Effects of Aftermarket Electronic Cigarette Pods on Device Power Output and Nicotine, Carbonyl, and ROS Emissions.

Aftermarket pods designed to operate with prevalent electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) products such as JUUL are marketed as low-cost alternatives that allow the use of banned flavored liquids. Subtle differences in the design or construction of aftermarket pods may intrinsically modify the performance of the ENDS device and the resulting nicotine and toxicant emissions relative to the original equipment manufacturer's product. In this study, we examined the electrical output of a JUUL battery and the aerosol emissions when four different brands of aftermarket pods filled with an analytical-grade mixture of propylene glycol, glycerol, and nicotine were attached to it and puffed by machine. The aerosol emissions examined included total particulate matter (TPM), nicotine, carbonyl compounds (CCs), and reactive oxygen species (ROS). We also compared the puff-resolved power and TPM outputs of JUUL and aftermarket pods. We found that all aftermarket pods drew significantly greater electrical power from the JUUL battery during puffing and had different electrical resistances and resistivity. In addition, unlike the case with the original pods, we found that with the aftermarket pods, the power provided by the battery did not vary greatly with flow rate or puff number, suggesting impairment of the temperature control circuitry of the JUUL device when used with the aftermarket pods. The greater power output with the aftermarket pods resulted in up to three times greater aerosol and nicotine output than the original product. ROS and CC emissions varied widely across brands. These results highlight that the use of aftermarket pods can greatly modify the performance and emissions of ENDS. Consumers and public health authorities should be made aware of the potential increase in the level of toxicant exposure when aftermarket pods are employed.

Comparison of design characteristics and toxicant emissions from Vuse Solo and Alto electronic nicotine delivery systems.

INTRODUCTION: Vuse Solo is the first electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) authorised by the US Food and Drug Administration for marketing in the USA. Salient features of the Vuse Solo product such as nicotine form, draw resistance, power regulation and electrical characteristics have not been reported previously, and few studies have examined the nicotine and other toxicant emissions of this product. We investigated the design characteristics and toxicant emissions of the Solo as well as Alto, another Vuse product with a greater market share than Solo. METHODS: Total/freebase nicotine, propylene glycol to vegetable glycerin ratio, carbonyl compounds (CC) and reactive oxygen species (ROS) were quantified by gas chromatography, high-performance liquid chromatography and fluorescence from aerosol emissions generated in 15 puffs of 4 s duration. The electric power control system was also analysed. RESULTS: The average power delivered was 2.1 W and 3.9 W for Solo and Alto; neither system was temperature-controlled. Vuse Solo and Alto, respectively, emitted nicotine at a rate of 38 µg/s and 115 µg/s, predominantly in the protonated form (>90%). Alto's ROS yield was similar to a combustible cigarette and one order of magnitude greater than that of Solo. Total carbonyls from both products were two orders of magnitude lower than combustible cigarettes. CONCLUSION: Vuse Solo is an above-Ohm ENDS that emits approximately one-third the nicotine flux of a Marlboro Red cigarette (129 µg/s) and considerably lower CC and ROS yields than a combustible cigarette. With its higher power, the nicotine flux and ROS yield from Alto are similar to Marlboro Red levels; Alto may thus present greater abuse liability than the lower sales-volume Solo.