) and PM1, PM2.5 and PM10 mm, individual and total volatile organic compounds, carbonyl compounds (formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein and crotonaldehyde); polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons; nicotine; glycerol; 3-Ethehil Pyridino; and tobacco-specific nitrosamines. |
Levels of formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, nicotine, particulate matter and number of particles were higher after using THP compared to control in the following situations: Formaldehyde (µg/m3): (Residence) THP - 18 and control - 16; Acetaldehyde (µg/m3): (Residence) THP - 10; Control - 5; (Office) THP - 16; Control - 7; (Hospitality) THP - 6; Control – 3; Nicotine (µg/m3): (Office) THP - 1.4; Control - 0.6; (Hospitality) THP - 0.4; Control - <0.2; PM1 (µg/m3): (Office) THP - 10.3; Control - 2.4; (Hospitality) THP - 6.5; Control - 3.8; PM2.5 (µg/m3): (Office) THP - 10.7; Control - 2.6; (Hospitality) THP - 6.6; Control - 3.9; PM10 (µg/m3): (Office) THP -13.8; Control - 5; (Hospitality) THP - 8.4; Control – 6; No. of particles (1/cm3): (Residence) THP -1.0E+04; Control - 9.6E+03; (Office) THP - 8.5E+03; Control - 9.9E+02; (Hospitality) THP - 4.7E+03; Control - 2.3E+03. |
Yes |
| Hirano et al. (2020) |
Tests in the shower box were carried out alternately with each of the products, with an interval of 1 hour, in which the room was ventilated. A single subject used the products. Fifty puffs were given on each product, with an interval of 30s. In the tests carried out in the room, the same man used all the products, and in the case of ploomTech, one more man used the product. Number of puffs: 50 for IQOS, 130 for glo, 265 ploomTech and 54 regular cigarettes. The per minute average of particulate matter was measured up to 120 minutes after the test started in the box and 60 minutes in the room. Data were collected for 2 heights (1m and 1.8m). |
Nicotine concentration and PM 2,5 (ug/m3). |
The maximum nicotine concentrations, in the shower test, for 1.0 and 1.8m were 29.3 and 25.9 µg/m3 for ploomTECH, 160 and 111 µg/m3 for Glo and 257 and 212 µg/m3 for IQOS [all greater than tolerated for adverse health events - 3.0 µg/m3]. Regarding PM2.5, the lowest values were observed for ploomTECH, 21 and 10 µg/m3 (SD=55.6.6) for 1.0 and 1.8 m, followed by 330 and 99 µg/m3 (SD = 564, 119) for Glo and 492 and 413 µg/m3 (SD = 667, 466) for IQOS. In the room test the nicotine concentrations with the 3 types of HTP did not exceed 3 µg/m3. PM2.5 concentrations measured at 1.5 and 2.5 m away from the user were lower for ploomTECH and IQOS, 6.5 and 7.0 µg/m3 (SD = 5.8, 2.7), and 7.0 and 6.9 µg/m3 (SD = 11.6, 4.0), respectively, and higher for Glo, reaching 102 and 56 mg/m3 (SD = 95, 56), respectively. |
No |
| Hirano & Takei (2020) |
They used the values obtained in the previous study in relation to nicotine concentration and related them to IARC measurements for type 1 and 2 carcinogens for cigarette smoke. This was used as a parameter to calculate the cancer risk of using HTP compared to smoking. |
Excessive cancer risk |
Excess cancer related to passive exposure to HTP smoke is: 2.7x10-6 |
No |
| Imura & Tabuchi (2021) |
Self-reported internet questionnaire survey of 8,784 eligible respondents aged 15-73. They examined the frequency (%) of subjective symptoms related to passive exposure to regular cigarettes and HTP (sore throat, cough, asthma attack, chest pain, eye pain, nausea, headache, and other symptoms). |
|
39.5% of those exposed to HTP aerosol had some subjective symptom. Non-cigarette or HTP users had the following symptoms when exposed to HTP vapor: sore throat (23%), cough (22.5%), asthma attack (10.9%), chest pain (11.8 %), eye pain (19.3%), nausea (31.9%), headache (17.7). It suggests that respiratory and cardiovascular abnormalities may be related to secondary exposure to HTP aerosol. |
No |
| Kaunelienė et al. (2019) |
The 1st campaign was carried out outside the nightclub, for 3 days and 5 sessions: "background", "background" with 10 people not using the product, 10 people using IQOS simultaneously, "background" with 30 people not using IQOS, and 30 people using IQOS. Each session took 30 minutes with natural ventilation. The 2nd "campaign" also took place in 3 days and on each day, 1 hour before the house opened (background) and 3 hours with the club in operation. On the last day, the measurement of the actual operating situation was extended to an additional 4 hours. |
Particle number concentration in real time (PNC), CO2 concentration, relative humidity and temperature, offline carbonyls (acetaldehyde and formaldehyde), nicotine and 3-ethenylpyridine concentration also offline. The measured distributions were based on PNC (single particles cm–3 or # cm–3) |
The use of 10 IQOS increased the particle concentration. The maximum peak recorded was 1.2E+5 # cm–3, with a median concentration of 3.6E+4 # cm–3 and 3.5E+4 # cm–3 in Zones 1 and 2, respectively. This was a significant increase over the background indoor environment or with 10 people not using the product. Thirty IQOS users resulted in another significant increase in particle number concentration with a peak value of 1.5E+5 # cm–3, and an average of 1.2E+5 # cm–3 in Zone 1 and 1.3E+5 # cm– 3 in Zone 2. The use of 30 IQOS devices did not result in a significant increase in particulate matter concentration compared to the control (background indoor environment), with the median PM2.5 ranging from 2.7 µg m–3 in Zone 1 and 2.8 µg m–3 in Zone 2 in the background environment to 11.4 µg m–3 (Zone 1) and 12.3 µg m–3 (Zone 2) after using 30 IQOS. |
Yes |
| Khalaf et al. (2020) |
Electronic cigarette, common cigarette and IQOS were used separately for 10 minutes each, by the same person. Particle concentrations were measured by aerosol diffusion spectrometer. |
PM1, PM2.5 and PM10 (ug/m3) |
The results were presented in graphs where it is not possible to know the exact values. It can be said that the highest values were observed after 5 minutes of using the IQOS, with PM1 close to 250 (µg/m3); PM2.5 below 100(µg/m3) and PM10 below 250 (µg/m3); and also, that there was a growth in relation to the baseline level, that is, before the use of this product. The surface area value of the particles reached approximately 1000 µm2/cm3 with 5 minutes of using IQOS. |
Unable to identify |
| Meišutovič-Akhtarieva et al. (2019) |
Thirty sessions of HRT and 3 of cigarettes were performed to analyze the quantitative effects of environmental variables, including ventilation intensity (V) such as air exchanges per hour (0.2, 0.5 or 1), intensity of use of THS as number of parallel users (1, 3 or 5), relative humidity (RH, 30, 50 or 70%) and distance from the observer (D, 0.5, 1 or 2 m) for pollutant concentration variations in a camera. |
Real-time particle number (PNC) concentration, CO and CO2 concentration, offline concentration of acetaldehyde, formaldehyde, nicotine and 3-ethenylpyridine were measured during and after active use. The measured distributions were based on the concentration of the number of particles (unit particles/cm3 or #/cm3). The number of particles per volume of air with a size between Dp and dDp, expressed mathematically as Dp ¼ dN/dlogDp (#/cm3). |
The use of HRT resulted in a significant increase in nicotine, acetaldehyde, PM10, PM2.5 and PNC compared to "background". The maximum concentration of 30min of fine particulate matter - PM2.5 (635.7 mg/m3) and PNC (4.8 105 #/cm3), as well as the maximum concentration of 1s of PM2.5 (109.8 mg/cm3) m3) and PNC (9.3 106 #/cm3) suggest that intensive use of HRT in a confined space with limited ventilation can cause elevated particle concentrations. |
Yes |
| Mitova et al. (2016) |
The simulation was performed in a controlled walk-in room (size: 24.1 m2, 72.3 m3) with recommended ventilation conditions to simulate an office, residential and hospital environment, and was compared with smoking a cigarette (Marlboro Gold) under identical experimental conditions. Occupant density was set at 8 m2/person for the office and residence, and 4.8 m2/person for the hospital. Evaluated products: nicotine, carbonyls and volatile organic compounds. |
They studied the concentrations of 18 constituents in indoor air. |
Statistical evaluation of the data showed that the concentrations of suspended respirable particles, ultraviolet particulate matter, fluorescent particulate matter, solanesol, 3-ethenylpyridine, formaldehyde, acrolein, crotonaldehyde, acrylonitrile, benzene, 1,3-butadiene, isoprene, toluene, CO, NO and NOx in the evaluations with THS 2.2 in three environmental conditions were equivalent to the concentrations found in the background internal air. Only acetaldehyde and indoor air nicotine concentrations were increased in the THS 2.2 assessments in the 3 simulated environments compared to the background indoor air as follows: Office - acetaldehyde: 9.42 x 5.77 and nicotine: 1.61 x 0.51; Residence - acetaldehyde: 12.5 and 7.44 and nicotine: 2.66 and 0.855; Hospitality - acetaldehyde: 4.05 and 2.65 and nicotine: 1.09 and 0.438. |
Yes |
| Mitova et al. (2019) |
The THS 2.2 device was used for 2 hours by the control (participant present in the room, without using any product) and by the smoker, with a 60-minute break with no one inside. The density of occupants was set at 8m2/person. The ventilation rate of 37m3/h (0.5 air changes/h -ACH) was based on the European ventilation performance standard EN 15251. |
Environmental tobacco smoke particulate phase markers (in µg/m3): breathable suspended particles, ultraviolet particulate matter, fluorescent particulate matter, solanesol and carbonyls (µg/m3): acetaldehyde, acrolein, crotonaldehyde, formaldehyde. Volatile organic compounds (in µg/m3): acrylonitrile, benzene, 1,3-butadiene, isoprene, toluene. Tobacco-specific gas phase markers: CO (ppm), NOx (ppb), TVOC, specific nitrosamines (NNK and NNN), glycerine, propylene glycol, and online measurement of PM 1 and 2.5. |
After using heated tobacco, nicotine, acetaldehyde, and glycerin were the only substances found in the air with higher concentrations than in the control. Nicotine (mean): 1.48 (SD: 0.685) after THS and 0.330 (SD: 0.047); Acetaldehyde (mean): 6.76 (SD: 0.760) after THS and 3.32 and (SD: 0.280); Glycerin(mean): 13.3 (SD: 3.39) after HRT and <6.23 in control. |
Yes |
| Mitova et al. (2021) |
Comprehensive evaluation of THS 2.2 environmental aerosol compared to background under three ventilation conditions representative of simulated residential category III (0.5 h−1), shop (2.4 h−1), and restaurant (4.3 h−1) 1). The density of occupants was set at 6 m2/person. Ventilation rates were based on the European Ventilation Performance Standard EN 15251 and ASHRAE 62-1 and 62-2. Each set of experiments was performed on a separate day, starting at approximately 9:30 am, with a 2h background assessment. Four repetitions were planned for each type of evaluation, and air sampling was performed for 2 hours, starting at time t = 0 min. The indoor air quality control room was air flushed at the maximum flow rate of fresh filtered air (750 m3/h) for 15 minutes after the background session and overnight between individual assessments. |
Environmental tobacco smoke particulate phase markers (in µg/m3): breathable suspended particles, ultraviolet particulate matter, fluorescent particulate matter, solanesol, Carbonyls (in µg/m3): acetaldehyde, acrolein, crotonaldehyde, formaldehyde; Volatile organic compounds (µg/m3): acrylonitrile, benzene, 1,3-butadiene, isoprene, toluene; Tobacco-specific gas phase markers: CO (ppm), NOx (ppb), total volatile organic compounds, specific nitrosamines (NNK and NNN), glycerin, propylene glycol, and online measurement of PM 1 and 2.5. |
Internal use of HRT 2.2 increased levels of nicotine, acetaldehyde, glycerin and (if menthol products are used) menthol from background levels, with a corresponding increase in total volatile organic compound (TVOC) values. Furthermore, a temporary increase in ultrafine particles was observed when two or more tobacco sticks were used simultaneously or with a short time interval between uses, but concentrations returned to levels close to background levels almost immediately. This is because THS 2.2 generates an aerosol of liquid droplets, which quickly evaporate. Acetaldehyde, TVOCs, and UFP concentrations decreased with increasing ventilation rates, while airborne glycerin levels were only slightly influenced, and nicotine levels were not influenced. |
Yes |
| Peruzzi et al. (2020) |
Seven smokers received one of the smoking products as a set of 2 blocks of 15 sessions each, for a total of 30 sessions (thus giving 15 device/flavor combinations repeated twice). GLO2 was smoked by Smoker 1, IQOS3 by Smoker 2, GLO4 by Smoker 3, IQOS6 by Smoker 4, IQOS1 by Smoker 5, GLO3 by Smoker 6, JUUL4 by Smoker 7, and so on. Emissions of particulate matter with a diameter ≤ 10 μm (PM10), ≤ 4 μm (PM4), ≤ 2.5 μm (PM2.5) and ≤ 1 μm (PM1) were continuously measured under actual use conditions 5 min before, during and 5 min after smoking each product in a room measuring 53m3, with temperature and relative humidity varying between 20 and 23◦C and 36 and 40%, respectively. Measurements were carried out in the “cumulative” mode, including the mass of all particles smaller than or equal to the defined size. |
Total particulate matter (in µg/m3) and in the following diameters: PM1, PM2.5, PM4 and PM10 |
There was an increase in particulate matter of all diameters and also in total particulate matter during use of all heated tobacco products compared to baseline (before use) levels. During use, emissions of PM≤1 μm (PM1) were 28(16;28) μg/m3 for GLO, 25(15;57) μg/m3 for IQOS. Total particulate matter concentrations measured during use were 39 (24; 127) µg/m3 for Glo, 31 (20; 63) µg/m3 for Iqos (compared to pre-use levels, which were respectively 19 (12; 29) and 16 (12;23) µg/m3). Comparisons between all types of heated tobacco products investigated demonstrated that different flavors/additives impact indoor PM emissions, both due to smoke characteristics and different patterns of use (e.g., frequency, depth, nasal or oral exhalation). In the case of Glo, the variation, for example, of PM10 concentration between two flavors was 33 (22; 59) a. 82 (31; 277) µg/m3, p = 0.027). Regarding IQOS, for example, PM2.5 concentration during use ranged from 14 (11; 25) to 79 (22; 1370) µg/m3, depending on the flavor. |
One of the authors stated that he consulted for a medical company. |
| Protano et al. (2020) |
Particulate matter (PM) with an aerodynamic diameter smaller than 10, 4, 2.5 and 1 μm (PM10, PM4, PM2.5, PM1) was measured before and during the use of IQOS®, GLO®, JUUL®, with different types of sticks/sachets, as well as during the smoking of a conventional tobacco cigarette. |
Particulate matter (µg/m3) in varied diameters: PM 1, PM2,5, PM4 and PM 10. |
The aerosol was mostly in the PM1 size range (>95%). All DEFs determined a worsening of the PM1 concentration in a closed environment, which ranged from very mild for JUUL® - depending on the capsule used - to considerably severe for IQOS® and GLO®. Median values ranged from 11.00 (IQOS3 and JUUL2) to 337.5 μg m−3(IQOS4). The high variability of particle loads was attributed both to the type of stick used and to the different way of smoking of the volunteers who smoked/vaped during the experiments. The results showed that all tested DEFs worsen indoor air quality during use. |
No |
| Protano et al. (2017) |
Aerosol measurements were performed in a model room with combustion devices (conventional and cigarettes, cigars and pipes) and non-combustion devices (electronic cigarettes and IQOS®). The data were used to estimate the dose of particles deposited in the respiratory system of subjects aged 3 months to 21 years using the multipath particle dosimetry (MPPD) model. |
Submicron particles, with diameters ranging from 5 to 560 nm. Estimation of exposure of individuals to secondhand smoke using investigated products, with specific profiles according to age: infants, children, adolescents, adults. |
The study demonstrated an increase in the concentration of particles in the air after using IQOS. It also demonstrated the accumulation of particle doses in the respiratory system after the use of IQOS, and that this accumulation is greater in infants and children. And yet, that the highest percentage of particles was deposited in the alveolar region. Approximately 60% to 80% of the particles deposited on the heads of 3-month-old babies were smaller than 100nm. Results refer to a single air exchange rate; these results, although representative of those that occur in domestic environments, do not take into account the possible variability in the air exchange rate that would affect particle concentration levels. |
No |
| Protano et al. (2016) |
Submicron particles were measured using a spectrometer in a 52.7 m3 room with a door and a window (room air changes: 0.67 air changes/h). To simulate the subjects' passive exposure, the air sampler was placed 2 meters away from the smoker and 1.5 meters from the floor. For each experiment, lasting 1 h, we also modeled the dose of submicron particle deposition in the human respiratory tree. Each experiment was performed three times; Arithmetic mean values were calculated for each 1s time measurement and used for data comparison. |
Submicron particles, with diameters ranging from 5 to 560nm. Estimation of exposure of individuals to secondhand smoke through the use of investigated smoking products |
The main results of the experiments are: 1. After the use of IQOS, submicromic particles are released that are deposited in the airways of a passively exposed subject; 2. After using IQOS submicron particle values immediately return similar to background levels; it is presumable that submicron particles generated by non-burning tobacco smoke unite with each other quickly and in large numbers, increasing their average diameter and sedimenting immediately; 3. In all experiments, approximately half of the deposited submicron particles were so small that they managed to reach the alveolar region of passively exposed subjects; 4. An hour spent indoors in which a single IQOS® is smoked provides exposure to submicron particles equivalent to that which would occur in spending 10 minutes in a high traffic area. |
No |
| Ruprecht et al. (2017) |
Experiments with the IQOS, in a room occupied by two to three people and equipped with real-time analyzers (2m away from the smokers), samplers and three fans were in operation during the smoking sessions. Continuous and time-integrated measurements were performed in an indoor environment, followed by the calculation of the emission rates of the substances. |
Carbon black, metallic particles, organic compounds and mass of particles segregated by size and numerical concentrations emitted by the devices |
Analysis of the smoke emitted by the IQOS indicated that the emission of organic matter particles from this device is significantly different depending on the organic compound. While polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons were mostly undetectable in IQOS smoke, certain n-alkanes, organic acids (such as suberic acid, azelaic acid, and n-alkanoic acids with carbon numbers between 10 and 19), as well as levoglucosan, were still emitted at substantial levels of IQOS (up to 2–6 mg/hr during a regular regimen of use). Metal emissions were similar to background levels. Another important finding is the presence of carcinogenic aldehyde compounds, including formaldehyde, acetaldehyde and acrolein. |
No |
| Savdie et al (2020) |
Particulate matter measurements were performed in two settings: home and in the car. The living room (73 m3) was furnished and occupied by 2 people. The equipment for monitoring air quality was placed 1.5 m away from the smoker with probes and absorption tubes pointing upwards, at a height of approximately 1 m from the floor. Car measurements were carried out inside a medium volume car (Diesel Opel Corsa, 2007) traveling on a low traffic intensity route of 4.95 km at an average speed of 34 km/h. The probes or absorption tubes of the various devices were positioned in the area corresponding to a child's breathing zone. The study was carried out with 2 occupants in the car: a driver (the smoker) and a non-smoker passenger. Three types of electronic devices (Slate JUUL, IStickTC40W and IQOS) and two common cigarettes (Chesterfield blue and menthol) were used. |
Particulate matter (in µg/m3): PM1, PM2.5, PM10; Ultrafine particles (particles/m3); Black carbon (µg/m3); CO (mg/m3); CO2 (mg/m3). |
At home, there was an increase in all substances evaluated, in relation to the control, after using the heated tobacco product. The concentration of PM10 (87.8 + 51.7 µg/m3) was 4 times higher, of ultrafine particles (35,700 + 11,500 particles/m3) was 7.6 times higher, of carbon black (1.2 + 0.7 µg/m3) was 5.6 times higher and CO2 (2640 + 680 mg/m3) was 1.5 times higher after using heated tobacco when compared to the control. The use of heated tobacco did not cause an increase in CO. In the car, there was an increase in particulate matter of all evaluated diameters after using a heated tobacco product. The concentration of ultrafine particles (22,100 + 16,800 particles/m3) was 2.8 times higher, of carbon black (0.5 + 0.3 µg/m3) was 0.7 times higher, after the use of heated tobacco when compared to the control. The use of heated tobacco did not cause an increase in CO. The carbon dioxide concentration found was 1020 + 60 mg/m3. CO2 showed no increase directly associated with nicotine delivery systems, but a trend linked to a higher breathing rate with smoking. |
No |
| Schober et al. (2019) |
Comprehensive assessment of environmental pollution in 7 passenger cars while tobacco cigarettes and new electronic smoking products (IQOS, e-cig) were being smoked. Seven drivers (one man, six women) were recruited, who were asked to bring their own car to smoke while driving. Data on indoor climate and indoor air pollution with fine and ultrafine particles and volatile organic compounds were collected while the cars were being driven. |
CO, CO2, PM2,5, volatile organic compounds, aldehydes/ketones . |
Smoking an IQOS had almost no effect on the concentration of the mean number of fine particles (> 300 nm) or the concentration of PM2.5 inside the vehicle. In contrast, the particle number concentration with a diameter of 25–300nm increased in all vehicles (1.6–12.3 ×104 /cm3) and averaged 9 to 232% above background levels (control). With the use of IQOS the nicotine concentration increased to 4-12µg/m3 in 3 out of 7 cars. However, no increase over background level of volatile organic compounds was observed after its use in any vehicle. Use of IQOS did not affect concentration of carbonyls (aldehydes and ketones) |
No |
| Yu et al. (2022) |
Two experiments were carried out with three heated tobacco products (IQOS, GLO and Lil) to analyze the concentrations of substances emitted by HTP and compare them with those of conventional cigarettes. A smoking machine was used to generate these compounds from heated tobacco products. |
Concentrations of nicotine, propylene glycol, vegetable glycerin, volatile organic substances, aldehydes, particulate matter and nanoparticles |
Nicotine levels transferred by heated tobacco products (0.8-1.2 mg cigarette -1). The concentrations of propylene glycol emitted by heated tobacco products ranged from 0.2-0.3 mg cigarettes -1. The levels of vegetable glycerin emitted were 3.1-5.9mg -1 cigarettes. Among the volatile organic compounds investigated, the highest concentration found was toluene: ~2.1ppb. However, toluene and m,p-xylene were not found in IQOS and ethylbenzene was only found in Lil. On the other hand, all VOCs were detected in Glo. Several aldehydes were detected at low concentrations: Formaldehyde: 0.001-0.009 ppb; Acetone: ~0.004ppb; Acetaldehyde: ~0.002ppb. The size distribution of the main nanoparticles ranged from 38.5-91.4 nm and the numerical concentration of all products was around 137000 cm-3. |
No |
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Subtitle: (A) The charger, support and HeetStick from Philip Morris International IQOS (tobacco stick). (B) Schematic drawing of the holder. (C) Schematic of the HeetStick tobacco stick. Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6252052/
Source: Adapted from Prisma Flow Diagram, 2020.