The lack of scientific evidence on the constituents, properties, and health effects of second-hand waterpipe smoke has fueled controversy over whether public smoking bans should include the waterpipe. The purpose of this study was to investigate and compare emissions of ultrafine particles (UFP, <100 nm), carcinogenic polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), volatile aldehydes, and carbon monoxide (CO) for cigarettes and narghile (shisha, hookah) waterpipes. These smoke constituents are associated with a variety of cancers, and heart and pulmonary diseases, and span the volatility range found in tobacco smoke. Sidestream cigarette and waterpipe smoke was captured and aged in a 1 m3 Teflon-coated chamber operating at 1.5 air changes per hour (ACH). The chamber was characterized for particle mass and number surface deposition rates. UFP and CO concentrations were measured online using a fast particle spectrometer (TSI 3090 Engine Exhaust Particle Sizer), and an indoor air quality monitor. Particulate PAH and gaseous volatile aldehydes were captured on glass fiber filters and DNPH-coated SPE cartridges, respectively, and analyzed off-line using GC–MS and HPLC–MS. PAH compounds quantified were the 5- and 6-ring compounds of the EPA priority list. Measured aldehydes consisted of formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein, methacrolein, and propionaldehyde. We found that a single waterpipe use session emits in the sidestream smoke approximately four times the carcinogenic PAH, four times the volatile aldehydes, and 30 times the CO of a single cigarette. Accounting for exhaled mainstream smoke, and given a habitual smoker smoking rate of 2 cigarettes per hour, during a typical one-hour waterpipe use session a waterpipe smoker likely generates ambient carcinogens and toxicants equivalent to 2–10 cigarette smokers, depending on the compound in question. There is therefore good reason to include waterpipe tobacco smoking in public smoking bans.

No abstract

No abstract

Waterpipe (hookah, narghile, shisha) use has become a global phenomenon, with numerous product variations. One variation is a class of products marketed as “tobacco-free” alternatives for the “health conscious user”. In this study toxicant yields from waterpipes smoked using conventional tobacco-based and tobacco-free preparations were compared. A human-mimic waterpipe smoking machine was used to replicate the puffing sequences of 31 human participants who completed two double-blind ad libitum smoking sessions in a controlled clinical setting: once with a tobacco-based product of their choosing and once with a flavor-matched tobacco-free product. Outcome measures included yields of carbon monoxide, nitric oxide, volatile aldehydes, nicotine, tar, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Smoke from both waterpipe preparations contained substantial quantities of toxicants. Nicotine yield was the only outcome that differed significantly between preparations. These findings contradict advertising messages that “herbal” waterpipe products are a healthy alternative to tobacco products.

Because narghile waterpipe (shisha, hooka) smoking normally involves the use of burning charcoal, smoke inhaled by the user contains constituents originating from the charcoal in addition to those from the tobacco. We have previously found that charcoal accounts for most of the polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) and carbon monoxide in the smoke of the waterpipe, both of which are present in alarming quantities. Because charcoal manufacturing conditions favor formation of PAH, it is reasonable to assume that charcoal sold off the shelf may be contaminated by PAH residues. These residues may constitute a significant fraction of the PAH inhaled by the waterpipe user and those in her/his vicinity. We measured PAH residues on three kinds of raw waterpipe charcoal sampled from Beirut stores and cafés. We found that PAH residues in raw charcoal can account for more than half of the total PAH emitted in the mainstream and sidestream smoke, and about one sixth of the carcinogenic 5-and 6-ring PAH compounds. Total PAH content of the three charcoal types varied systematically by a factor of six from the charcoal with the least to the greatest PAH residue. These findings indicate the possibility of regulating charcoal carcinogen content.