Wow. Thanks for this, a really good paper - for that is what it deserves to be called (though I have to concede my expertise in the physical chemistry is not enough to fully judge it).
I notice that you do not remark on the fact that actual vaping (as opposed to spraying out ecig vapor into the air) involves pretty efficient pulmonary absorption. So the quantities of chemicals that are available to settle are trivial. Or maybe that is part of your point and I just missed it.
I also wonder if it is worth referring to the practical baseline. As in: even if “third hand vape” is as potent as “third hand smoke”, that is still not an issue of any consequence. Since the latter is trivial in terms of impactful exposure, the former is no worse. Also the former is a “cleaner” mix of chemicals and there is no reason to believe that small exposures to nicotine are harmful. (Or larger exposures either, but that is a different part of the story)
Hi Carl. Thanks for reading and for the comment. It is true that vaping involves efficient pulmonary absorption and so what is released to environment is very diluted. I have discussed this in previous posts, on environmental vapes and on the "third hand". Look at this post https://robertosussman.substack.com/p/is-there-third-hand-vaping-191
It shows how any "third hand" phenomena found in vaping required special conditions. The post has reference to posts on environmental vaping.
Wow. Thanks for this, a really good paper - for that is what it deserves to be called (though I have to concede my expertise in the physical chemistry is not enough to fully judge it).
I notice that you do not remark on the fact that actual vaping (as opposed to spraying out ecig vapor into the air) involves pretty efficient pulmonary absorption. So the quantities of chemicals that are available to settle are trivial. Or maybe that is part of your point and I just missed it.
I also wonder if it is worth referring to the practical baseline. As in: even if “third hand vape” is as potent as “third hand smoke”, that is still not an issue of any consequence. Since the latter is trivial in terms of impactful exposure, the former is no worse. Also the former is a “cleaner” mix of chemicals and there is no reason to believe that small exposures to nicotine are harmful. (Or larger exposures either, but that is a different part of the story)
Hi Carl. Thanks for reading and for the comment. It is true that vaping involves efficient pulmonary absorption and so what is released to environment is very diluted. I have discussed this in previous posts, on environmental vapes and on the "third hand". Look at this post https://robertosussman.substack.com/p/is-there-third-hand-vaping-191
It shows how any "third hand" phenomena found in vaping required special conditions. The post has reference to posts on environmental vaping.