A comparison of the electrical characteristics, liquid composition, and toxicant emissions of JUUL USA and JUUL UK e-cigarettes

dc.contributor.authorTalih, Soha
dc.contributor.authorSalman, Rola
dc.contributor.authorEl-Hage, Rachel
dc.contributor.authorKaram, Ebrahim
dc.contributor.authorSalam, Sally
dc.contributor.authorKaraoghlanian, Nareg
dc.contributor.authorEl-Hellani, Ahmad
dc.contributor.authorSaliba, Najat A.
dc.contributor.authorShihadeh, Alan Louis
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Mechanical Engineering
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Chemistry
dc.contributor.facultyMaroun Semaan Faculty of Engineering and Architecture (MSFEA)
dc.contributor.facultyFaculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS)
dc.contributor.institutionAmerican University of Beirut
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-24T11:32:50Z
dc.date.available2025-01-24T11:32:50Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.description.abstractIn 2018, JUUL entered the UK market, where EU regulations limit liquid nicotine concentration to 20 mg/mL, approximately one-third the level of JUUL products sold in the USA. We hypothesized that JUUL’s UK product was engineered to deliver greater electrical power and boost liquid vaporization such that the net nicotine delivery rate was similar to the US version. We compared electrical characteristics, liquid composition, and aerosol emissions of JUUL devices procured in the USA and the UK. Study outcomes included electrical power, total and freebase nicotine, propylene glycol/vegetable glycerin ratio, carbonyls, and reactive oxygen species. Liquids and aerosols were analyzed by GCMS, HPLC, and fluorescence. Compared to the US version, JUUL UK had approximately one-third the liquid nicotine concentration in the liquid (5.4 vs. 1.6 wt.%) and aerosol (4.7 and 1.3 wt.%). Other than nicotine concentration and yield, we found no differences in any other study outcome, including electrical power. Currently, JUUL UK emits nicotine at a far lower rate than the US product, offering an opportunity to study how this factor impacts user behavior, JUUL uptake, and other population-level outcomes across the two markets. © 2020, The Author(s).
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-64414-5
dc.identifier.eid2-s2.0-85084128093
dc.identifier.pmid32355323
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10938/27884
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherNature Research
dc.relation.ispartofScientific Reports
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectAerosols
dc.subjectElectricity
dc.subjectElectronic nicotine delivery systems
dc.subjectFlavoring agents
dc.subjectGlycerol
dc.subjectHydrogen-ion concentration
dc.subjectNicotine
dc.subjectPropylene glycol
dc.subjectReactive oxygen species
dc.subjectUnited kingdom
dc.subjectUnited states
dc.subjectVaping
dc.subjectFlavoring agent
dc.subjectReactive oxygen metabolite
dc.subjectAerosol
dc.subjectComparative study
dc.subjectElectronic cigarette
dc.subjectPh
dc.titleA comparison of the electrical characteristics, liquid composition, and toxicant emissions of JUUL USA and JUUL UK e-cigarettes
dc.typeArticle

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
2020-6494.pdf
Size:
971.11 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format