Comparative assessment of HPHC yields in the Tobacco Heating System THS2.2 and commercial cigarettes

Abstract

There has been a sustained effort in recent years to develop products with the potential to present less risk compared with continued smoking as an alternative for adult smokers who would otherwise continue to smoke cigarettes. During the non-clinical assessment phase of such products, the chemical composition and toxicity of their aerosols are frequently compared to the chemical composition and toxicity of the smoke from a standard research cigarette - the 3R4F reference cigarette. In the present study, it is demonstrated that results of these analytical comparisons are similar when considering commercially available cigarette products worldwide. A market mean reduction of about 90% is observed on average across a broad range of harmful and potentially harmful constituents (HPHC) measured in the aerosol of a candidate modified risk tobacco product, the Tobacco Heating System 2.2 (THS2.2), compared against the levels of HPHC of cigarettes representative of selected markets; this mean reduction is well in line with the reduction observed against 3R4F smoke constituents in previous studies.

Carbon monoxide levels after inhalation from new generation heated tobacco products

“…Dissimilarity in absolute CO values reflects different methodologies used for analysis of emissions and assessment of exposures [18]. Nonetheless, the very large reductions reported in CO emissions [13–17] are fully consistent with our findings in human exhaled breath. Interestingly, in a recent paper about GLO aerosol emission [19] when the tobacco stick was ignited and smoked as a conventional cigarette a sharp increase in CO, NO and CO2 was observed, thereby confirming that it is the burning (and not the heating) of the tobacco that results in combustion.…”

“…Our findings concur with findings from e-cigarette studies [6–8] as well as from manufacturer and independent data on HTPs. Findings from tobacco industry reports indicate negligible CO emission (0,436 mg/stick and 0,223 mg/stick for iQOS and GLO, respectively; compared to 30.2 mg/tobacco cigarette, that is 69,3 and 135,4 times less) [13, 14]. Independent analytical chemistry data confirms substantial CO level reductions [15, 16] in HTP aerosol emissions compared to combustible cigarettes.…”

“…However, surprisingly, in two of these studies, when exposure to CO was evaluated by measurement in exhaled breath, a significant elevation was detected [13, 14]. It is possible that combustion can still take place in some HTPs designs.…”

Carbonyl emissions from a novel heated tobacco product (IQOS): comparison with an e‐cigarette and a tobacco cigarette

“…This is expected to result in lower levels of toxic emissions and, as a result, they are marketed as reduced‐risk products. Several studies have assessed the chemistry and toxicology of this and other similar products from other manufacturers . However, with few exceptions , all studies have been performed by the manufacturers of the products.…”

New ideas, old problems? Heated tobacco products – a systematic review

“…IJOMEH 2019;32(5) 596 taining propylene glycol or glycerol) which passes through a capsule made of granulated tobacco leaves [12,13]. Tobacco companies claim that HTPs are less harmful than traditional cigarettes [14][15][16][17][18]. However, the potential impact of HTP use on human health has not been fully investigated yet.…”