Refine
Document Type
- Article (6)
Language
- English (6)
Has Fulltext
- yes (6)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (6)
Keywords
- environmental tobacco smoke (6) (remove)
Institute
- Medizin (6)
- Biochemie und Chemie (4)
Children are commonly exposed to second-hand smoke (SHS) in the domestic environment or inside vehicles of smokers. Unfortunately, prenatal tobacco smoke (PTS) exposure is still common, too. SHS is hazardous to the health of smokers and non-smokers, but especially to that of children. SHS and PTS increase the risk for children to develop cancers and can trigger or worsen asthma and allergies, modulate the immune status, and is harmful to lung, heart and blood vessels. Smoking during pregnancy can cause pregnancy complications and poor birth outcomes as well as changes in the development of the foetus. Lately, some of the molecular and genetic mechanisms that cause adverse health effects in children have been identified. In this review, some of the current insights are discussed. In this regard, it has been found in children that SHS and PTS exposure is associated with changes in levels of enzymes, hormones, and expression of genes, micro RNAs, and proteins. PTS and SHS exposure are major elicitors of mechanisms of oxidative stress. Genetic predisposition can compound the health effects of PTS and SHS exposure. Epigenetic effects might influence in utero gene expression and disease susceptibility. Hence, the limitation of domestic and public exposure to SHS as well as PTS exposure has to be in the focus of policymakers and the public in order to save the health of children at an early age. Global substantial smoke-free policies, health communication campaigns, and behavioural interventions are useful and should be mandatory.
Objective: Inhaled particulate matter (PM) in secondhand smoke (SHS) is deleterious for smokers and non-smokers. Different additives in cigarettes might effect the amount of PM. This study aimed to assess the influence of additives on the PM emissions from different cigarette types in SHS.
Design: An experimental study of PM measuring in SHS of cigarettes without exposition of any person.
Method: The concentrations of PM (PM10, PM2.5 and PM1) in SHS of four different types of cigarettes of the brand Lucky Strike, two types with additives (Original Red, Original Blue) and two types without additives (Straight Red, Straight Blue), in comparison to the reference cigarette 3R4F were analysed. An automatic environmental tobacco smoke emitter generated SHS in an enclosed space with a volume of 2.88 m3. PM was measured with a laser aerosol spectrometer (Grimm model 1.109). Afterwards, the measuring values of the four Lucky Strike brands and the reference cigarette were statistically evaluated and visualised.
Results: Lucky Strike Straight Blue, a cigarette type without additives and lower tar amount, showed 10% to 25% lower PM mean values compared with the other tested Lucky Strike products, but 21% (PM1) respectively 27% (PM2.5,PM10) higher mean values than the reference cigarette. The PM mean of all measured smoke-free baseline values (clean air) was 1.6 µg/m³. It increased up to about 1800 µg/m³ for the reference cigarette and up to about 3070 µg/m³ for the Lucky Strike Original Blue.
Conclusions: The findings of this study show the massive increase of PM amount by smoking cigarettes in enclosed spaces and suggest that additives in tobacco products increase the PM amount in SHS. For validation, further comparative studies are necessary focusing on the comparison of the PM concentration of cigarettes with and without additives.
Implications: Due to the exposure to SHS, 890 000 people die each year worldwide. PM in SHS endangers the health of both non-smokers and smokers. This study considers the effect of additives like aromatics and humectant agents in cigarettes on PM in SHS. Do additives in tobacco products increase the amount of PM?
Abstract
Indoor air pollution with harmful particulate matter (PM) is mainly caused by cigarette smoke. Super-Slim-Size-Cigarettes (SSL) are considered a less harmful alternative to King-Size-Cigarettes (KSC) due to longer filters and relatively low contents. We ask if “Combined Mainstream and Sidestream Smoke” (CMSS)-associated PM levels of SSL are lower than of KSC and thus are potentially less harmful. PM concentrations in CMSS (PM10, PM2.5, and PM1) are measured from four cigarette types of the brand Vogue, using an “automatic-environmental-tobacco-smoke-emitter” (AETSE) and laser aerosol spectrometry: SSL-BLEUE, -MENTHE, -LILAS and KSC-La Cigarette and -3R4F reference. This analysis shows that SSL MENTHE emitted the highest amount of PM, and KSC-La Cigarette the lowest. 3R4F reference emitted PM in the middle range, exceeding SSL BLEUE and falling slightly below SSL LILAS. It emerged that PM1 constituted the biggest proportion of PM emission. The outcome shows significant type-specific differences for emitted PM concentrations. Our results indicate that SSL are potentially more harmful for passive smokers than the respective KSC. However, this study cannot give precise statements about the general influence of the size of a cigarette on PM. Alarming is that PM1 is responsible for the biggest proportion of PM pollution, since smaller particles cause more harmful effects.
The inhalation of particulate matter (PM) in second-hand smoke (SHS) is hazardous to health of smokers and non-smokers. Tobacco strength (amount of tar, nicotine, and carbon monoxide) and different additives might have an effect on the amount of PM. This study aimed to investigate the influence of tobacco strength or additives on PM. Four cigarette types of the brand Marlboro with different strengths and with or without additives were analyzed in comparison to the 3R4F reference cigarette. SHS was generated by an automatic environmental tobacco smoke emitter (AETSE) in an enclosed space with a volume of 2.88 m³. PM concentrations (PM10, PM2.5, PM1) were measured with a laser aerosol spectrometer followed by statistical analysis. The two strongest Marlboro brands (Red and Red without additives) showed the highest PM concentrations of all tested cigarettes. The measured mean concentrations Cmean of PM10 increased up to 1458 µg/m³ for the Marlboro Red without additives (PM2.5: 1452 µg/m³, PM1: 1263 µg/m³). The similarly strong Marlboro Red showed very similar PM values. The second strongest type Marlboro Gold showed 36% (PM10, PM2.5) and 32% (PM1) lower values, respectively. The “lightest” type Marlboro Silver Blue showed 54% (PM10, PM2.5) or 50% (PM1) lower PM values. The results indicate that the lower the tar, nicotine, and carbon monoxide amounts, as well as the longer the cigarette filter, the lower are the PM levels. An influence of additives could not be determined.
Although the big tobacco companies offer the same cigarette brands across countries, little is known about the potential regional differences of the particulate matter (PM) emissions of apparently equal brands. PM emissions of three cigarette brands (Marlboro Gold, Winston Red resp. Classic, Parliament Platinum resp. Night Blue) from the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Germany were analysed. Second-hand smoke was produced in a 2.88 m3 measuring cabin by an automatic environmental tobacco smoke emitter. PM size fractions PM10, PM2.5, and PM1 were detected in real-time using laser aerosol spectrometry. Depending on the PM fraction Marlboro cigarettes from UAE showed 33%–35% higher PM amounts. Moreover, Winston cigarettes from UAE showed distinctly higher PM values (28–31%) than the German counterparts. The “lighter” Parliament from UAE emitted 3%–9% more PM than the German one. The measured mean PM10 values laid between 778 and 1163 µg/m3 (mean PM2.5: 777–1161 µg/m3; mean PM1: 724–1074 µg/m3). That means smoking in enclosed rooms causes massive PM burden. The PM emission of equal or similar tobacco products from different countries can differ distinctly. Hence, the declaration of PM emission values, besides nicotine, tar, and carbon monoxide amounts, should be obligatory worldwide. Furthermore, complete information about the ingredients and production processes of tobacco products should be provided to health officials and the public. This can help to minimise or ban substances or product designs that make smoking even more harmful, and to enhance the awareness of the risks of smoking.
Private-label cigarettes are cigarettes that belong to the retailer itself. Private-label cigarettes from discounters or supermarkets are cheaper than brand-name cigarettes, and their lower price has allowed them to garner an ever-increasing share of the tobacco product market, especially among lower socioeconomic groups. Particulate matter (PM), a considerable component of air pollution, is a substantial health-damaging factor. Smoking is the primary source of PM in smokers’ homes. In a 2.88 m3 measuring chamber, the PM emission fractions PM10, PM2.5, and PM1 from three private-label cigarette brands and three brand-name cigarette brands with identical nicotine, tar, and carbon monoxide content were measured and compared to those of a reference cigarette by laser aerosol spectroscopy. All cigarette brands emitted PM in health-threatening quantities. The measurement results ranged from 1394 µg/m3 to 1686 µg/m3 PM10, 1392 µg/m3 to 1682 µg/m3 PM2.5, and 1355 µg/m3 to 1634 µg/m3 PM1, respectively. Only one private-label brand differed significantly (p < 0.001) from the other cigarette brands, which were tested with slightly lower PM levels. All other brands differed only marginally (not significant, p > 0.05) from one another. Significant (p < 0.05) negative correlations between private-label and brand-name cigarettes were found for PM10, PM2.5, and PM1 when accounting for tobacco filling densities, and for PM1 when accounting for filter lengths. The especially health-hazardous fraction PM1 accounted for the largest proportion of PM emissions from the cigarettes tested. The results of this study suggest that- cheaper tobacco products are as harmful as more expensive ones, at least regarding PM emissions. This highlights the importance of anti-smoking campaigns, especially for lower socioeconomic groups, where smoking is more widespread. Governments should reduce the price gap between cheap and more expensive tobacco products by implementing specific tobacco taxes. In such a case, at increasing prices of tobacco products, a downward shift to private-label cigarettes would probably decrease.