Predicting Regional Lung Deposition of Environmental Tobacco Smoke Particles

Nazaroff, William W.; Hung, Wen-Yea; Sasse, A.G.B.M.; Gadgil, Ashok

doi:10.1080/02786829308959633

Cited by 31 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…MMD values reported in the literature are in the approximate range of 0.3-0.7 µm for mainstream smoke (Chang et al 1985;Anderson et al 1989;Chung and Dunn-Rankin 1996), 0.2-0.5 µm for sidestream smoke (Ueno and Peters 1986;Ingebrethsen and Sears 1989;Chung and Dunn-Rankin 1996), and 0.2-0.5 µm for ETS Sextro et al 1991, as reported in Nazaroff et al 1993;Kleeman et al 1999), with reported GSD values in the approximate range of 1-2. In spite of the variation in these reported results, ETS particle emissions appear to have a fairly narrow and identifiable distribution.…”

Section: Estimates Of the Ets Particle Size Distributionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Determining Size-Specific Emission Factors for Environmental Tobacco Smoke Particles

Klepeis

Apte

Gundel

et al. 2003

Aerosol Science and Technology

Self Cite

112

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Because size is a major controlling factor for indoor airborne particle behavior, human particle exposure assessments will benefit from improved knowledge of size-specific particle emissions. We report a method of inferring size-specific mass emission factors for indoor sources that makes use of an indoor aerosol dynamics model, measured particle concentration time series data, and an optimization routine. This approach provides-in addition to estimates of the emissions size distribution and integrated emission factorsestimates of deposition rate, an enhanced understanding of particle dynamics, and information about model performance. We applied the method to size-specific environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) particle concentrations measured every minute with an 8-channel optical particle counter (PMS-LASAIR; 0.1−2+ µm diameters) and every 10 or 30 min with a 34-channel differential mobility particle sizer (TSI-DMPS; 0.01−1+ µm diameters) after a single cigarette or cigar was machine-smoked inside a low air-exchange- S. Department of Energy (DOE) underContract DE-AC03-76SF0098. Additional support was provided by the TRDRP under grant 6RT-0118 to Stanford University. We would like to express our appreciation for the technical assistance of D. Sullivan. S. Baker assisted with filter preparation and experimental procedure. The graphics and much of the data analysis for this research were accomplished using the freely-available R system described by Ihaka and Gentleman (1996) and accessible on the World Wide Web at http://www.r-project.org.Address correspondence to Neil E. Klepeis, 16475 Tarpey Road, Watsonville, CA 95076-9015. E-mail: nklepeis@uclink.berkeley.edu rate 20 m 3 chamber. The aerosol dynamics model provided good fits to observed concentrations when using optimized values of mass emission rate and deposition rate for each particle size range as input. Small discrepancies observed in the first 1-2 h after smoking are likely due to the effect of particle evaporation, a process neglected by the model. Size-specific ETS particle emission factors were fit with log-normal distributions, yielding an average mass median diameter of 0.2 µm and an average geometric standard deviation of 2.3 with no systematic differences between cigars and cigarettes. The equivalent total particle emission rate, obtained by integrating each size distribution, was 0.2-0.7 mg/min for cigars and 0.7-0.9 mg/min for cigarettes.

show abstract

Section: Estimates Of the Ets Particle Size Distributionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Determining Size-Specific Emission Factors for Environmental Tobacco Smoke Particles

Klepeis

Apte

Gundel

et al. 2003

Aerosol Science and Technology

Self Cite

112

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Most of the particulate mass occurs in particles with diameters between 0.1 and 1.3 μm, the lower half of the fine particle diameter range. 110,111 Though ultrafine particulate (<0.1 μm) from tobacco smoke is not the fraction with the greatest mass, the small size facilitates deeper penetration into the lung, more rapid uptake into cells, and into circulation. 112,113 Geiser et al found that after an exposure of rat lung to a 4-5 μg dose of insoluble ultrafine TiO 2 particles, the particles were found widely distributed on luminal sides of airways and alveoli, in all tissue compartments and cells, and within capillaries.…”

Section: Particulate Sizementioning

confidence: 99%

Toxic elements in tobacco and in cigarette smoke: inflammation and sensitization

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biochemically and pathologically, there is strong evidence for both atopic and nonatopic airway sensitization, hyperresponsiveness, and inflammation as a consequence of exposure to tobacco mainstream or sidestream smoke particulate. There is growing evidence for the relation between exposure to mainstream and sidestream smoke and diseases resulting from reactive oxidant challenge and inflammation directly as a consequence of the combined activity of neutrophils, macrophages, dendritic cells, eosinophils, basophils, as a humoral immunological consequence of sensitization, and that the metal components of the particulate play a role in adjuvant effects. As an end consequence, carcinogenicity is a known outcome of chronic inflammation.Smokeless tobacco has been evaluated by the IARC as a group 1 carcinogen. Of the many harmful constituents in smokeless tobacco, oral tissue metallothionein gradients suggest that metals contribute to the toxicity from smokeless tobacco use and possibly sensitization.This work reviews and examines work on probable contributions of toxic metals from tobacco and smoke to pathology observed as a consequence of smoking and the use of smokeless tobacco. Metals and metalloids in tobaccoThough exposure to substances from tobacco use is obviously a complex exposure, the carcinogens in tobacco smoke have been classified for health risk determinations into five major chemical classes. 1 Some of these have been carefully studied, contributing to a strong weight of evidence for associated health risks. 2 Toxic metals and metalloids constitute one of the more understudied major carcinogenic chemical classes in smokeless tobacco products and tobacco smoke. Eight of the top forty substances in the Fowles and Dybing table of cancer risk indices are metals or metalloid compounds. 1 In their table of non-cancer risk indices for individual chemical constituents of mainstream cigarette smoke based on a single cigarette per day, three of the top eight listed for respiratory effect health risk, cadmium, hexavalent chromium, and nickel, were metals. Another metalloid, silicon in the form of silicates, poses serious health risks by inhalation, but limited data is available, likely due to analytical difficulties.Metals and metalloids in smoke from biomass combustion including tobacco are generally considered to be present in ionic form, but may also occur in a gaseous elemental form, as is the case for mercury. 3 Whether a tobacco product is consumed by smoking or in a smokeless form, the exposure to toxic metals is directly related to the concentration in the tobacco leaf, assuming no metal containing additives are included during manufacture. [4][5][6] The soil (including any amendments to the soil such as sludge, fertilizers, or irrigation with

show abstract

“…A lung deposition model, as described by Nazaroff et al, 8 was combined with the particle size distribution data from each of the four particle experiments to predict deposition of tobacco smoke particles in three lung regions: nasopharyngeal (NP), tracheobronchial (TB), and alveolar (Alv). Lung deposition calculations yield deposited dose of particles for one hour of exposure, starting with cigarette ignition.…”

Section: Optical Particle Countermentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of Smokeless Ashtrays

Wampler

Miller

Nazaroff

et al. 1995

Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) issues from the tips of smoldering cigarettes between puffs. Smokeless ashtrays are designed to reduce ETS exposure by removing particulate and/or gas-phase contaminants from this plume. This paper describes an experimental investigation of the effectiveness of four smokeless ashtrays: two commercial devices and two prototypes constructed by the authors. In the basic experimental protocol, one or more cigarettes was permitted to smolder in a room. Particulate or gas-phase pollutant concentrations were measured in the room air over time. Device effectiveness was determined by comparing pollutant concentrations with the device in use to those obtained with no control device. A lung deposition model was applied to further interpret device effectiveness for particle removal. The commercial ashtrays were found to be substantially ineffective in removing ETS particles because of the use of low-quality filter media and/or the failure to draw the smoke through the filter. A prototype ashtray using HEPA filter material achieved better than 90% particle removal efficiency. Gasphase pollutant removal was tested for only one prototype smokeless ashtray, which employed filters containing activated carbon and activated alumina. Removal efficiencies for the 18 gas-phase compounds measured (above the detection limit) were in the range of 70 to 95%.

show abstract

Predicting Regional Lung Deposition of Environmental Tobacco Smoke Particles

Cited by 31 publications

References 31 publications

Determining Size-Specific Emission Factors for Environmental Tobacco Smoke Particles

Determining Size-Specific Emission Factors for Environmental Tobacco Smoke Particles

Toxic elements in tobacco and in cigarette smoke: inflammation and sensitization

Effectiveness of Smokeless Ashtrays

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About