Characteristic Human Individual Puffing Profiles Can Generate More TNCO than ISO and Health Canada Regimes on Smoking Machine When the Same Brand Is Smoked

Abstract

Human smoking behavior influences exposure to smoke toxicants and is important for risk assessment. In a prospective observational study, the smoking behavior of Marlboro smokers was measured for 36 h. Puff volume, duration, frequency, flow and inter-puff interval were recorded with the portable CReSSmicro™ device, as has often been done by other scientists. However, the use of the CReSSmicro™ device may lead to some registration pitfalls since the method of insertion of the cigarette may influence the data collection. Participants demonstrated consistent individual characteristic puffing behavior over the course of the day, enabling the creation of a personalized puffing profile. These puffing profiles were subsequently used as settings for smoking machine experiments and tar, nicotine and carbon monoxide (TNCO) emissions were generated. The application of human puffing profiles led to TNCO exposures more in the range of Health Canada Intense (HCI)-TNCO emissions than for those of the International Standardization Organization (ISO). Compared to the ISO regime, which applies a low puff volume relative to human smokers, the generation of TNCO may be at least two times higher than when human puffing profiles were applied on the smoking machine. Human smokers showed a higher puffing intensity than HCI and ISO because of higher puffing frequency, which resulted in more puffs per cigarette, than both HCI and ISO.

E‐cigarette puffing topography: The importance of assessing user behaviour to inform emissions testing

“…For example, a standardised intense puffing regimen for combustible cigarettes necessitates taking a larger volume puff over the same length of time as a non-intense regimen, leading to a higher flow rate. 23,24 Puff volume has been demonstrated to have the largest effect on thermal by-products such as carbonyls for combustible cigarettes, with changes in puff duration and peak flow rate having minimal effect. 25 This is not true for e-cigarettes in that both longer puff durations and lower puff flow rates have been shown to cause higher coil temperatures 26 and increase the generation of carbonyls.…”

Risk assessment of components in tobacco smoke and e-cigarette aerosols: a pragmatic choice of dose metrics

“…It is recommended to replace these default values by chemical-specific data, whenever available. It is also recognized that large interindividual as well as intra-individual differences in smoking habits and topography do exist (Gust et al 1983;Djordjevic et al 1995;Pauwels et al 2020). In addition, it will be worthwhile to verify the effect of interindividual and intraindividual variation in smoking or vaping habits on the exposure estimates and thereby on possible health risks.…”

“…This hampers the determination of a minimum value for the MoE. However, the question may be asked what the appropriate exposure pattern in an animal experiment should be to sufficiently mimic the human smoking behavior, considering the large inter-individual (and possibly also the intra-individual) variation in smoking habits (Gust et al 1983;Djordjevic et al 1995;Pauwels et al 2020). Should the animal exposure scenario resemble that for the light, medium or heavy smoker?…”

Increased JUUL Emissions from Initial Puffs after Removing and Reinserting Pod

“…Cigarette emissions are often examined by utilizing a “standard” puffing protocol in laboratory settings, such as the International Standardization Organization (ISO) regimen, in which cigarettes are machine “smoked” with a controlled number of puffs, puff volume, and puff duration. However, “real-world” human cigarette puffing behaviors may generate more than double the toxicant emissions compared to cigarette emissions generated from ISO protocols . Additionally, research has documented the tobacco industry’s attempts to undermine standard puffing protocols through product designs, such as cigarette filter ventilation, that cause standard puffing protocols to underestimate cigarette emissions.…”

“…However, "real-world" human cigarette puffing behaviors may generate more than double the toxicant emissions compared to cigarette emissions generated from ISO protocols. 2 Additionally, research has documented the tobacco industry's attempts to undermine standard puffing protocols through product designs, such as cigarette filter ventilation, 3 that cause standard puffing protocols to underestimate cigarette emissions.…”