Carbonyl emissions from a novel heated tobacco product (IQOS): comparison with an e‐cigarette and a tobacco cigarette
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To measure carbonyl emissions from a heated tobacco product (IQOS) in comparison with an e-cigarette (Nautilus Mini) and a commercial tobacco cigarette (Marlboro Red). DESIGN: Regular and menthol variants of the heated tobacco product were tested. A tank-type atomizer was tested with a tobacco-flavoured liquid at 10 and 14 W. Aerosol and smoke were collected in impingers containing 2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazine. Health Canada Intense and two more intense puffing regimens were used. SETTING: Analytical laboratory in Greece. MEASUREMENTS: Carbonyl levels in the aerosol and smoke. FINDINGS: At the Health Canada Intense regimen, heated tobacco products emitted 5.0-6.4 μg/stick formaldehyde, 144.1-176.7 μg/stick acetaldehyde, 10.4-10.8 μg/stick acrolein, 11.0-12.8 μg/stick propionaldehyde and 1.9-2.0 μg/stick crotonaldehyde. Compared with the tobacco cigarette, levels were on average 91.6% lower for formaldehyde, 84.9% lower for acetaldehyde, 90.6% lower for acrolein, 89.0% lower for propionaldehyde and 95.3% lower for crotonaldehyde. The e-cigarette emitted 0.5-1.0 μg/12 puffs formaldehyde, 0.8-1.5 μg/12 puffs acetaldehyde and 0.3-0.4 μg/12 puffs acrolein, but no propionaldehyde and crotonaldehyde. At more intense puffing regimens, formaldehyde was increased in heated tobacco products, but levels were three-fourfold lower compared with the tobacco cigarette. Based on the findings from Health Canada Intense puffing regimen, use of 20 heated tobacco sticks would result in approximately 85% to 95% reduced carbonyl exposure compared with smoking 20 tobacco cigarettes; the respective reduction in exposure from use of 5 g e-cigarette liquid would be 97% to > 99%. CONCLUSIONS: The IQOS heated tobacco product emits substantially lower levels of carbonyls than a commercial tobacco cigarette (Marlboro Red) but higher levels than a Nautilus Mini e-cigarette.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".