A Comparison between Cigarette Topography from a One-Week Natural Environment Study to FTC/ISO, Health Canada, and Massachusetts Department of Public Health Puff Profile Standards

Risa J. Robinson, S. Emma Sarles, Shehan Jayasekera, Aziz al Olayan, A. Gary Difrancesco, Nathan C. Eddingsaas and Edward C. Hensel
Additional contact information
Risa J. Robinson: Department of Mechanical Engineering, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY 14623, USA
S. Emma Sarles: Department of Mechanical Engineering, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY 14623, USA
Shehan Jayasekera: Department of Mechanical Engineering, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY 14623, USA
Aziz al Olayan: Department of Mechanical Engineering, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY 14623, USA
A. Gary Difrancesco: Department of Mechanical Engineering, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY 14623, USA
Nathan C. Eddingsaas: Department of Mechanical Engineering, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY 14623, USA
Edward C. Hensel: Department of Mechanical Engineering, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY 14623, USA

IJERPH, 2020, vol. 17, issue 10, 1-10

Abstract: Standardized topography protocols for testing cigarette emissions include the Federal Trade Commission/International Standard Organization (FTC/ISO), the Massachusetts Department of Health (MDPH), and Health Canada (HC). Data are lacking for how well these protocols represent actual use behavior. This study aims to compare puff protocol standards to actual use topography measured in natural environments across a range of cigarette brands. Current smokers between 18 and 65 years of age were recruited. Each participant was provided with a wPUM™ cigarette topography monitor and instructed to use the monitor with their usual brand cigarette ad libitum in their natural environment for one week. Monitors were tested for repeatability, and data were checked for quality and analyzed with the TAP™ topography analysis program. Data from n = 26 participants were analyzed. Puff flow rates ranged from 17.2 to 110.6 mL/s, with a mean (STD) of 40.4 (21.7) mL/s; durations from 0.7 to 3.1 s, with a mean (STD) of 1.5 ± 0.5 s; and volumes from 21.4 to 159.2 mL, with a mean (STD) of 54.9 (29.8) mL. Current topography standards were found to be insufficient to represent smoking across the wide range of real behaviors. These data suggest updated standards are needed such that emissions tests will provide meaningful risk assessments.

Keywords: cigarette; topography; puff flow rate; puff duration; puff volume; interpuff interval; natural environment; FTC/ISO; standards; puff profiles; emissions; MDPH; HC (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/10/3444/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/10/3444/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:10:p:3444-:d:358517

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().