Toxicity of Waterpipe Tobacco Smoking: The Role of Flavors, Sweeteners, Humectants, and Charcoal.

Waterpipe tobacco (WPT) smoking is a public health concern, particularly among youth and young adults. The global spread of WPT use has surged since the introduction of pre-packaged flavored and sweetened WPT, which is widely marketed as a safer tobacco alternative. Besides flavorants and sugars, WPT additives include humectants, which enhance the moisture and sweetness of WPT, act as solvents for flavors, and impart smoothness to the smoke, thus increasing appeal to users. In the United States (U.S.), unlike cigarette tobacco flavoring (with the exception of menthol), there is no FDA product standard or policy in place prohibiting sales of flavored WPT. Research has shown that the numerous fruit, candy, and alcohol flavors added to WPT entice individuals to experience those flavors, putting them at an increased risk of exposure to WPT smoke-related toxicants. Additionally, burning charcoal briquettes-used as a heating source for WPT-contributes to the harmful health effects of WPT smoking. This review presents existing evidence on the potential toxicity resulting from humectants, sugars, and flavorants in WPT, and from the charcoal used to heat WPT. The review discusses relevant studies of inhalation toxicity in animal models and of biomarkers of exposure in humans. Current evidence suggests that more data are needed on toxicant emissions in WPT smoke to inform effective tobacco regulation to mitigate the adverse impact of WPT use on human health.

A review of the toxicity of ingredients in e-cigarettes, including those ingredients having the FDA's "Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS)" regulatory status for use in food.

INTRODUCTION: Some firms and marketers of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes; a type of electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS)) and refill liquids (e-liquids) have made claims about the safety of ingredients used in their products based on the term "GRAS or Generally Recognized As Safe" (GRAS). However, GRAS is a provision within the definition of a food additive under section 201(s) (21 U.S.C. 321(s)) of the U.S. Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act). Food additives and GRAS substances are by the FD&C Act definition intended for use in food, thus safety is based on oral consumption; the term GRAS cannot serve as an indicator of the toxicity of e-cigarette ingredients when aerosolized and inhaled (i.e., vaped). There is no legal or scientific support for labeling e-cigarette product ingredients as "GRAS". This review discusses our concerns with the GRAS provision being applied to e-cigarette products and provides examples of chemical compounds that have been used as food ingredients but have been shown to lead to adverse health effects when inhaled. The review provides scientific insight into the toxicological evaluation of e-liquid ingredients and their aerosols to help determine the potential respiratory risks associated with their use in e-cigarettes. IMPLICATIONS: The rise in prevalence of e-cigarette use and emerging evidence of adverse effects, particularly on lung health, warrant assessing all aspects of e-cigarette toxicity. One development is manufacturers' stated or implied claims of the safety of using e-cigarette products containing ingredients determined to be "Generally Recognized As Safe" (GRAS) for use in food. Such claims, typically placed on e-cigarette product labels and used in marketing, are unfounded, as pointed out by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA)1 and the Flavor and Extract Manufacturers Association (FEMA)2. Assessment of inhalation health risks of all ingredients used in e-liquids, including those claimed to be GRAS, is warranted.

Cardiovascular Health Effects and Synthetic Cooling Agents in E-cigarettes Labeled as 'clear' Marketed in Massachusetts After the Tobacco Product Flavoring Ban.

Introduction: Massachusetts (MA) enacted statewide regulation on all flavored tobacco products in June 2020. Thereafter, electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) labeled 'clear' emerged on the market. We aimed to combine cardiovascular health effects with chemical analysis of 'clear' e-cigarettes. Methods: We measured acute changes in blood pressure and heart rate following a 10-minute structured use of participants' own e-cigarette, comparing 'clear' e-cigarette users with other flavored e-cigarette users and non-users. Chemical characterization and quantification of relevant flavorings and cooling agents (WS-3, WS-23) of 19 'clear'-labeled disposable e-cigarette liquids was carried out by GC/MS. Results: After the ban, participants that used 'clear' labeled e-cigarettes increased from 0% to 21%. Increase in diastolic blood pressure and heart rate was significantly greater in 'clear' e-cigarettes users (n=22) compared to both non-'clear' flavored e-cigarette users (n=114) and non-users (n=72). We saw similar results in heart rate when comparing Juul e-cigarette and 'clear' users; Juul was used as a reference as synthetic coolants WS-3 or WS-23 were not detected in these.All (19/19) 'clear' e-liquids were found to contain synthetic cooling agents WS-23 and/or WS-3, menthol (18/19), as well as other flavorings (12/19). Discussion: The detected presence of menthol alongside other flavorings in tested 'clear' products is a direct violation of the MA flavored tobacco product regulation, warranting stricter monitoring for new products and constituents. 'clear' e-cigarette use led to greater hemodynamic effects compared to other flavored e-cigarettes and Juul, which raises questions about the effect of cooling agents on users.

High Variability in Nicotine Analog Contents, Misleading Labeling, and Artificial Sweetener in New E-Cigarette Products Marketed as "FDA-Exempt".

The recent introduction of electronic cigarette products containing a synthetic nicotine analog, 6-methyl nicotine (6MN), challenges FDA's tobacco regulatory authority. A similar strategy is pursued by vendors of recently introduced e-cigarette liquids containing nicotinamide (NA), marketed as 'Nixotine' or 'Nixamide'. Compared to nicotine, 6MN is pharmacologically more potent at nicotinic receptors, and more toxic, raising concerns about increased addictiveness and adverse effects. Here, combinations of gas chromatography, high performance liquid chromatography and mass spectrometry were used to determine nicotine analogs, flavor and sweetener contents of e-cigarette liquids of the brands "SpreeBar" and ECBlend "Nixotine" products. All SpreeBar products, labelled as containing 5% 6-methyl nicotine, contained only 0.61-0.64% 6-methylnicotine, while "Nixotine" samples contained 7-46% less of the declared nicotinamide contents. Although "Nixotine" product labels did not list 6MN as an ingredient, small amounts of 6-methyl nicotine were detected. All 'SpreeBar' samples contained the artificial sweetener neotame (0.20-0.86µg/mg). Results identified significant discrepancies between declared and measured constituents of e-cigarette products containing nicotine alternatives. The discrepancy is misleading for consumers and raises concerns about production errors. 'SpreeBar' products also contained neotame, a high-intensity sweetener with high heat stability, likely increasing appeal to young and first-time users. Novel e-cigarette products with misleading labels containing nicotine analogs instead of nicotine on the US market is concerning and should be urgently addressed by lawmakers and regulators.

Comparison of emissions across tobacco products: A slippery slope in tobacco control.

In this narrative review, we highlight the challenges of comparing emissions from different tobacco products under controlled laboratory settings (using smoking/vaping machines). We focus on tobacco products that generate inhalable smoke or aerosol, such as cigarettes, cigars, hookah, electronic cigarettes, and heated tobacco products. We discuss challenges associated with sample generation including variability of smoking/vaping machines, lack of standardized adaptors that connect smoking/vaping machines to different tobacco products, puffing protocols that are not representative of actual use, and sample generation session length (minutes or number of puffs) that depends on product characteristics. We also discuss the challenges of physically characterizing and trapping emissions from products with different aerosol characteristics. Challenges to analytical method development are also covered, highlighting matrix effects, order of magnitude differences in analyte levels, and the necessity of tailored quality control/quality assurance measures. The review highlights two approaches in selecting emissions to monitor across products, one focusing on toxicants that were detected and quantified with optimized methods for combustible cigarettes, and the other looking for product-specific toxicants using non-targeted analysis. The challenges of data reporting and statistical analysis that allow meaningful comparison across products are also discussed. We end the review by highlighting that even if the technical challenges are overcome, emission comparison may obscure the absolute exposure from novel products if we only focus on relative exposure compared to combustible products.

Chemical and physiological interactions between e-liquid constituents: cause for concern?

Studies of Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS) toxicity have largely focused on individual components such as flavour additives, base e-liquid ingredients (propylene glycol, glycerol), device characteristics (eg, model, components, wattage), use behaviour, etc. However, vaping involves inhalation of chemical mixtures and interactions between compounds can occur that can lead to different toxicities than toxicity of the individual components. Methods based on the additive toxicity of individual chemical components to estimate the health risks of complex mixtures can result in the overestimation or underestimation of exposure risks, since interactions between components are under-investigated. In the case of ENDS, the potential of elevated toxicity resulting from chemical reactions and interactions is enhanced due to high operating temperatures and the metallic surface of the heating element. With the recent availability of a wide range of e-liquid constituents and popularity of do-it-yourself creation of e-liquid mixtures, the need to understand chemical and physiological impacts of chemical combinations in ENDS e-liquids and aerosols is immediate. There is a significant current knowledge gap concerning how specific combinations of ENDS chemical ingredients result in synergistic or antagonistic interactions. This commentary aims to review the current understanding of chemical reactions between e-liquid components, interactions between additives, chemical reactions that occur during vaping and aerosol properties and biomolecular interactions, all of which may impact physiological health.

Synthetic Cooling Agent and Other Flavor Additives in "Non-Menthol" Cigarettes Marketed in California and Massachusetts After Menthol Cigarette Bans.

This study uses a bioassay and chemical analysis to determine the proportion of newly introduced "non-menthol" cigarette brands with sensory cooling effects, cooling agents added, and any other flavor additives after menthol cigarette bans.

Synthetic cooling agent in oral nicotine pouch products marketed as 'Flavour-Ban Approved'.

BACKGROUND: US sales of oral nicotine pouches (ONPs) have rapidly increased, with cool/mint-flavoured ONPs the most popular flavour category. Restrictions on sales of flavoured tobacco products have either been implemented or proposed by several US states and localities. Zyn, the most popular ONP brand, is marketing Zyn Chill and Zyn Smooth as 'Flavour-Ban Approved' or 'unflavoured', probably to evade flavour bans and increase product appeal. At present, it is unclear whether these ONPs are indeed free of flavour additives that can impart pleasant sensations such as cooling. METHODS: Sensory cooling and irritant activities of 'Flavour-Ban Approved' Zyn ONPs, Chill and Smooth, along with minty varieties (Cool Mint, Peppermint, Spearmint, Menthol), were analysed by Ca2+ microfluorimetry in HEK293 cells expressing the cold/menthol (TRPM8) or menthol/irritant receptor (TRPA1). Flavour chemical content of these ONPs was analysed by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry. RESULTS: Zyn Chill ONP extracts robustly activated TRPM8, with much higher efficacy (39%-53%) than the mint-flavoured ONPs. In contrast, mint-flavoured ONP extracts elicited stronger TRPA1 irritant receptor responses than Chill extracts. Chemical analysis demonstrated that Chill exclusively contained WS-3, an odourless synthetic cooling agent, while mint-flavoured ONPs contained WS-3 together with mint flavourants. CONCLUSIONS: ONP products marketed as 'Flavour-Ban Approved' or 'unflavoured' contain flavouring agents, proving that the manufacturer's advertising is misleading. Synthetic coolants such as WS-3 can provide a robust cooling sensation with reduced sensory irritancy, thereby increasing product appeal and use. Regulators need to develop effective strategies for the control of odourless sensory additives used by the industry to bypass flavour bans.

Synthetic Cooling Agent and Candy Flavors in California-marketed "non-Menthol" Cigarettes.

RATIONALE: The ban of menthol cigarettes is one of the key strategies to promote smoking cessation in the United States. Menthol cigarettes are preferred by young beginning smokers for smoking initiation. Almost 90% of African American smokers use menthol cigarettes, a result of decades-long targeted industry marketing. Several states and municipalities already banned menthol cigarettes, most recently California, effective on December 21, 2022. In the weeks before California's ban took effect, the tobacco industry introduced several "non-menthol" cigarette products in California, replacing previously mentholated brands. Here, we hypothesize that tobacco companies replaced menthol with synthetic cooling agents to create a cooling effect without using menthol. Similar to menthol, these agents activate the TRPM8 cold-menthol receptor in sensory neurons innervating the upper and lower airways. METHODS: Calcium microfluorimetry in HEK293t cells expressing the TRPM8 cold/menthol receptors was used to determine sensory cooling activity of extracts prepared from these "non-menthol" cigarette brands, and compared to standard menthol cigarette extracts of the same brands. Specificity of receptor activity was validated using TRPM8-selective inhibitor, AMTB. Gas chromatography mass spectrometry (GCMS) was used to determine presence and amounts of any flavoring chemicals, including synthetic cooling agents, in the tobacco rods, wrapping paper, filters and crushable capsule (if present) of these "non-menthol" cigarettes. RESULTS: Compared to equivalent menthol cigarette extracts, several California-marketed "non-menthol" cigarette extracts activated cold/menthol receptor TRPM8 at higher dilutions and with stronger efficacies, indicating substantial pharmacological activity to elicit robust cooling sensations. Synthetic cooling agent, WS-3, was detected in tobacco rods of several of these "non-menthol" cigarette brands. Crushable capsules added to certain "non-menthol" crush varieties contained neither WS-3 nor menthol but included several "sweet" flavorant chemicals, including vanillin, ethyl vanillin and anethole. CONCLUSION: Tobacco companies have replaced menthol with the synthetic cooling agent, WS-3, in California-marketed "non-menthol" cigarettes. WS-3 creates a cooling sensation similar to menthol, but lacks menthol's characteristic "minty" odor. The measured WS-3 content is sufficient to elicit cooling sensations in smokers, similar to menthol, that facilitate smoking initiation and act as a reinforcing cue. Regulators need to act quickly to prevent the tobacco industry from bypassing menthol bans by substituting menthol with synthetic cooling agents, and thereby thwarting smoking cessation efforts.

Synthetic Cooling Agent in Oral Nicotine Pouch Products Marketed as "Flavor-Ban Approved".

Background: US sales of oral nicotine pouches (ONPs) have rapidly increased, with cool/mint-flavored ONPs the most popular. Restrictions on sales of flavored tobacco products have either been implemented or proposed by several US states and localities. Zyn, the most popular ONP brand, is marketing Zyn-"Chill" and Zyn-"Smooth" as "Flavor-Ban Approved", probably to evade flavor bans. At present it is unclear whether these ONPs are indeed free of flavor additives that can impart pleasant sensations such as cooling. Methods: Sensory cooling and irritant activities of "Flavor-Ban Approved" ONPs, Zyn-"Chill" and "Smooth", along with "minty" varieties (Cool Mint, Peppermint, Spearmint, Menthol), were analyzed by Ca2+ microfluorimetry in HEK293 cells expressing the cold/menthol (TRPM8) or menthol/irritant receptor (TRPA1). Flavor chemical content of these ONPs was analyzed by GC/MS. Results: Zyn-"Chill" ONP extracts robustly activated TRPM8, with much higher efficacy (39-53%) than the mint-flavored ONPs. In contrast, mint-flavored ONP extracts elicited stronger TRPA1 irritant receptor responses than Zyn-"Chill" extracts. Chemical analysis demonstrated the presence of WS-3, an odorless synthetic cooling agent, in Zyn-"Chill" and several other mint-flavored Zyn-ONPs. Conclusions: Synthetic cooling agents such as WS-3 found in 'Flavor-Ban Approved' Zyn-"Chill" can provide a robust cooling sensation with reduced sensory irritancy, thereby increasing product appeal and use. The label "Flavor-Ban Approved" is misleading and may implicate health benefits. Regulators need to develop effective strategies for the control of odorless sensory additives used by the industry to bypass flavor bans.

Emerging ENDS products and challenges in tobacco control toxicity research.

Electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) continue to rapidly evolve. Current products pose unique challenges and opportunities for researchers and regulators. This commentary aims to highlight research gaps, particularly in toxicity research, and provide guidance on priority research questions for the tobacco regulatory community. Disposable flavoured ENDS have become the most popular device class among youth and may contain higher nicotine levels than JUUL devices. They also exhibit enhanced harmful and potentially harmful constituents production, contain elevated levels of synthetic coolants and pose environmental concerns. Synthetic nicotine and flavour capsules are innovations that have recently enabled the circumvention of Food and Drug Administration oversight. Coil-less ENDS offer the promise of delivering fewer toxicants due to the absence of heating coils, but initial studies show that these products exhibit similar toxicological profiles compared with JUULs. Each of these topic areas requires further research to understand and mitigate their impact on human health, especially their risks to young users.

What to Expect When Expecting in Lab: A Review of Unique Risks and Resources for Pregnant Researchers in the Chemical Laboratory.

Pregnancy presents a unique risk to chemical researchers due to their occupational exposures to chemical, equipment, and physical hazards in chemical research laboratories across science, engineering, and technology disciplines. Understanding "risk" as a function of hazard, exposure, and vulnerability, this review aims to critically examine the state of the science for the risks and associated recommendations (or lack thereof) for pregnant researchers in chemical laboratories (labs). Commonly encountered hazards for pregnant lab workers include chemical hazards (organic solvents, heavy metals, engineered nanomaterials, and endocrine disruptors), radiation hazards (ionizing radiation producing equipment and materials and nonionizing radiation producing equipment), and other hazards related to the lab environment (excessive noise, excessive heat, psychosocial stress, strenuous physical work, and/or abnormal working hours). Lab relevant doses and routes of exposure in the chemical lab environment along with literature and governmental recommendations or resources for exposure mitigation are critically assessed. The specific windows of vulnerability based on stage of pregnancy are described for each hazard, if available. Finally, policy gaps for further scientific research are detailed to enhance future guidance to protect pregnant lab workers.

Synthetic Cooling Agents in US-marketed E-cigarette Refill Liquids and Popular Disposable E-cigarettes: Chemical Analysis and Risk Assessment.

INTRODUCTION: Menthol, through its cooling and pleasant sensory effects, facilitates smoking and tobacco product initiation, resulting in the high popularity of mint/menthol-flavored E-cigarettes. More recently, E-cigarette vendors started marketing synthetic cooling agents as additives that impart a cooling effect but lack a characteristic minty odor. Knowledge about content of synthetic coolants in US-marketed E-cigarette products and associated health risks is limited. AIMS AND METHODS: E-liquid vendor sites were searched with the terms "koolada", "kool/cool", "ice", or WS-3/WS-23, denoting individual cooling agents, and relevant refill E-liquids were purchased. "Ice" flavor varieties of Puffbar, the most popular disposable E-cigarette brand, were compared with non-"Ice" varieties. E-liquids were characterized, and synthetic coolants quantified using GC/MS. Margin of exposure (MOE), a risk assessment parameter, was calculated to assess the risk associated with synthetic coolant exposure from E-cigarette use. RESULTS: WS-3 was detected in 24/25 refill E-liquids analyzed. All Puffbar flavor varieties contained either WS-23 (13/14) or WS-3 (5/14), in both "Ice"- and non-"Ice" flavors. Modeling consumption of WS-3 from vaped E-liquids, resulted in MOEs below the safe margin of 100 for most daily use scenarios. MOEs for WS-23 were <100 for 10/13 Puffbar flavors in all use scenarios. Puffbar power specifications are identical to Juul devices. CONCLUSIONS: Synthetic cooling agents (WS-3/WS-23) were present in US-marketed E-cigarettes, at levels that may result in consumer exposures exceeding safety thresholds set by regulatory agencies. Synthetic coolants are not only found in mint- or menthol-flavored products but also in fruit- and candy-flavored products, including popular disposable E-cigarette products such as Puffbar. IMPLICATIONS: Synthetic cooling agents are widely used in "kool/cool"- and "ice"-flavored E-liquids and in E-liquids without these labels, both as a potential replacement for menthol or to add cooling "notes" to nonmenthol flavors. These agents may be used to bypass current and future regulatory limits on menthol content in tobacco products, and not just E-cigarettes. Because synthetic cooling agents are odorless, they may not fall under the category of "characterizing flavor", potentially circumventing regulatory measures based on this concept. Regulators need to consider the additional health risks associated with exposure to synthetic cooling agents.

Quantification of Flavorants and Nicotine in Waterpipe Tobacco and Mainstream Smoke and Comparison to E-cigarette Aerosol.

INTRODUCTION: Waterpipe use remains popular among youth with the availability of flavored shisha tobacco being one of the main drivers of waterpipe use. Although waterpipe mainstream toxicant emissions are well understood, less is known about the carryover of flavorants such as vanillin, benzaldehyde, and eugenol. In this study, flavored waterpipe tobacco was analyzed for flavorants and nicotine, and subsequent carryover to mainstream smoke. METHODS: Flavorants vanillin, benzaldehyde, and eugenol, and nicotine were quantified in vanilla-, cherry-, and cinnamon-flavored shisha tobacco by gas chromatography/flame ionization detector and subsequently in waterpipe mainstream smoke generated by a smoking machine. The setup allowed for sampling before and after the water-filtration step. RESULTS: Flavorant and nicotine content in smoke was reduced 3- to 10-fold and 1.4- to 3.1-fold, respectively, due to water filtration. Per-puff content of filtered waterpipe mainstream smoke ranged from 13 to 46 µg/puff for nicotine and from 6 to 55 µg/puff for flavorants. CONCLUSIONS: Although water filtration reduced flavor and nicotine content in waterpipe mainstream smoke, the detected flavorant concentrations were similar or higher to those previously reported in e-cigarette aerosol. Therefore, users could be drawn to waterpipes due to similar flavor appeal as popular e-cigarette products. Absolute nicotine content of waterpipe smoke was lower than in e-cigarette aerosol, but the differential use patterns of waterpipe (>100 puffs/session) and e-cigarette (mostly <10 puffs/session, multiple session throughout the day) probably result in higher flavorant and nicotine exposure during a waterpipe session. Strategies to reduce youth introduction and exposure to nicotine via waterpipe use may consider similar flavor restrictions as those for e-cigarettes. IMPLICATIONS: Although waterpipe mainstream smoke is well characterized for toxicants content, little is known about carryover of molecules relevant for appeal and addiction: flavorants and nicotine. This study shows that flavorant content of waterpipe mainstream smoke is comparable or higher than e-cigarette aerosol flavorant content. Regulatory action to address tobacco use behaviors targeting the availability of flavors should also include other tobacco products such as flavored shisha tobacco.

Influence of menthol and green apple e-liquids containing different nicotine concentrations among youth e-cigarette users.

E-cigarettes are popular among adolescents. Given that flavors enhance e-cigarette appeal, this study examined the influence of flavors on nicotine in e-cigarettes. Youth e-cigarette users (average 26.2 days [SD = 3.6] in past 28 days) were randomized to use e-cigarettes containing 6 or 12 mg/mL of freebase nicotine and completed 4 test sessions. During the first 3 test sessions, participants completed 3 fixed puffing bouts (1 puffing bout = 10 puffs, 3 s each, 30-s interval), using menthol, green-apple, and unflavored e-liquids (50 propylene glycol [PG]/50 vegetable glycerin [VG]) with their assigned nicotine concentration in a random order using a ∼5.5-W V2 e-cigarette device. After each puffing bout, participants assessed subjective effects of nicotine and flavor. In the 4th test session, participants used any of the e-liquids they had tried in the earlier sessions, ad libitum for 60 min and the amount of e-liquid used for each flavor and the number of puffs was assessed. Participants (n = 49; 6 mg/mL [n = 24]; 12 mg/mL [n = 25]) were 63.3% male, 65.3% non-Hispanic White with an average age of 18.7 (SD = 0.9). Mixed models analysis revealed that green apple and 6 mg/mL of nicotine independently increased liking of e-cigarette taste. In addition, green apple produced higher ratings of fruitiness, sourness, sweetness, and menthol produced higher ratings of coolness. We did not observe any interactions between nicotine and flavor. Youth liked the taste of e-liquids containing green-apple flavor or low nicotine concentration which highlights the appeal of fruit flavors in e-cigarettes to adolescents. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Chemical Adducts of Reactive Flavor Aldehydes Formed in E-Cigarette Liquids Are Cytotoxic and Inhibit Mitochondrial Function in Respiratory Epithelial Cells.

INTRODUCTION: Flavor aldehydes in e-cigarettes, including vanillin, ethyl vanillin (vanilla), and benzaldehyde (berry/fruit), rapidly undergo chemical reactions with the e-liquid solvents, propylene glycol, and vegetable glycerol (PG/VG), to form chemical adducts named flavor aldehyde PG/VG acetals that can efficiently transfer to e-cigarette aerosol. The objective of this study was to compare the cytotoxic and metabolic toxic effects of acetals and their parent aldehydes in respiratory epithelial cells. AIMS AND METHODS: Cell metabolic assays were carried out in bronchial (BEAS-2B) and alveolar (A549) epithelial cells assessing the effects of benzaldehyde, vanillin, ethyl vanillin, and their corresponding PG acetals on key bioenergetic parameters of mitochondrial function. The potential cytotoxic effects of benzaldehyde and vanillin and their corresponding PG acetals were analyzed using the LIVE/DEAD cell assay in BEAS-2B cells and primary human nasal epithelial cells (HNEpC). Cytostatic effects of vanillin and vanillin PG acetal were compared using Click-iT EDU cell proliferation assay in BEAS-2B cells. RESULTS: Compared with their parent aldehydes, PG acetals diminished key parameters of cellular energy metabolic functions, including basal respiration, adenosine triphosphate production, and spare respiratory capacity. Benzaldehyde PG acetal (1-10 mM) increased cell mortality in BEAS-2B and HNEpC, compared with benzaldehyde. Vanillin PG acetal was more cytotoxic than vanillin at the highest concentration tested while both diminished cellular proliferation in a concentration-dependent manner. CONCLUSIONS: Reaction products formed in e-liquids between flavor aldehydes and solvent chemicals have differential toxicological properties from their parent flavor aldehydes and may contribute to the health effects of e-cigarette aerosol in the respiratory system of e-cigarette users. IMPLICATIONS: With no inhalation toxicity studies available for acetals, data from this study will provide a basis for further toxicological studies using in vitro and in vivo models. This study suggests that manufacturers' disclosure of e-liquid ingredients at time of production may be insufficient to inform a comprehensive risk assessment of e-liquids and electronic nicotine delivery systems use, due to the chemical instability of e-liquids over time and the formation of new compounds.

Differences in flavourant levels and synthetic coolant use between USA, EU and Canadian Juul products.

BACKGROUND: 'Juul' is the dominant US e-cigarette brand and was recently introduced to Canada, UK, France, Germany and Italy, with several flavours available across countries. US/Canadian products are sold with 5%, 3% and 1.5% (Canada only) nicotine content, whereas European Union (EU) regulation limits nicotine content to 1.7%. The differential nicotine content raises the question if flavour profiles and Juul device power output differ between countries. METHODS: 'Mint', 'Vanilla' and 'Mango' e-liquids from all six countries were purchased in 2019 and analysed by GC/MS for their principal flavourant and nicotine content. In addition, device power specifications were compared for devices purchased from the respective countries. RESULTS: Compositions of Juul e-liquids from the USA and Canada were identical and differed from the EU-marketed liquids, in which principal flavourant concentrations were significantly lower. EU Juul 'Mint' e-liquids contained a synthetic coolant, N-ethyl-p-menthane-3-carboxamide (WS-3), absent in US/Canadian products. US/Canadian 'Mango' e-liquid contained triethyl-citrate, an emulsifier. Nicotine contents matched label information, and devices had identical power specifications. CONCLUSIONS: Tested US/Canadian Juul e-liquids contained higher flavour concentrations than EU products, likely reflecting adaptation to user preferences. In EU, 'Mint' e-liquid, menthol is partially substituted with the synthetic coolant WS-3 that elicits a cooling effect like menthol but lacks its distinct 'minty' odour. The inhalational safety of WS-3 is unknown. The use of an emulsifier in US/Canadian 'Mango' Juul e-liquid may be necessary to keep the product homogeneous. Similar power specifications of devices between countries suggest that nicotine aerosol delivery is likely proportional to the e-liquid nicotine content.

Designing for a green chemistry future.

The material basis of a sustainable society will depend on chemical products and processes that are designed following principles that make them conducive to life. Important inherent properties of molecules need to be considered from the earliest stage-the design stage-to address whether compounds and processes are depleting versus renewable, toxic versus benign, and persistent versus readily degradable. Products, feedstocks, and manufacturing processes will need to integrate the principles of green chemistry and green engineering under an expanded definition of performance that includes sustainability considerations. This transformation will require the best of the traditions of science and innovation coupled with new emerging systems thinking and systems design that begins at the molecular level and results in a positive impact on the global scale.

Formation of flavorant-propylene Glycol Adducts With Novel Toxicological Properties in Chemically Unstable E-Cigarette Liquids.

INTRODUCTION: "Vaping" electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) is increasingly popular with youth, driven by the wide range of available flavors, often created using flavor aldehydes. The objective of this study was to examine whether flavor aldehydes remain stable in e-cigarette liquids or whether they undergo chemical reactions, forming novel chemical species that may cause harm to the user. METHODS: Gas chromatography was used to determine concentrations of flavor aldehydes and reaction products in e-liquids and vapor generated from a commercial e-cigarette. Stability of the detected reaction products in aqueous media was monitored by ultraviolet spectroscopy and nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy, and their effects on irritant receptors determined by fluorescent calcium imaging in HEK-293T cells. RESULTS: Flavor aldehydes including benzaldehyde, cinnamaldehyde, citral, ethylvanillin, and vanillin rapidly reacted with the e-liquid solvent propylene glycol (PG) after mixing, and upward of 40% of flavor aldehyde content was converted to flavor aldehyde PG acetals, which were also detected in commercial e-liquids. Vaping experiments showed carryover rates of 50%-80% of acetals to e-cigarette vapor. Acetals remained stable in physiological aqueous solution, with half-lives above 36 hours, suggesting they persist when inhaled by the user. Acetals activated aldehyde-sensitive TRPA1 irritant receptors and aldehyde-insensitive TRPV1 irritant receptors. CONCLUSIONS: E-liquids are potentially reactive chemical systems in which new compounds can form after mixing of constituents and during storage, as demonstrated here for flavor aldehyde PG acetals, with unexpected toxicological effects. For regulatory purposes, a rigorous process is advised to monitor the potentially changing composition of e-liquids and e-vapors over time, to identify possible health hazards. IMPLICATIONS: This study demonstrates that e-cigarette liquids can be chemically unstable, with reactions occurring between flavorant and solvent components immediately after mixing at room temperature. The resulting compounds have toxicological properties that differ from either the flavorants or solvent components. These findings suggest that the reporting of manufacturing ingredients of e-liquids is insufficient for a safety assessment. The establishment of an analytical workflow to detect newly formed compounds in e-liquids and their potential toxicological effects is imperative for regulatory risk analysis.